The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana,, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

2. Sri. Kanukunta Markandeya S/o K. Dharmaiah, Hindu, aged about 61 years, Occ. Business, Ryo Flat No.301, Telkar Residency, Near Sridevi Talkies, Chandanagar, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petilion, the High Court may be pleased to QUASH the proceedings against the against the Petitioners/Accused No.1,3 4 and 5, in S.C. No.25812O24 on the file of X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, a Kukatpally (presently at Khaithalapur) l.A. NO: 2OF 2024 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 STAY of all further proceedings including appearance of the against the Petitioners/ Accused 1, 3 4 and 5, in S.C. No.25812O24 on the file of X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatpally(presently at Khaithalapur), pending disposal of the Criminal Petition. l.A. NO: 1OF 2025 Between: Sri. Kanukunta Markandeya S/o K. Dharmaiah, Hindu, aged about 61 years, Occ. Business, R:/o Flat No.301, Telkar Residency, Near Sridevi Talkies, Chandanagar, Hyderabad, Telangana State. ...PETITIONERS/DEFACTO COM PLAINANT AND

1. M.Shabarish S/o Late lvl. Satyanarayana, Na 28 years, R/o H.No. 1- 56l2lcllP-27, Road No.3, Jawaharnagar Colony, Chandanagar, Hyderabad. 2. M.Aruna W/o Late M. Satyanarayana, fua 50 years, R/o H.No.6-218, Bhupalpally, Bhupalpally District. 3 M.Sandhya W/o Sampath, ala 37 yea.s, R/o Chennuru (V and M), Manchiryala District.

4. M Sampath- S/o Rajamallu, a/a 40 years, R/o Chennuru (V and M), Manchiryala District

5. The State of Telangana, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED No. 't, 3, 4 & 5 Petition under Section 359(6) of BNSS 2O23 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminat petition, the High Court may be pleased to PERMIT the petitioner to compromise with the Accused No.1, 3, 4 & 5, with the offence punishable U/S 306, 498-A of lpC and Sec.3 & 4 of DP Act in S.C.No.25812O24 on the fite of X Addl. Metropotitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally (Presently at Khaithalapur), Telangana State. l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 359(2) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise and COMPOUND the offence punishable U/S 306, 498-4 of IPC and Sec.3 & 4 of DP Act in S.C.No.258/2024 on the file of X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally (Presently at Khaithalapur), Telangana State, against the Accused No.1, 3, 4 & 5. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P. Venkanna, Advocate for the Petitioner, Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri Pallerlamudi Suresh, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI l.A.Nos.l and2of 2025 in/and CRIMINAL PETITION No.9893 ot 2024 COMMON ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 , 3, 4 and 5 to quash the proceedings against them in S.C.No.258 ot 2024 on the file of Senior Civil Judge-cum-V Additional Chief Judicial Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Kukatpally, presently at Khaithalapur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 4984 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. lt is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the respondent No.2, that during pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 have been filed to record the compromise between them and to compound the offences.

3. Vide order dated 24.02.2025, this Court directed the pa(ies along with their respective counsel to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court for \ \ I I 2 ..-j-..- the State of Telangana, Hyderabad, for identification and to submit a report.

4. Pursuant to the above said direction issued by this Court, the parties have appeared and the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has identified the parties and submitted a report, dated 04.03.2025 and the same is placed on record.

5. ln view of the above, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 is allowed. Consequently, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 in S.C.No.258 of 2024 on the file of Senior Civil Judge-cum-V Additional Chief Judicial Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Kukatpally, (presently at Khaithalapur), are hereby quashed Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed sd/- N. sRrHARr DEPUTY REGISTRAR Note: This order is amended as per the order dated 02-05-2025 passed in l.A.No.3 ot 2025 by replacing X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate with Senior Civil Judge-cum-V Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in paragraph Nos.1 and 5. This amended order substitutes the earlier order despatched on 1 1-03-2025. I //TRUE COPY// sd/- N. sRtHARr ASSISTANT REGISTRAR )./ SECIdM OFFICER To, 1 . The X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally (presently at Khaithalapur)

2. The Station House Officer, Chandanagar Police Station, Cyberabad 3. Twp CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad

4. One CC to Sri P. Venkanna, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Pallerlamudi Suresh, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies (Along with a copy of joint memo of Compromise) Vt{/gh 19- iti_ 4+:;,.{=/l ,' HIGH COURT DATED: 0710312025 0210512025 I I a) : 15,-' .$ :J ii) l''- \: .NC s AMENDED COMMON ORE l.A. NO: 1 AND 2 OF 2O2l', ER li r',.1 + o( IN/AND CRLP.No.9893 of 2024 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PET!T!ON 1l d?r t I I I c o d r), 5 rrs, leS, ITS lCeS fiaY \ddl -i-.+t. i.n.-,,, - IN THE I{IGH c*ouRT op ruorcaTuRE FoR TttE srATE oF TELANGANA, ai nvoenaeAD cRL.P.No. g8g3 oF 2024 . BETWEEN: l.M.Shabarish, S/o Late M. Sa0zanarayana. Na 28 years. R/o H.No. l_56D/r-nt ^_ I::1). ,.Jalaharnagar c;;;,' -,,, L nandanagar, Hyderabad.

2.M.Aruna, W/o Late M. Satyanarayana. A./a 50 years, R/o H.No.6_2 js, Biip;tprrrv, Bhupalpally District.

3.M.Sandhya. Wo Sampath, a/a37 years. rvo Lnerururu (V&M), Manchiryala Disiricr. 4.M. Sampath, S/o Rajamall u, a.la 40 years, R/o Chennuru ( V&M), Vun"ni,yutu'Oirtri.r. AND l. The. State of Telangana, R:q public prosecuror, High Court for the State of fefrngun;, a;;;;;a. ",

2. S-ri. Kanukunta Markandeya, S/o K.Dharmaialr, -'" I:"9:,rg:O_"bout 6t years, Occ: Bu.in.rr, Wo.ljlat No.30 I , Telkar Residency, Near Sridevi Talkies, Chandanagar, Hyderabad. ...Petitioners/ Accused No. 1,3,4&5 ...Respondents/ Complainants l. JOINTMEMO OF COMPROMIS E The present petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the peritioners/Accused No'I, 3,4 & 5 in S'C.No.25g/20240n the fire of X Addl. Metropolitan Magisrrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpaily (presentry at Khaitharapur), Telangana State, for an alleged offence Under Section 306, 49g-A ofIpC and Sec. &4 f ' Act. M '," 4AytL<lC? ,*4\,h.:, %f,/ - lu #suiz"s;-'fr ...Cont.p.2 I .) 2 It is respectfully submitted that case of the prosecution is that the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant, who is the father of deceased filed an alleged complaint on 11 .10.2020 stating that deceased was his third daughter, who performed her marriage with Accused No.l on 28-02.2020, the marriage was an arranged one. The deceased and Accused No.1 both are software employees. After marriage Accused No.1 and deceased stayed at Chandanagar, in the same building his elder daughter also staying. The complainant and his second daughter are staying at Telkars Residency, near.Sridevi Talkies, Chandanagar. The de-facto complainant alleged that after marriage the deceased stayed with Accused No.l happily for short period, thercafter started mental and physical harassment sexually and sometimes shc u,as in fear to stay with the accused during the night time, when she camc to her elder sister's house after the marriage for Ganesh Festival, then she revealed her feelings of the conjugal life to the family members. That on 14.10.2020 the Accused No.l went to Banglore for party arranged by friends, leaving thc dcceased at horne. On 17.10.2020 she went to the house of hcr father/de-facto complainant, at about 1400 hours, she went to the 5th floor while talking with phone and jumped from there, thereafter shifted the deceased to the Hospital, but the doctors declared her brought dead with multiple in juries, and the said complaint was registered under the offence punishable U/s 306, 498-4 of IPC, and Sec.3 & 4 of DP Act, and after filing alleged charge sheet, sam e was numbered as S.C. No.258/2024. ,:f M $-D,qh'1 t. 1' h,l lTv c-\\et

3. Acc Asl On

4. dt. I' S.C. Kuk Iaw, o (il' Cl)l''1t l, l r1 -3-

3. It is respectfully submitted that l{ Accused and 2'd respondent both are close relatives, as such defacto complainant performed the marriage of I't Accused and his deceased daughter. The defacto complainant knows very well about nature of the l'' Accused, but on the spur of movement he filed the above alleged complaint against the accused, though there is no involvement of accused for the death of his deceased daughter. F.ven as per complaint and 161 statements of de-facto complainant, there is no allegation against the accused. At the time of suicide committed by the deceased, l,r Accused was at Banglore, and other accused are residing their respective habitats in the different Village and towns. As such, the accused neither involved nor abetted the deceased to commit suicide. On the advise of elders, relatives, well-wishers of the family, after negotiations and mutual discussions, finally the complainant voluntarily come forward to withdraw the complaint to restore the family relationship, as it was spoiled due to the complaint,, though it was filed on the spur of movement. That on 10-11-2024 both the parties resolved thc matter between them in the presence of both side caste elders It is further submitted that as per understanding between the parties 4. dt.10.11.2024 the 2^d respondent agreed to co-operate to quash the S.C.No.258/2024 on the filc of X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally (Presently at Khaithalapur), Telangana State, and expressed his intention to withdraw the case. ln view of the above, it would be unfair and contrary to the interest ofjustice, and would be tantamount to abuse of process of law, if the criminal proceedings continue against the Accused, in the event of prosecution, the Accused will be put to great hardship. The de-facto complainant has withdrawn the allegations made againsl the Accused No.l, 3, 4 & 5 and alscr withdraw the case vide SC.No.25 812024 onthe file of X Addl. Metropolitan tl'G h,{ Ax(\t .,.Cont.P,4 ,-.ial (^ ( ) i'i--l'4s"J&q'h': $, 3 e .4, z2v -4- Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatfatly (Presently at Khaithalapur), Telangana State, against the petitioners by reporting compromise, before the l{on'ble High Court $ for the state of Telangana. Now the de-facto complainant/lather of deceased voluntarily presenting before the Hon'blc l-ligh Court for seeking permission to tA compromise the case conscquently to QUASH the olfence I'unishable U/S 306, 498-4, of IPC, and Sec.3 & 4 ol DP Act in S.C.No -25812024 on tl.re file of X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally (Presently at Khaithalapur), Telangana State, against the petitioners/Accused No. 1, 3, 4 & 5. Flence this joint memo olcompromise Accused No. I M Accused No.3 14" I+rol"r-c{ Accused No.4 M q b.: Accused No.5 2''d respondent Counsel for used No.I 3,4&5 Counsel for 2nd respondent /t I S b P M