✦ High Court of India · 09 Jun 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 09 Jun 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
09 Jun 2025
Length
1,887 words

1. The State of Telangana' Rep' by its Public Prosecutor' High court for the state " of Telangana, HYderabad' i 1 I l '-f !i

2. Asma Begrrrr W/o.Shaik-Saleh Taher, Aged about 31 ),ears, H.No.1g_2- 43t3/A, r']/t';:i e [rrg!.coro;;, ;;d;ilsurta, Hydr,rrabad presentry residins a*J No .18_2_4st3t1tiC,e;;.i;'Mitt, cotony,\ Mujtaba cotony -O',',,'. c h a n d ra y a ., r r r,, fta, H yd e ra b ad. (iryif;';i ir Petitior L,nrj:r Section_ s2g of BNSS praying that in thr I circumstances stated in the r\4ern'c'rand,,, or croulo"-.'t?iri"'ri lr"tilion, the High court may be pleased to quastr case in cc ruo.-5sr Jioz'i'puno,rg :n *,e fire of the XV "g;I.f ,n,, 0., t,onilrs/Accused No. f?Sl"n'" Ju(tic a uasistrate, ai nvJ.rri,i ...Respondents t.A. NO: 20F 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the r\'rern.';rnd,m of.Grounds"ir'r?i[r,"ii i,."tition, the ,igh court r;ay be pleased to rran. itav of.all.th_e p.".ulirg".'i" 'Ei *o. ,u, of 2)24pendino on ffi xf,#H"'l:l: jJ1),-titifl:l;/J:iifl 'l,llt,l,, I.A. NO:4 OF 2025 .TxitEt i;i'*:11ffi Between: Asma Begunr !r'Vtr Shaik Saleh Taher, Aged about 31 years. H.*o.18_2_43l3tA Ghazi E Mitlal C otonv Ctrandr"vrrbrtt:i" ffi;;;ro presen ly residino ai fi#l;li;l.,,r,' 1, 2 i Ghazi E M;rd'C;;;;, ,*, #,Eil c oron r c h andrayanslfta, ...Petitioners/De-fact<: Complainant AND 1 2 3 4 5 Jr;.?ni".:::ll;li;t?r** bv its Pubric Prosecutor, Hish cor,rt ror the state Shaik Saleh f;Llrer, S/o S!1_1f1fa,nei.nged 45 years, Occ. Driv_.r, R/o. H.No. 18-13-BlMt76t1C(4. Mohammed Nfrg"rr, 6p,p.- inco t=mo,rssy School. Errakunta Hyd-"rbad. presenry residiig at B-J{rarn'nep By hir GpA Ahmed Bawazi @ Shrr,t Ahmea Bawazeer S-d &;ii;;.J, .age,t abcut 32 years, occ. Unenrpt:1e,rt R/o. H.No. 1e_r3_8lMr;;A;;, i;.hamred Nasar, Opp. lndo. Emba.;sy I i,: root, Errakunt", Hyo"rrlri. iiil_f O'"of Shaikhzr Zehra.e) Zehra Begum, wi" srlril]r-'n"i, hluo roor, ,i8years, Housewife. rMorn,:r of Alr,iro H N; 18_;; ;A/;0fr8.+, [/oha nmed Nagar, 3ll-,10" E:mb:rs,r;y Schoot. Errakunia, Hra"uir#i- '" baroa Begum @) {jayeeda Begum, Wo ebOuttan Knan, Rged abcut 35 years, 3'*"r,Jf.li;iXi;,,,*'" n No +Ji'- e-'iffi",''"ftot*p.t, a;;#;;;: Salma Begrrm \t,rc Sved I-.I11 Kl,"l, Aged about 40 years Oc,;. housewife, *" 'B t'tttarNrora, ahorelha iirJrI, cilLi,nar, Hvde.abad (Sister Yi il Occ. I l I ; I I -*+ 'il!*::'lSliii?;:{r:#f"ffik, jv;:F$'Hli""'ffi :rBr ' x.t;fl{ u*, $trfrffi frfit:ffiffi il*"ji},,ii'*:.;,ff,erarao Respondents fri6$ilgffi'ffig#g1g#Hti,igffi .A. NO:5 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359(2) morandum of Groun cord tfib iomPromise stated in the Me of 2O24 Pending on the file of the Hon'ble XV Addlchief Judicial Magistrate, At bep leased to re Hyderabad in the inte rest of iustice and q uash the P of Cr.P.C P ds of Crimi raying that i nat Petition ' n the H the circumstances rg h Court may roceedings tn CC No. 351 ThiS Petition an d lAs coming on fo iminal Petition an ocate for the P of Grounds of Cr ehman Khan, Adv Memorandum lbad Ur R Mr. Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the ResPon dent No.1 and of Mr. Ahsan Bin Ali Jabri, Advocate for the Respondent No'2 The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER r hearing, uPon Pe on hearing the arg ners and the Mr' etitio rusing the uments of Jithender I I I I rHF !IONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TTIKARAIIJI t.A. Nos. 4 AN D50 F2 025 ln/And RIMINALP ETI TtoNNo. 58480F ?92e coMMON ORDE: lt i I I I I I ! This lr'ri"ar petition is fired under Sectiorr 5,2g rrf Bharatiya 202 ),) seeking Nagarik Sr-rlais L Sanhita, 2023 gor short ,BNSS, quashment cf ih(} rroceedings against the petitioners; in l C No. 351 of 2024 on the fiir: c1 the learned XV Additional Ch F\uurtronal chief Judrcial fu4agistrate, Hyderabad.

2. The petiii<.rrrsr:j are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 6 i_r th,r Caiendar Case registere d lor the offences punishable under Sectrons 4S){t_A 506 of the lndian pe.ai (.Je' 1g60' sections s ar'ra qof the Dov;,-y r)r-ohibition Act, 1961 3 Heard l,lrrLrar! UR Rehman Khan, learned cou-rsr:i fcr- the Petitioners IVlr.li.'5.r1ur. Rao Veeramalla, Iearned r\dditioir, rl public Prosecutcr, repr.eserl ng the respondent No.1_State and Mr,Ahr;rrrr Bin AIi Jabri, learnecj .oi-:i.,ls o for responden t No.2lcle_factocomplainant

4. Pending thi:-. i:,. ition, the parties have entered into the conrpromise and, accordingh ih -=i moved l.A.Nos.4 and 5 of 2025 v,,lth :he )rayer to Befmit them to ")nter ntc compromise and by recording the serlrement to z N1R, N,' - i i :N{ ; ! i ;'; l,i,id' L ^ quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos'1 to 6 in C.C' No.351 of2O24

5. This Court vide order ctated 28'04'2025 referred the parties to the High Court Legal Services Committee for identification and to verify the voluntariness in arriving the settlement' The Secretary' High Court Legal Services Committee' has submitted report dated 02'05'2025 stating that the parties were identified by their respective counsel and also on verification of Aadhar Cards/ldentity Cards and the enquiries revealeci that the parties have willfully and without coercion entered into settlemenUcomPromlse I have considered the submissions' of the learned counsel and 6 perused the materials on record 7 Having considered the allegations' the charged offences, which are essentiallY matrimonial and inter-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 or Puniab and anothe/ and Anil Mishra v' Sfate of lJ'P2i State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others3' this Cou( is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of )12 (10) scc 303 'z zo24 INSC 189 I 2019 (5) scc 588 /' 3

1...1.,. \7tr.i r '; .i : oi 2025 ini antl , .t . t).,\o. ttJS oJ-2025 the set,em--nt ,.,, exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.p C./S2B of BNSS, 202:], ,!,),ld be in the interest of justice. B ItccorJirlr;r. , proceedir)gs Additional Chi:-.f l.A Nos.4 and 5 of 2025 are allo,,vec iri C.C. No. 351 of 2024 on the file. of thr_. learned XV .ludicial Magistrate, Hyderabad, ai-e herej)y quashed i- )nsequenfly, agatnst the p,:triic rr.rrs/accused Nos.1 to 6 a in the al:r:r.,rrr ti:i.rns. the Criminal petition is disposeci of Penoinlr r'lii;() jilaneous apprications, if any, shail starrrl r;r rsed j //TRUE COPY// SD '{,[fiily€88,SiRRI SECTIOI,.I OFFICER To, itrorra | (:hief Judicial Magistrate, 'ic u ;: Officer, South East Zo

1. The XV Add 2. The Station {itatron. .lyderabad District. 3. Two CCs to the r) rolic prosecutor, High Court for the lstater or l.elangana 4. One CC to M. lbrr,j Ur Rehman Khan, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Mr Ah,; rn Bin Ati Jabri, naro"rtulOpLCt 6. Two CD Copie,s at Hyderabad [(f t.,l ] at Hydera ne Police (Along with a Oopv :'Joint Memo of Compromise) Kam/gh 0,,1!r ?- 6ry* }s---ffi .,..'.,' . j':i, - :a'=:iiit i- t4 [l7 Jl.i 1l]15 I \r'-1 ) '-J :E * HIGH COUF't DATED:09 t06t2025 l COMMON OIIDER l.A.Nos.4 ancl ,5 of 2025 ln/And CRLP.No.S848 of 2O2S l.A.Nos.4 anct li of 2025 ARE ALLOWE:t) DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PE:l'tTtON d- v r-l(, l/' 4 I 1 @l N{EMORANDLJT\4 OF CRIMINAL PETITION TINDER SECTION 359WO rN rr{E, irrcrr col5lgffi-.$ffi'or rBreNcANA BNSS : '{a: F of2025 IANo. 05 IN cxt-YNg 4Q 2025 Against (CC No 351 of 2024 on the file of the XV AddlChief Judicial Magistrate' At Hyderabad.) Between: ""'i. "at.u gegum Wo ShaikSalehTaher ' e""J"U"'" 31 years'H'No ' 18-2'4313lA' tf,J, ti*'i* t"r",'v' cr'*dravangutt4 Hvderabad fr"r"n fy residing at H'No: l8-2-45l3ll-123 31ffi f#'l1i":ff n lilf ,**i&l"ry+' ' - '''Petitioners/De-facto AND Complainant

1. The State ofTelangana Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Uiif, *"tt for the state of Telangana, Hyderabad

2. ShaikSalehTaher S/o ShaikTaher, Aged 45 years, Occ: Driver, PJo : H.No : 18 -13 -8 lM/l 6/ I 05 4, Mohammed Nagar, Opp: Indo Embassy School, Errakunta, Hyderabad. Presently residing at Behrain Rep By his GPA Ahmed Bawazlr @ Shaik Ahmed Bawazeer S/o ShaikTaher, Aged about 32yeks,Occ: Unemployed R /o : H.No : I I - 1 3 -8 lMJ 7 6/ 1 05 4, Mohammed Nagar, Opp: Indo Embassy School, Errakunta, Hyderabad. I t q?\-

3. ShaikhaZehra @ ZebraBegum Wo ShaikTaher, \Aged about 58years, Occ: Housewife, ffi uk&r I I I I i / i I l I I J i R,o: III,Io: Ig_lj_ opp, r,", ro" a,,i#,;ffigir*.,ffiH,H::.Ti,ff : Abdu,ah K ha r

4. Saida lt:qum @ Sz j r.1i;.ir;ffi l,:_##: fl:I ir i rr.o1h;rp : . .Sarooma, " ^ . (,,.,l";"+#,1( R n o;,, ). Salrna I:r1lum Wo t j ir l#{il,=Yll; ti: l, i I Charm r r ;r;;;;;:y t7o/A, Bhotesha Nagitr,

6. .flrm.:d ;., llffr,-') dffi l[ i : i#]nffiffi*'rfi ;;: f},jr:n.,(:/o Lare ShaikAmeerB a Vazeer , .' " * #tI i ;:, i''k s:rr*,ru,**,. r lrJsUrj). ].c i (itng at Bel Kep hy rri:. ( ; r.A Airned .l}rrr .rz ir @ Shai *g"1 :1,, K/o: H.Nrr IF t3-8ffW76/f OS+, irloiu,i_ed Nagar, Opp: Indo lir rt assy Schc rb rt^:; ,) h ait['n**ta' HYderabla. J,', ;.ff 'd.i,ffiffilil:zeer s/o S ha ik ra h :r. ..Respondents ,l(,Itl IMEMO oMO FCo CtMISE I' It is subrLrrlerr hat petitioner,lDe-facto complainant l.dgec a compraint before the liJ,lj South East Zone against the Responcients No. 2 to 7 n CrNo.98 cl'll,).13 offence U/s 498(4),506 IpCand 3 and 4 of Dp Act subsequerrtl" rr:mbered as cc No 351 of 2024 perrding on the fire of the Hon'ble ).\' r!.,ldl Chief Judicial Magistrate, At Hyderabad 1)

2. lt issubmitted that during the pendency of the CC No 35i of 2024 Addlchief Metropolitan Magistrate' At pending on the file "'* of the elders and well-wishers' the " Hyderabad "'o" 'n" '*rvention settled and to that effect the Petitioner/de-facto matter has O""rr "'"'0" complainant *A n"'potta*t' No' 2 to 7/AccusedNo' 1 to 6 entered into has undertook to compromise urrd '1" '"titioner/De-Complainant withdraw the said case unconditionally' In view of the above stated alll'o""::::,:'j H ilJrf,f::Tiffi: Court may be pleased to record the compromrse a CC No. 351 of 2024n"t;;' on the file of the Hon'ble XV Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Hyderabad irrthe interest of justice and'pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumslansss sf the case. Place: HYderab oarcJ7'o4-20. etitloner 6: ^r^s'\ [ Petitioner #rC. Counsel for ResPondent No'2to 7 Resoondents rto.z t$l CD 4^ Accus a-L l[t..u .) lgatvdUl" @0 4P+^ thtutl'iet i I I I I t i I I

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments