The High Court · 2025

2. Smt. Mandadi priv: '[,Ul]:i1?i[\i!,i1ii,S#,liffi:l"df ...RespondenUComplainant J,X%?liit?jj?;9,??,Househo,d ...RespondenUDe-facto Complainant Petition under Section 4g2 Cr.p.C. Section 52g of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in c.c. No. 5801 of 20 r8, pending on the fire of the court of the ,r Additionar Judiciar IVragistrate of First crass' Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, registered for the offences under Sections 498_4 and 506 of lpC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, against the petjtioners /A1 lo A4. ; l j --l/ l.A. NO: 1 OF 2025 Between: f I Smt. Mandadi Priyanka, D/o M Narsi Reddy, aged 36 years Occ. Household, R/o H. No. 1 -7 -38213 n U 1, Bahunnagar, Champapet, Saroorn agar, Hyderabad ... Petitioner/Respondent No. 2 (De-facto Complainant) AND

1. Mallavaram Srinivas Reddy, S/o Ram Reddy, aged 39 years, Occ. Private Services, R/o H.No 8-12, Srinivasnagar, Chintal, Jeedinre,tla, Hyderabad. 2. Mallavaram Ram Reddy, S/o Late Kista Reddy, aged 63 years, Occ. Private Service, R/o H.No. B-'12, Srinivasnagar, Chintal, Jeedimet a, Hyderabad. 3. Mallavaram Vasantha, Wo Ram Reddy, aged 59 years ()cc. Household, R/o H.No. 8-12, Srinivasnagar, Chintal, Jeedimetla, Hyderaba,i.

4. Sripati Vani W/o Srrnrvas Reddy, aged 43 years, O,:c Household, R/o lndrakaran Village, Edulabad Mandal, Sangareddy Districl ...Respondents/Petitioners (Al to 44)

5. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Hi(,h Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad. ... Res po ndenUCom plainant Petition under Section 359(6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner/Respondent No.2 (De-farlo Complainant) to Compromise and record the same in C.C. No. 5801 of 2018, pending on the file of the Court of the lll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. against the Petitioners/A1 to 44 for the offences punishable under Sections-4g8-A and 506 of the lndian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359 (2) of BNSS praying that rn the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C No. 580'1 of 2018, pending on the file of the Court of the Ill Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at L.B Nagar. by compounding the offences in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties, for the offences ounishable under Sections 498-4 and 506 of the lndian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, against the Petitioners lA1 lo A4. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N. Hanuman Naik, Advocate for the Petitioners and the [/lr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 in/and CRIMINAL PETITION No.92 51 of 202!i ORDER: It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 as well as the respondent No.2, that durin3 pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromist>d the matter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 o'f 2025 have been filed to record the compromise between them and to compound the offences.

2. Vide order dated 24.07.2025, this Court directed ther parties along with their respective counsel to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court for the State of Telangara, Hyderabad, for I I identification and to submit a report.

3. Pursuant to the above said direction issued by this Court, the parties have appeared and the Secretary, High Cou( Legal Services Committee, has identified the partieS and submitted a report, daled 2g.07.2025 and the same is placed on record.

4. ln view of the above, l.A.Nos.'l and 2 oI 20ZS are allowed. Consequently, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings ;in c.c.No.5801 of 2018 on the file of the lll Additionat Judiciat Magistrate of First class, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, against the petitioners/accused Nos.l to 4 are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners/a,:cused Nos.1 to 4 2 ETD, J CILP 9251 2025 paying an amount of Rs.5,000r (Rupees Five Thousand onry) to the Director, Sainik welfare, Hyderabad (Savings A/c.No.S2'r88926279, state Bank of lndia, Shantinagar Branch (20070), IFSC Code:SBtNOO2OO7O, M|CR Rs.5,0001 (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two (02) weeks from today and file proof of the same before the Registry. No.50000405t) and Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/- MOHD DEPUry REG .ISMAIL ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 J

4. 5. The lll Judicial Maqistrate of First Class. Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Naqar rhe Station HousJofficer w"."; p;;;'6ir1lffil"n.rona, Two CCs to the public pros iecutor' state of relangana, High Court Buildings, at Hyderabad (oUT) One CC to Sri. N Hanuman Naik' Advocate [oPUc] Two cD copies DL w (Enclosed copy of Joint Memo) Note: Total AmountofRs. i0,0001 ( Rupees Ten thousand only ) has been paid by Sri N Hanuman Naik, counser for the petitioner as directed by the Hon,bre court vide order dated 14.08.2025 as Rs. 5,000/_ ( Rupees Five thousand only ) to the "Director' sainik werfare Hyderabad, and Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees Five thousand onry ) to the Terangana High coud Advocates Association, Hyderabad and fired Memo as proof of comptiance USR No. 99629 of 2O2S dated 12.09.2025. HIGH COURT DATED:14l08t2025 ORDER l.A. Nos. 1 and 2 ol 2025 IN/AND CRIMIN AL PETITI ON NO: '- ,l - 9251o.F 2025 ,=a.til,,,\. (--)' 'na \.1, 23 c,tp M P'\. ;l: :' il l.A NOS. 1 AND 2C]F 2025 AND CRIMINAL PETITION ARE ALLOWED. e9Ll HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD. cRL.PErnroN No. "1)J^l oF 2025 BETWEEN: l.Mallavaram Srinivas Reddy, 11" 1* Reddy, aged 39 years,-Occ: private Services, R/o H. No. B-12, Srinivasna ga r, Chinrat, J.;;l;;il, ;yderabad. 2. Maltavaram Ram Reddy, S/o Late Kista Reddv. aoed 6J years, Occ: private Services, R/o H.No. B-1 2, Srinivainagar, -Chintal, .l""Oi."tf .,-Hydera bad.

3..Mallavaram Vasantha, Y/o.|gf Reddy, aged 59 years, Occ: Househotd, R/o H. No. B-1 2, Srinivasnagar, Chinta t, ;;;l;;;, Hyderabad. 4. Sripati Vani, W/o Srinivas Reddy, aged 43 years, Occ: llousehold. ivvJL"vr\J, Yg ]rd'gfu'gl vilagel Edurabad M;il;i, Sangareddy District. AND ...Petitioners/A1 to 44.

1. The State of Telangana, .1"p. OV its public prose-cutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyclerabad. 2.. Smt. Mandadi priyanka, D/o lt4. Narsi Reddy, aged 36 years, Occ: Household. I{3^l-Y- -t'. 3 Bzi 3 /.7 B t r, B. h;; ;; s.,i i;;p1 ;.,? 5aroornagar, Hyderabad. .. Respondent/Complainant. ... Respondent/De-Facto Complainant. OI TME o The above-named petitioners/Accused and Resp. No.2 submits as under. 1' That the petitioner/Al is the son of petitioners/A2 and 43, and the brother of Petitioner/A4, whire the Respondent rJo. 2/de-facto comprainant is the wife of Petitioner/A1' It is respecffully submitted that the marriage of the de facto comprainant with petitioner/A1 was soremnized on 31-05-2015 at sama yadi Reddy Gardens' RCI Road, Hyderabad, according to Hindu customs and rituars. It is further submitted that the petitioners arrayed as Accused Nos. 1 to 4 in c.c. No. 5801 0f 2018, on the fire of the court of the III Additionar Judiciar Magistrate of ,*1 .t4- R oZ €a AL M* ,("d { Q.|y. \^ q[',t\fl(.A. First class, Rangareddy District at L.B. Nagar, registered 'br the offences under sections 498-4 and 506 0f the Indian Penal code and Sections 3 and 4 0f the Dowry Prohibition Act, based on the complaint lodged by the de-facto complainant / Respondent No. 2.

2. That while leading their matrimonial life, certain disputr)s arose between the Accused and the de facto complainant, as a result of which they have been living separately. Subsequently, the Respondent No.2 / de facto complainant lodged a complaint, based on which FIR No. 58/2018 was regist(lred at women Police station, saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District. After completion of investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, which was numbered as C.C. \o. 5801 of 2018, and the same is now pending on the file of the III Additional luclicial Magistrate of First class, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, for the offence:; under sections 498-A and 506 of IPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibil:ion Act.

3. That during the pendency of the above case, with the intervention of elders, well- wishers, and Advocates, the matter was amicably settled out of court and to obtain Divorce by Mutual Consent. Accordingly, the Responcent No.2 / de facto complainant agreed to withdraw the case against the P3titioners/A1 to A4 by entering into a Memorandum of Understanding dated I-,t-04-2025, wherein she accepted a sum of Rs. 19,00,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs only) towards permanent alimony/maintenance as full and final settlenlent of all claims, and agreed for dissolution of marriage on the ground of mutua consent'

4. That in vlew of the Memorandum of Understanding cated 17-04-2025, the Petitioner/Accused has paid a total amount of Rs. 19,00,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs only) to the Respondent No.2 / de facto complainart towards full and final settlement of permanent. alimony, maintenance, etc. The particulars of payment are: Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs only) vide DemanC Draft No. 484932 dated 24-03-2025 drawn on State Bank of India, and Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) vide Demand Draft No. 484964 dated 08-05-2025 drawn on state Bank of India. In acknowledgment of the above, Respondent No.2- / de facto complainant has executed a receipt confirming the receipt of the said anount of Rs. 19,00,000/- towards full and final settlement of all her claims of alimony and maintenance etc' A {-,}1 ? H -o- ^^SK"d {o'j2 ,1_ r .\ s'8** fl-'l/ I

5. That in view of the arni petitioners/A1 ,o oo ,n,tuo'" seftlement and compromise arrived at between the purpose wourd be ,"*":rf :T:::T:J".:,1,:" "* comprainant, no userur ute cnminal proceedings' It is therefore respectfully prayed rhat ;;,.*;:::^' ;6#:i*i#;*ffir,:: H;1j; "'::;*.r;1. l; utr::s' Kdl-lQd Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, in the interest of justice. Hence this loint Memo, $ 6'Us*c\ Respondent No. 2/De_facto Compla inant. l-' "t"ea Accused No.2 = M,i ,-- o Accused f,Jo.3 I for' e espondent No.2 Date: 22-07_2025. Place: Hyderabad.

4. +,4" Accused No.1 <6 Va","1 Accused No.4. Counsel for