High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana' Rep by its Public Prosecutor' High Court at 2. Smt. Balagoni Rani' w/o Raju Goud' 4S'" 1?y': Cast Goud Occ House "i""iJni wif e R/o roo, ra n"n i[7]' ]?'ii iiTi nda l. sang a reddv Dist' "'RespondenUDefacto Complainant Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in SC No' 367 of 2021 on the file of the ll Addl Senior Civil J udge-cum-Additional Assistant Sessions Judge' Sangareddy for the offenses u/s 307' 323 IPC' t.A. NO: 10F 2025 petition under section 35g(6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High Court may be pleased to grant leave and permit the petitioner and respondent no 2 to compromise and quash the proceedings in SC No 367 of 2021 on the file of the ll Addl Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Assistant Sessions Judge' SangareddY. I.A. NO :2 0F 2025 Between: 3['*:3:"*',"##?0i#i:,fl?[3i$3;t3i.r"r.,rh?iio?.?,ooccHousewire AND 1 2 ... Petitioner/Respondent No. 2 Iffi"::1t:." relansana, Rep bv its pubric prosecutor, High court at Xi""ffi:3'#[,3iF,Tl;,*f,tllli S,"lS;Afl:r.J yrs, cast Goud, occ Asri, ...Respondents/ RespondenUpetitioner Petition under Sec ;ff :r:": lTl* fi :,: :: fJ :, #] t:#:: 1,,ffi ;" :::n":; 2021 on the re ",,^"?i"il:; ::::::ll':JJ,"#::.;::-;.:ffl Sessions Judge, Sangareddy. This petitlon corni Grounds or c rim i na,, J:;'. :"J ffi Hff ;:,:il',H"r;#" T ff I Anand' Advocate for the petitioner and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramara Additionar pubric prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No.1 and of Mr. S. Ram Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N'TUKARAMJI l.A.Nos.1 AND2 ln/And OF 2025 CRIMI NAL PETI TION No.85 210F 2025 coM MON ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita' 2023 (for short 'BNSS' 2023') seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners in S C' No'367 of 2021 , onthe file of the learned ll Additional Senior Civil Judge-Cum- Additional Assistant Sessions Judge' Sangareddy'

2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused in the Sessions Case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3C7 and 323 of the lndian Penal Code, 1860

3. Heard Mr. C' Sunil Anand' learned counsel for the petitioner' Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla' learned Additional Public Prosecutor' representing the respondent No'1-State and Mr' S' Ram Reddy' learned counsel for the respondent No'2ide-facto complainant'

4. Pending this petition' the parties have entered into the compromise and, accordingly, respondent No'2/de-facfo complainant filed l'A'Nos'1 and 2 of 2025 with the prayer to permit them to enter into compromise and by recording the settlement to quash the proceedings against'the. titioner/accused in S.C'No 367 of 2021 ' T 2 ^-TR,/ I-4-Notl and 2 oJ 2025 ia/ and Cr/.P.N0.852/ of 2025 5' This court vide order dated 10.07.2025 referred the parties to the High court Legar services committee for identification and to verify the voluntariness in arriving the setrement. The secretary, High court Legar Services Committee, has submitted report dated 31 .07.2025 stating that the parties were identified by their respective counser and arso on verification of Aadhar cards/rdentity cards and the enquiries reveared 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 aregations, the nature of charged offences and taking into account the amicabre settrement between the parties and to restore peace between the parties, in the right of the dictums in Gr'an singh v. stafe of punjab and anotherl and Anir Mishra v. state of It.P.2; State of Madhya pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others3, this Court is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of the setrement by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.p.C.lS2B of BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest of e t 2012 (1O) SCC 303 ' 2024 INSC 189 I 2019 (s) scc 688 I t -, J \11u 1 aird O'f t.,4.Noi ' 617.P.56 8521 o-i202i

8. AccordinglY , l.A.Nos.1 and 2 o{ 2025 are allowed' Consequent\Y' in S'C'No 367 of 2021' Pending on the file of the all the Proceedings learned ll Additional Senior Civil Sessions Judge' SangareddY' are Judge-Cum-Additional herebY quashed against the Assistant petitioner/accused' I ln the above terms, the Criminal Petition is disposed of' Pending miscellaneous applications' if any' shall stand closed' SD/- A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Second Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Assistant Senior Judge,Sangareddy.

2. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Narsapur. 3. The Station House Officer, Jinnaram Police Station, Sangareddy District. 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, 5 One CC to [Vlr. C Sunil Anand, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Mr. S. Ram Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies at Hyderabad (OUT) (Enclosed a copy of Joint Compromise lVlemo) DUpsl HIGH COURT DATED:31t0il2025 ORDER CRLP.No.8521 o12025 '- !t{E 1; I 4 \a ! 21 stP 2r1ffi .,, t --a::, \ :, \ I ALLOWNgTHE I.A. NOS. 1 AND 2 OF 2025 AND Cnrururu PETITIoN ls DlsPosED oF 0\ I I-IIGH COURT FOR ]'Hlt S]'ATF. OI.'T.trLANGANA :: At. : HyDERABAD CRI,P.NO oF 2025 Between: Veeragoni Amad Goud, S/o Anatha Coud. Age:41yrs. Cast: Coud. ( )cc. Agri. R/o Amdoor (V) of Jimraram Mandal Sangareddy Dist. And l. The State of Telangana Rep by its Public I,rosccutor. High Court at Flyderabad

2. Smt. Balagoni Rani w,/o Raju CioLrcl. Age: 35Yrs, Cast: Goud. Occ: I{ouse Wife R/o Kodakanchi (V) of Jinnaram Mandal. Sangareddy District. .. .PeLitioner/Accused . Responclents/ Defeacto Comp lainant JOINT COMP ROMISE MEMO FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND SECO ND RES PONDENT

1. The Petitioner had been arrived as Accusecr in cr.No. 62 of 2020 on the file of PS Jinnaram, Sangareddy Dist firr thc orfenses under section 307,323 rpc subsequently charge sheet was filed and converted to SC No. 367 of 2021 on the file of the II Addr Senior cir.ir .Iudge-cuur-Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Sangareddy for the of1-cnses u/s 307, 323 IpC .

2. It is respectively submittecl rhal the Dct'acto- complainant's husband Raju Goud (Inj ured/L w3 ) and the petiti.nerlAccused herein are crosery rerated to each other as Brother-in-Laws and thal the sister of Raju Goud (injure<i) namely Mrs. Lakshmi (t,w2) is the *,if-e of the pctilioner/Accused herein.

3. That due to misunderstanding ber*ecn thc paftics, rhe r.vilb of LW3 (I-w1) had lodged a complaint on 19-09-1010 bcfore the inspector of.police iinnaram. stating that on 27 -09-2ozo her husband (injured) had gont. ro Amdoor viflage and bought liis sistcr to their housc, on thc same night at arounti g:00 p.m. the accuscd r'vho is the husband of (LW2) camc in a car to their house in Kodaikanchi village and started abusing her Sister-in- [ar.r, I-akshmi (wife of Accused) ancl rvhen the LW3/Injured and LWl/complairant interf'erecr, he qua*eled and bcat them as weil. when l-w3/rnjured tried to tranquil the Accused, he s,ent in to the Car, then I.W3 i,r,ent to accuse<i car to try to stop him then the accused wontedry dashed with his car vide B.No rS 07Gw 1664 and try to kill LW3, then LW3 received injurics. Immcdiarell, hc rvas shifted to Hospital, LW-3 rib bones sustained fracture and he is gerti.g treatment at Hospital and got him treated. 4 on the abovc co.rplaint, a case was registered uiSec i07.323 Ipc and took-up the investigation. after the investigation potice filed a Charee Shcet. -5' on the plane reading of the compraint and obscrr.ari.n ol the inirLries rhal occurred, thc incident took place during a domestic quarrer befrvecn the fam y members and there was no intention to cause ani. in jurl tu LW j r,rho is the brother-in-law of the accused.

6. It is further submittcd that the incident rvas said to be resisrered rvith the delay and r'vith the support of the Medico legal patient record that gocs to show that the accident occuned rvh e walking on the road hit b} an unknow.n 4 wheerer vehicle, due to rvhicl'r LW3 sustained injuries. 7 It is humbly submitted that as per the complaint and invcstigation done, the police at the most could have charged rhe accused u/Sec 33g lpc, as the incident had occurred during domestic quarrel and onry when the accused wanted to leave from that place in a hurried manner and as LW3 try to stop the speeding car It is therefore prayed that rlris Ilon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the proccedings in SC No' 361 ot202l on thc file of the II Addl Senior Civil Judge- cum_Additionar Assistant Sessions Judge, Sangareddy for the offenses u/s 307, 323 lPcand be pleased to pass such othcr and fufther order or orders as this tlon'bte Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of iustice' ge€D Smt. Balagoni Rani d Goud v.A Veeragont CO LF PETITIONER COTINSEI- FOR SPO ENT NO.2 Date: -07.2025 Place: HYderabad

8. It is respectfulll, subrnittcd that the Complainant/LW I '"venr. inro a sudden shock and was not in a position to understand the situation as to rvhat has eractly happened to her husband and in a heated moment and rrpon the advicc of her relatives, she htrd filed the present complaint assumin,q that due to rash behavior of the Accused/Petitioner her husband sustained injuries. Later on it came to hcr (Complainants) knowledge that the incident \,vas nol an intcntional act of thc accused. It is submitted that the R2lComplainant realized that due to the said complaint neither she nor the petitioner and his famill are har.ing mental pcace in their li., es. It is submitted the respondent uo.l in thr- best interest ol hcr life and petitioner taken the decision to rvithdran, rhe above complaint by r.vay of filing t-his compromise petition on the follou ing tcrnrs: a) That the Respondent No.2/ComplainanilLl filed complainr in Cr.No. 62 of 2020 on the file of PS Jinnaram, Sangareddy I)ist lor tl.re of'tenses under section 307,323 IPC subsequcntly Chargr. shccr ri,as filed and convertcd to SC No. 367 of 2021 on thc lile olthe II Acldl Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Assistant Sessions .ludge, Sangareddy for the offenses u/s 307, 323 IpC. Tliat the rcspondcnt no.2 u.ith her frec will and without any coercion and undue influencc has dccided to withdraw the above said complaint fil:d by. her against- the petirioner herein uncondilionalty.