Criminal Appeal No. 196 of 2013 · The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hydeiabad for the State of Telangana and the state of Andhra Pradesh.

2. Mr. P. Srinivas, I]/o Flat No. G-1 , Mahalakshmi Heights, Flat No. i)9, Kalyan ...Respondents Nagar, Phase -lll, l,4othinagar, Hyderabad -500 018. lA 1ot 2025 Between: Mr. P. Srinivas, S/o P. Raghunatha Naidu, Rl/o Flat No. G-1 , l,rlahalakshmi Heights, Flat No. 89, Kalyan Nagar, Phase -lll, Mothinagar, Hyderabad -500 018. ...Petitioners/Respondent -2 AND '1. B. Balakrishna, S/(). B. Rangaiah, Occupation . Private Service, residing at Flat No. 301, (E-l I 1), ceetanjali Residency, H. No. 8-3-22418N4, Madhuranagar Y ousufguda, Hyderabad.

2. B. Ravi Kumar, {i/o. B. Rangaiah, residing at Flat No. 301, (E-1 1'l ), Geetanjali Residency, H. Nr:. 8-3-224184"/4, lvladhuranagar Yousufgud a, Hyd era bad. 3. B. Anil Kumar, S/o. B. Rangaiah, residing at Flat No. 301, (E-111), Geetanjali Residency, H. Nrr. B-3-224l8A,/4, Madhuranagar Yousufguda, Hyderabad. 4. B. Sunil Kumar, residing at Flat No. 301,(E-1 11), Geetanjali Resicency,H. No. 8-3-2241 I N 4, Madhuranagar Yousufguda, Hyderabad. ..Respondents f Pelitioners 5 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, Hi.qh Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the state of Andhra Pradesh. ...RespondenURespondent No. -1 Petition under Section 359(2) of BNSS (New) under Section 32C(6) of Cr. p. C (OId) RAfl Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023 (New) and Section 482 of Cr. p. C. (Old) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to permit the petitioner/Respo ndent No. 2 to compound the offence against the respondents 1 to 4 herein and petitioners in Criminal R.C. and accused in C.C. and set aside order dated : 11103/2013 passed in C.C. No. 1OG ot 2012 by the Hon'ble Special Metropolitan Magistrat,e Court No. lll, Kukatpally, Hyderabad as confirmed in Crl. A. No. 196 ol 2013 by the Hon'ble lV Additional District Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad by rj.ismissing the appeal on 05/05i2018 for the off ence under Section 138 of N.l. Act and direct to refund the amount deposited by respondents 1 to 4 herein in pursuance of interim order dated : 2210612018 pas sed by this Hon'ble Court in l.A. No. 1 of 2018in Crl. R.C. No. 1551 ot 2018. lA 2of2025 Petition under {iection 359(2) of BNSS (New) under Section 3:20(6) of Cr. P. C (Old) RA/r/ Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023 (New) and Section 482 of Cr. p. C. (old) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavlt filed in sucport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise in terms of Settlement Agreement reached between this petitioner and respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein and others and set aside the order dated : 11t}3t201 3 passed in C.C. No. 106of2ol2bytheSpecialMetropolitanMagistrateCourtNo.lll,Kukatpally, UyOeraUaO as confirmed in brL n. No 196 ot ZOIZ by the Honble lV Additional District Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Ranga n9-d!v District' at L B Nagar' Hyderabad by dismissing tl; r;;;;i;' oslSslzor a for the offence under Section 138 of N.l. Act and direct to riund the amount deposited by respondent:.1 t9 4 herein in pursuance or inteil, otOer dated : 22tOGl2o1B passed by this Honlble Cortt in t.n. ruo. 1 ot 2018 in Crl. RC No 1551 of 2018' Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri T P Acharya Counsel for the Respondent No' 1 : Public Prosecutor Counsel forthe Respondent No' 2: Sri S'V' S' Chowdary The Court made the following: ORDER i.i '' .;ilr : - HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI l.A.Nos.l and 2 of 2025 in/and CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1551 of 2018 COMMON ORDER: Challenging the judgment dated 05.05.2018 passerj in Criminal Appeal Nlo 196 of 2013 by the learned lV Additicnal Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, this Crimiral Revision Case is filed. By the impugned order, the judgment dated 11.03.2013 passed in C.C.No.10,j of 2012 by the learned lll Special Metropolitan Magrstrate, Kukatpally at Miyapur, was confirmed, wherein, the petitioners- appellants-accused Nos.1 to 4 were convicted for the offence under Section 138 of N.l. Act and they were sentencec to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each and also to pay Rs.1,00,000/- each towards compensation wrthin one morth, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months ear:h.

2. lt is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as respondent No.2, that during pendenc\,, of the present Crinrinal Revision Case, the parties h:rve compromised the rnatter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 have been filed to record the compromise between them and to compound the offences. I -\

3. Vide order dated 23.04.2025, this Court directed the parties along with their respective counsel to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court for 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 29.04.2025 and the same is placed on record'

5. ln view of the above, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 are allowed' Consequently, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the conviction and sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioners-appellants-accused in the judgment dated 05 05 2018 passed in Criminal Appeal No-196 of 2013 by the learned lV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, confirming the judgment dated 1 'l '03 2013 passed in C.C.No.106 of 2012 by the learned lll Special lVletropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally at N/liyapur, is hereby set aside' The bail bonds of the petitioners-appellants-accused, if any' shall stand cancelled. I l i ' rl' ---7 closed Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall :;tand ,TTRUE COPY// A Sd/. K. SATLESHI I JolNr REGISTRAR I I'i: TION OFFICER To, DL t The lV Additiona\ Metropolitan Sessions Judge' At L B' ' i;;;; Dlirict'lwirh records' if any) 2. The lll Special rv"t'oporiiln'r"ragiiirat" Kukatpally' at M ; il";;6ri'r e ncnarya' Advocate [oPuc]^^. ati s'y'. s chowdarv' Advocate toPUCl ;. ;;;;; 5 Two CD CoPies " i"""r"t"o a cocS' of Joint memo) W Nagar, llanga iyapur I {h E' .€- \ --'- i HIGH COURT DATED:.0210512025 ORDER l.A. Nos. 1 and 2 ol 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE 1551 2018 'itr':' S Ir; .)+( f o l.I \I t\ M z o * '':;: ; :,,; ;- + ,. ,/ ALLOWING THE I.A. NOS. 1 AND 2OF 2025 AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE. N ?, \ € & a HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD Crl. R-C. No. 1551 of 2018 BETWEEN

1. B. Balakrishna, S/o B. Rangaiah, Hindu, Aged about 45 Years, Occupation: Private Service.

2. B. Ravi Kumar, S/o B. Rangaiah, Hindu, Aged about 44 Years, Occupation: Private Service.

3. B. Anil Kumar, S/o B, Rangaiah, Hindu, Aged about 43 Years, Occupation: Private Service.

4. B. Sunil Kumar, Sio B. Rangaiah, Hindu, Aged about41 Years, Occupation: Pdvate Service. (All are residing at Flat No. 301, (E-1 11), Geetanjali Resadency, H- No. 8-3-224184,/4, Madhuranagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. AND 1) The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad-

21. Mr- P. Srinivas, S/o P. Raghunatha Naidu, Hindu, Aged 56 years, Occ: Business, R/o Flat No. G-1, Mahalakshmi Heights, Flat No. 89, Kalyan Nagar, Phase - lll, Motinagar, Hyderabad - 500 018. t ,1r1*-il'* 7 ), I P. flv'rrzqvn"st tz< L-^/ 9 I I I I I I I I I i i1 l t, , Appellants - Respondents f# AL-, , The Appellants Nc arrived at a compro m,se as recorded enclosed herewith The pa(ies be pleased to iecord the compromise i pass such other order or orders as are hereto JOtlvT cOMPROMtsE M I.to 4 and the Respondent No.2 respectfully submrt that th o EM RA NDUM accordingly ey have tn the Sefttement Agreement dat ed 23-04-2024, request that the Hor,,ble Court may n terms of the said Setflement Agreement and deemed fit and proper in the cift.:umstances of I \ L ,q/, (1) 4 /r-4-t^r/"o (2) D-Ra v\ r{q\."{,.qy o V.*+^Ual^(a @ {9-9;__- w+ (epry1 y*.t;.^^y {,,+. (Respondent / ct'-t No.2) the case Counse, for &Fle+p.+ Counsel fo ondent