High Court · 2025

Pstition under Section 397 (l) ol Cr.l,.c'.. praying that in the circumstances stated in tl.re petition, thc Iligh Court may be pleascd to stay all furthcr proceeditlgs in M.C. No. 157 of 20lb on the file of the Judge. Additit nat Family Courr. Rangareddy District at L.B. Nagar, pending disposal olCrl.R.C. No.530 of 2024. on the file ol'thc High Court. I.A. NO. I & 2 OF 2025: Bet$ cen: Smt. 13.Vijaya, W/o. B. Srisailam. D/o. Dasaratham, fuo. t[.No. 2-10. Arkapally Village, Madgul Mandal. Ranga Reddy District. PetitioncriResPondent No.2 (Respondent No.2 in Crl.R.C. No. 530 of 2024 On the file otthe High Court) ANI) [. B.Srisailanr, S/o. B. Yadaiah, R/o. H.No. l-15, Appareddypally Village. Madgul Mandal. R:rnga Reddy District. Rt:spondent/Peti tioner (Petitioner in Crl.lt.C. No. 530 o12024 On the file of the High Court)

2. llre State ofTclangana. Rep. by the Public Proseculor. High ('.run at Hyderabad Resl,ondent,/Respondent I...\. N(): I OI'' 2(125r Petition under Sccti.rn 359(6) of BNSS. praying that in rhc circumsrances srated in the petition, the I [igh Ll(Jurt may be pleased to permit the Petitioncr/R,lspondent No.2 to compromise the nratter $,ith the Respondent/Revision Petitioncr in M.C.Nh.l57l 2019 on the file of the Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at I-B Nae,ar. L\ NO: 2 O[- 2025: Pelition under Scction 359 (2) olBNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the petition, the IIigh ('oLrrt mav be pleased to record the terms olcomprc,mise and allow the Crl.R.C. No.530/201-l b\ setling aside the order dated 0310112014 in N,l.C.No.l57i20l9 on the l'ile of the Additionrl Fanrily Court. Ranga Reddy District at LB \agar. The petition collrills orr tbr hearing, upon perusing the pctition anJ thc grounds Iilcd thercin, and upon lrelrin-l the arguments of Sri P.Animi Reddy. r\dvocatr: tirr the pctitioner, Sri Jithender Rao VeL:r.lntalla, Addl. Public I,rosecutor, fbr Respondcnt Nr,. i. and Sri G.Naga Bhushana Reddy. Advocate lor Respondent. '[ he Court madt' 1hc lirllorr ing: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI l.A.Nos.1 AND 2 OF 2025 ln/And CRIM INAL REVISION CASE No"530 OF 2024 COMMON ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case ts filed under: Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the order dated 03.01 .2024 passed in M.C.No.157 of 2019, on the file of the Judge, Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L B,Nagar

2. Heard Mr.P.Animi Reddy, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1-State and Mr.G.Naga Bhushana Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.2lde-facto com plainant.

3. During pendency of the Criminal Revision Case, respondent No.2lde-facto complainant has filed lnterlocutory Applications vide l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 seeking permission to compromise the matter and to record the terms of compromise between the respondent No-2lde-factocomplainantandtherevisionpetitioner/respondent. f l'

4. This Court vide order dated 18.03.2025 referred the parties to .the High Court Legal Services Committee for identification and to verify 2 NrR,/ I..4.Not./ a 2 of2025 in/ard Crl.R.C.No.s)0 of 2024 the voluntariness in arriving the settlement. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has submitted report dated 24.03.2025 stating that the parties are identified by their respective counsel and also on verification of Aadhar Cards/ldentity Cards and the enquiries reveal that the parties have willful and without coercion entered into settlemenuconrpromise.

5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the materials on record

6. Having considered the allegations, which arer essentially matrimonial and lnter-personal in nature and taking into account the amicable settlement between the parties and to restore peace among them, in the light of the dictums in Gian Singh v. State of punjab and anotherl and Anit Mishra y. Sfate of lJ.P.2; Stafe of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and othersi, this Coui-t is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of the settlentent by exercising jurisdiction under Section 4g2 Cr.P.C.1528 of BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest of justice. L 2012 (10) SCC 303 2 2024 INSC t89 3 zots 1s1 scc eas 3 Nr&/ IA.Not.l a 2af2025 in/and Crl.kC.Na510 of 2024

7. Accordingly, l.A.Nos.'1 and 2 of 2025 are allowed and the order dated 03.01.2024 in M.C.No.'t57 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judge, Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L'B'Nagar' is hereby set aside. S.lntheaboveterms,theCriminalRevisionCaseisdisposedof. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed. Sd/. I'.PADMANAB I IA R!]DDY DEPTiTY REGIS'I'RAI{ I /iTRUE COPY// SE,CTIO OFT.'ICIIR (ou l)

1. 'lhe Judge, Additional Family Court, RangaReddyDistrict' at L IJ' Nagar' 2. Two CCs to public pror"".,iJr, rlign coui fo. the Stute of Telangana, at Hyderabad :. br" ic to Sri P.Animi Reddy, Advocate (OPUC) +. Or" CC to Sri G.Naga Bhushana Reddy' Advocate (OPCU) 5. Two CD CoPies 6. One SPare CoPY ^ I / To' A long with a copy of.ioint memo of Compromise W \ i I HT(;H COTIRT NTI{J DATE: 01.0{.2025 COMMOn* OIIDLIt IA. NOS. I AND 2 ()F ]025 IN/AND CRLRC. NO.530 ()t 2{l]{ DISPOSING OF ('RI,.IT.C" AND ALLO\['ING IA. NOS. I ANt) 2 ()t..2025 lq) \./ { d\ C '.t' + a O I \ 11 tPn 216 * a \S +1IC! ('l I if* (MEMORANDUM OF CRL. REVISION MISC.PSIITION U/SEC,442 OF BNSS) HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD CRL.R.C.No. 530 OF 2024 BDTWtrtrN: B. Srisailam S/o.B.Yadaiah, Age:42 years, Occ: Govt Employee, R/o H.No. 1-15, Appareddypally Village, Madgul Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. AND Petitioner/ Respondent

1. The State of Telangana Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

2. Smt.B.Vijaya W/o B.Srisailam, D/o B. Dasaradham Age:30 years, Occ: House wife, R/o. H.No.2- 1 O, Arkapally Village, Madgul Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. JOINT MEMO Respondent/ Petitioner

1. It is submitted that respondent no.2 have filed a maintenance case against the petitioner before the Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at LB Nagar. After completion of trial the Hon'ble Additional Family Court granted maintenairce to respondent no.2 @ Rs. 15,000/- per month from the date petition vide M.C.No. 157 of 2019. Against the said order of family court the petitioner filed Revision before this Hon'ble High Court vide Crt.RC.No.53O of 2024 and' the same is pending. The Hon'ble High Court also granted interim ord.er in favour of B vijgq o -t I I !x \ E ':-.rF!rf petitioner and directing petitioner to pay 1O,OOO/- per *nf.r}iiid respondent no.2 alld respondent no.2 also filed petition. for enforcement of maintenance before Additionat Family court, Ranga Reddy district vide crl.MP.No.2B4 of 2024 in M.c.No.i57 of 2or9 and the same is pending.

2. It is submitted that as per ttre Mou dt. l2-ol-2fr2s both parties are compromised the following pending cases between them. a. C.C.No.99 4 of 2022 on the file of the Junior Civil judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Amangal, Ranga Reddy District.( U/Sec. 49AA, 323,506 R/w 34 of IpC arrd Sec.3 & 4 of DP Act). b. Crl.RC.No.530 of 2024 pending before the Hon,bll fiigtr Court. c. Crl.MP.No .284 of 2024 in M.C.No.157 of 2Ol9 pending before the Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at LB Nagar. d. DVC.No.1O of 2022 pending before the Junior Civil Judge_Cum_ Additiona_l Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Amangat, Ranga Reddy District. e. FCA.No.65 ot 2024 pending before the Hon,ble High Court.

3. It is submitted that at the insta,ce of elders and well lvisher,.Ioetitioner and the respondent no.2 entered into Mou dt.L2-ctl-2(r25 as per Mou we both comprornrsed in all cases and agreed to get mu.{:ual divdroe and s vi|"lfl M I I i I i --"t-4 .,,, . .. "u'"h the Petitioner agreed to pay an arnount of Rs. 12,00,000/_ as.furl an.d f'na1 settlelnen! and the petitioner agreed to pay 3,00,000/_ by way of D'D per r."3 it amounts to total 0f Rs. 12,00,000/- for all four cases. Now the petitioner agreed to grve Rs.3,00,O00/_ for .compromrsrng the present case by way of D.D. The original D.D wiil be ' harrded over to respondent no.2 at the time of recording of compromise before the Hon,ble court vide D.D.No.4614 OS dt. LZ_02_2O25. 4. It is submitted that during pendency of the above Crl.R.C, at the instance of erders ar-rd weli wishers, we set,ed the matter amicably a,d compromised. Therefore, we have filed petition before this Honble Court to record the compr-omise between us_ 5' The contents mentioned in the said compromise petition is true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief, the sard compromise is entered with free w,] ald consent a,d without undue influence from anyone

6. It is submitted that the Respondent No.2 has no objection to allow the Cr1.R.C by setting aside the Order dated O3_OI_2O24 in M.C. No. 157 ol 2019 on the file of the Judge, Additional Family Court Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. Date:24-02-2025 Hyderabad lr.,)Frq Hence tJ.is joint memo. , (8. SRTSATLAMI PETITIONER I -i:iglg5;1=-=:-: r@\-' : COUNSEL FOR THtr PETITION ER, , i,.r.,Di# tl3.vIJAYA} RESP()NDBNT NO.2 ,@-W COUNSEL FOF: REI;PONDENT No'2 (l i I I I , n ',1, I I