The High Court · 2025

I Mr. Karne Shiva Kumar occupation ASt, R/o. n No z<-ss5, H;;ili;ilr;" C"t";t, ^ Hanamkonda, Warangal. Telangana. V.e_e1q Bhadraiah, aged about 60 years, ' R;.;il;;; p/o .

2. The State of Telan Hyderabad for the ggna, [e3 .bV the pubtic prosecutor, High Court at utate ot I elangana ...RESPONDENT/ACCUSED NO.4 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 359(6) of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of briminit p"tition, ir," High may be pleased to permit the petitionei to compromise the pRC sR No 3050 of 2025 on the fire of the Vil Additionar cnief iuoiciar Nrrgi"ti"i"-rt Nampally, Hyderabad in so far as respondent No.l/Accused No 4 concerned. l.A. NO:4 OF 2025 ^c_o-urt Petition under Section 359(2) of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds or brrminit p"tition, ih" Higl.r court may be preased ro.record tne compromise and quash the proceedings ggails! the respondent No. 1 /Accused No.4 in pRC sR No 3050 or zozs on'in" file of the Vll Additionar chief Judiciar Magistrate at'Nampary, Hyderabad. 'petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Afluri Divakar Reddy' Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramafla, rearned Additional Pubric prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No..1 , and of Mr. M. Achyuth Reddy, Advocate learned counser for Respondent No.2/de-facto complainant. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI l.A.Nos.3 AND 4 OF 2025 ln/And CRIMINAL PETITI ON No. 7382 oF 2025 COMMON ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section S2g o,f Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (,for short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioner in p.R.C. SR No.3050 of 2025 on the file of the learned Vll Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, arising out of Crime No.34 of 2025 of Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.4 in the pRC registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 417, 420,493, 506 of the lndian Penal Code, 1860 (for short'lPC').

3. Heard Mr.Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional public prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State and Mr.M.Achyuth Reddy, learned counsel for responden I No.2lde-facto complainant.

4. Pending this petition, the parties have entered into the compromise and, accordingly, respondenl No.2lde-facto complainant filed LA.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 with the prayer to permat them to enter into comproorise and by recording the settlement to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.4 in p R.C. SR No.3050 ot2O2i. 2 Nl'\ 1 '1.No.r.J and I rf 2025 .. in/ and (.rl.P.\0.7 )82 oJ 2025

5. This Court vide odil dated 18.06.2025 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 23.06.2025 stating that the parties were identified by their respective counsel and also on verification of Aadhar cards/ldentity cards and the enquiries revealed that the parties have willfully and without coercion entered into settlemenUcomPromise.

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

7. Having considered the allegations, the nature of charged offence i.e. Section 506 lPC, alleged against the petitioner/accused No 4 and taking into account the amicable settlement between the parties and to restore peace between the parties, in the light of the dictums in Gran Singh v. Stafe of Puniab and anothe/ and Anil Mishra v' State of lJ.P.2; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and ofherss, this Cou( is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of the settlement by exercising lurisdiction under L 2012 (10) scc 303 2 2024 rNSc 189 r 2019 (5) scc 688

7. 3 N7&/ [.-4.NotJ and4 of 2025 in/ a Cr/.P.No.7)E2 o;f 202i Section 482 Cr.P.C.l528 of BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest of justice

8. Accordingly, l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 are allowed. Consequently, all the proceedings in P.R.C. SR No.3050 of 2025 on the file of the learned Vll Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, arising out of Crime No.34 of 2025 of Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed against the petitioner/accused No.4

9. ln the above terms, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// sD/- A.v.s. PBASAD DEPUW REGI$TRAR I SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Vll Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad' 2. The station House Officer, Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad city District. 3. One CC to Mr. Alluri Divakar Reddy, Advocate [OPUCI 4. One CC to Mr. M. Achyuth Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High court for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

6. Two CD CoPies (Along with a Copy of Joint Memo of Compromise) SwUgh YY l :-_- i.{ r.. l\ a 1\.E- S 2 B JUr,l 2U5 r)r. n^TCt\ (-C ',^. ). . .. .\ a. ilc:i HIGH COURT DATED: 2610612025 COMMON ORDER l.A.Nos.3 and 4 ot 2025 ln/And CRLP.No.7382 o12025 c o l.A.Nos.3 and 4 ot 2025 ARE DISPOSED OF THE CRTMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF aagP(eJ5' ' \t-- <(t\aJ iN rHE H1GH couRIrFSlrttHIftE oF rELAN GANA CRLP. No' '\) kq of 2025 (/ )o/- gETWEEN: p.':f$#-r,*i'itr'*ffi ;i,:r,.,"n,". ...Petitioner/ Accused No'4 \ And ir;JHfl,:f i:3;i':':'[sl*':"xl ft#fJ':"i"',iiilrurrl'r'Hi:r::i"u'equ ...Respondents oINT M E Mo has lodged a complaint hours stating that police on 21'01'2025 before the 1't respondent

1. It is submitted that' the 2nd respondent the Accused No'1 and 2 have made false promise of marriage and with her and cheated the partrcipated in sexual intercourse has requested the police to take action as per Law' The respondent Police has regi*ered the the complainant complainant' Therefore' \ ,..',# FIR vide Cr. No. 34 of 2025 on the file of the SHO, Malakpet police ' Station, Hyderabad for ciffences under Section s 376(2)(n), 477 , 420, 493IPC on the file of the SHO, Malakpet police Station, Hyderabad. However, the petitioner is tried for offence under Section 506 of IPC.

2. It is submitted that the petitioner was acted as Caste Elder at the request of both the families of complainant and Accused ruo.UceP 2 to settle the dispute amicably between the complainant and the Accused No. 1 and 2. The petitioner is no way concerned with the said complaint and the crime vide FIR. No. 34 of 2025 on the file of the SHO, Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad.

3. It is submitted that the complainant has approached the petitioner and on mutual discussion, the complainant atknowledges that the petitioner was falsely impllcated in the said crime vide FIR. No. 34 of 2025 on the file of the SHO, Malakpet police Station, Hyderabad.

4. The complainant has further acknowledged the fact that the complaint lodged against the petitioner/Accused No. 4 was based on a misunderstanding and in misrepresentation. --7 1

5. it is submitted that the complainant has expressed that she has no intention or desire to pursue the case against the petitioner and has come to a mutual understanding to withdraw the case against the petitioner as per the procedure of law.

6. It is humbly submitted that the petitioner and the 2nd respondent have voluntarily come to a conclusion and decided to withdraw the complaint filed against petitioner since he is being falsely implicated in the crime as Accused No.4 ir-r the crime.

7. It is humbly submitted that by virtue of said compromise, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue and therefore filing this petition to quash the aforesaid proceedings thereby to prevent abuse of the process of court and to secure ends of justice by exercising the power of this Hon,ble Court to quash the proceedings under Sec.528 of BNSS as Section 359 of BNSS would not be bar in view of the .ludgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court. K Petiti oner C S No.4 2nd Respondent/defacto-Complainant Counsel r e Petitioner \I\1.-- Counsel for the 2nd respondent.