The High Court · 2025

1. The State of A.P., Rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. G.Vanaja Wo U.Rajeshwar, Aged about 38 years, Occ_ Housewife, R/o H.No.1-i-50/43, Bandameeda Basthi, Brindavan Nagar Colony, Subhash Nagar, Trimulgherry, Secunderabad. ...RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Between: G.Vanaja Wo U.Rajeshwar, Aged about 49 years, Occ Housewife, R/o H.No.1-i-50/43, Bandameeda Basthi, Brindavan Nagar Colony, Subhash Nagar, Trimulgherry, Secunderabad. ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No. 2/ RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT .FW AND 1 . Mrs Ballem Bhagya Laxmi Wo Ballem Hanumantha il ao, Aged about 50 years, Occ Busin63s, R/o H.No.2-7-93, Machabollaram, lit:cunderabad 2 rhe state "r Hyderabad r"h;'SE::?i3'il'?"*[,13i:= y..A::,, i:i^il[',i%""::=I ...RESPONETE:NT/RESPONDENT Petition under Section 359 (2) and Section 528 of IINSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of trr: petition, the High court may be pleased to permit the petitioner/ comptarrrant and Revision Petitioner/Accused to enter into compound and record the ;ame between the parties in Crl.R.C.No. 1512 of 2013 and consequentially to set aside the conviction orders dated. 27104t2012 passed in new C.C Nr 124 of 2011 (old C.C.No. 222 of 2010) on the file of Xll Special Magistrate' [-]Vlerabad as well as confirmed the same vide Judgment dated: 1710412013 in C;rl A.No 445 of 2012 passed by the Special Judge for Trial of offences under sect on SC & STs (POA) Act cum-Vl Adctitional Metropotitan Sessions Judge, Secuncerabad and allow the Crl.R.C.No. 1512 of 2013. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359 (2) and Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of ti-rr: petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise belween the parties in crl.R.c.No. 1512 of 20-13 and consequentially to set aside trr; conviction orders daled:27t04t2012 passed in new C.C.No.124ot 2011 (old C: 'l.No. 222 of 2010) on the file of Xll Special Magistrate, Hyderabad as well as c lnfirmed the same vide Judgment daled. 17t04120'13 in Crl.A.No. 445 of 2012 pas sed by the Special Judge for Trial of offences under section SC & STs (P CA) Act cum-Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad and allow the Cd.R.C.No. 1512 of 2013. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri S Srinivasa Sharma Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: Dr. C. S. Chakravarthy Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER ';''t: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI - l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 - in/and CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1512 of 2013 ORDER: Challenging the judgment dated 17.04.2Afi passed in Criminal Appeal No.445 of 2012 by the Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SC & STs (POA) Act cum Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, Hyderabad, this Criminal Revision Case is filed. By the impugned judgment dated

27.04.2012 passed in New C.C.No.124 of 2011(Old CC No.222 of 2010) by the learned Xll Special lvlagistrate, Hyderabad, was confirmed, wherein, the petitioner-appellant-accused was convicted for the offence under Section '1 38 of N.l. Act and she was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month

2. lt is submitted by learned ccunsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent No.2, that during pendency of the present Criminal Revision Case, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 2 have been filed to record the compromise betrreren them and to compound the offences. 3 'y'ide orders dated 23.06.202S, this Cc,urt directed the parties along with their respective counsel to apcear before the Secretary. High Court Legal Services Committe-" High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad, for identitication and to submit a report. 4 Pursuant to the above said direction issr..:r:cl by this Court, the parties have appeared and the Secretary, r-li,lh Court Legal Services Committee, has identified the parties il rrd submitted a report, dated 11.07.2025 and the same is placed rtrr record.

5. In view of the above, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 r:f 2025 in the Criminar Revision Case is allowed. Consequent y, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the conviction an I sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner_appellirnt_accused in the judgment dated 17.04.2013 passed in Criminat Appeat No.445 ot 2012 by the Special Judge for Trial of Cffences under SC & STs (POA) Act cum Vl Additional Metrop,rlitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, Hyderabad, confirming the judgment daled 27.04.2012 passed in New C.C.No.124 ot,2O1l(Otd CC No.222 of 20'l 0) by the learned Xll Specia Magistrate, ,.ict*r-l 3 Hyderabad is hereby set aside. The bail bonds of the petitioner_ appellant-accused, if any, shall stand cancelled. ltrliscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed \ \ To, //TRUE COPYII L. LAKSHMI BABU PUTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER Vt Additionat Met-ropotitan ses.ions LuaE,'3!cin"j"raoaa l The speciar Judoe for Triar of offences under scs and srs (poA) Act-cum- 2. The Xll Special Magistrate at Hyderabad. 3. The Station House Officer, Karkhana police Station, Hyderabad 4. The Superintendent, Chanchalguda Jail, Hyderbad, 5 Two ccs to the pubric prosecutor, High court for the state of rerangana at 6. One CC to Sri S. Srinivasa Sharma, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri C. S. Chakravarthy, Advocate IOPUCI B. Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUT] (Along with a copy of Joint memo of Compromise) VITgh HIGH COURT DATED: 1510712025 2 ri SEP 2U5 \ *i ;-' ORDER lA NO: 1 AND 2 OF 2025 IN/AND CRLRC.No.1512 of 2013 ALLOWING THE CRL.R.C. I) \ ;1 IN TI{E HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDEP-A,BAD I.A.No. oF 2025 IN Crl.R.C.No. l5l2 of 2013 Between: G. Vanaja Wo. U. Raj eshwar Aged about 49 years, Occ: House wife, R-/o. H.No. l-1-50/48, Bandameeda Basthi, Brindavan Nagar colony, Subhash Nagar, Tirumalagiri, Secunderabad AND .. Petitioner/Respondent No. 2/ Respondent /complainant I 2 Mrs. Ballem Bhagya laxmi Wo. Ballem Hanumantha Rao, Aged about 50 years, Occ: Business, R.io. H.No. 2-7 -93, Machabollaram, Secunderabad ... Res:,rndent/petitioner/Appellant /Accused The State ofTelangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, I{igh Court at Hyderabad. Respondent/Respondent JOINT MEMO FILED BY TFiT, BOTTI TIIE PARTIES It is respectfully submitted that the per.itioner/Respondent No. 2 / complainant l. and Rcspondent No. l/Revision petitioner /ir,ccused have already compromised all issues including the issue of the present case settled all their issues and disputes and entered into compromise and filed the Joint nremo in O.S. No. 603 of 2012 before the XV Additionat Chief Judge, City Civil Courl flyderabad in which it was specifically agreed by the petitioner to file compromise petition in Crl. R.C. No. 1512 of 2013 pending before this Hon'ble High Court to acquit the accused to take back her deposits which were deposited during the trial of crirninal cases. And the petitioner,IRespondent No. I and Respondent /petitioner /Accused has also filed Joint petition bearing I.A.No. 570 of 2016 to. record the compromise in O.S.No. 603 of 2012 belore rhe XV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court Hyderabad the sante was allowed vide docket order dated:22-03-2016, in view ofthe same the court below l| "'i) x {t l, u- tg{LM I )- recorded the samc and pennissron .was view of the compromise by recording O.S.No. 603 of 2Ot2 by the XV Addit vide order dated: 22-03-2016. granted to the plaintil)'tr. withdraw the case in the compromise and disn: issed the suit bearing ional Chief Judge, Cig r. ivil Court Hyderabad 2 rt is respectfulry submitted that in view of the above :ircts and circumstances the disputed cheque amount of trre case ha'e already settled ar:cr the comprainant has already satisfied full and final settlernent lor the all issues autL he complainant will not initiate any civil or criminal proceedings against the resp(,lclent/Accused in the court of law in future, in these reasons tho petitioner /complaini rr t has no objection to allow thc crl'R.c.No. 1512 of 2013 by ser aside the con'icti.r ,rrders dated: 27_04_ 2012 passcd in ,er'r c'c'No' 124 0f 20rl (,rld c.c.No. 222 0r'2.r,)on rhe fire of XtI Special Nlagistrate' Hyderabad as welr as confirmed the samc ,. ice Judgment datcd: I1-04-20t3 in Crl A.No. 445 of 2012 prssed by rhe Speci;r Judge tbr Trial of off'ences undcr section SC & STs (I,Ol ) Act _<um_VI A,ttlirional Metropolitan Sessio.s Judge' Secunderabad and pass such other order or r)rJr:rs as this Ho,,bre court may deenr fit and proper in the ciicumstances of the cast: in the interest of justice. Hence this mcmo Place: Hyderabad Date:05-02-2025 4 \ &il.* I'et ir ioner/RLspondent N, r. 2/complainant "t ro, *" ffinir.s rondenr No. 2 / E' /complainant /n( C.\"ur I / Respondent petitioner/Accuse o. 1 Revision Counsel for the n ['clitioner Counsel fortlreRevis ign pslr itioner