The High Court · 2025

sta ted i n *, " rvre m o,.a n o-#T 3?:,::,'|,? ff:ll g"',lil" :',# "r,'n,;'H :f H:; be^pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Accised r.lo i in c.c.No 3946/2021 on the fire ot tlt Ro]-ditionar Junior civir Judge-crn,-xrv Additionat Judiciat Magistrate of First ctass, Medchat-tr/att<ajgiri "Dis1iict,"at Kukatpally, Telangana State. l.A. NO:2 OF 2025 Between: |p.i.-ylthl Lavanya-@ Vepuri Lavany_a, Wo Mathi Manoj Kumar, Hindu, a/a 33 years, / Occ. Software Employee,h/o H No.4_34_1t0,'noaO fl'o 5, NZJ'- ff 5:Lffi ?: l],X?L *,ts,'llg iB[ti;t ; t a s a r, n1 n s a reo d v D is tii ci : " ... Petitioner/De-facto complainant in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2025 AND 1 2 The State of Telangana, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, Hr,lf Court for the State of Tela ngana. at Hyderabad. Sri Mathi Manol Kumar, S/o lr/. Venkateshwarlu, Hindr.. rged about 34 years, Occ. Pvt servrie. R/o H No.15-'18-263i6l2, Prasanthi'a:tir, Beside prigathi !9!oo!-(f glapr.rram Haveti, Khammam City, Khamrr ar ii District, Tetanlana State-507002 ..Respondents/Accused No.1 in l.r\.lrlos.2 and 3 of 2025 Petition under Section 359 (6) of BNSS praying that irr the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petitiorr lhe High court may be pleased to Permit the petitioner to compromise with th: .Accused No..1 , with the offence punishable U/S 498-4, IPC and Sec.3 9 4 of Dp Act in C.C. No.3946/2021 on the file of ttl Additional Junior :.; vil Judge-Cum-XlV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First class, Medchal-l/;r lkajgiri Distnct, at Kukatpally, Telangana State pending disposal of the Crimrnal :)etition l.A. NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359 (2) of BNSS praying that r the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petitior .re High Court may be pleased to record the compromise and compound the oi'errce punishable U/S 498-4 IPC and Sec.3 & 4 of DP Act, in C.C.No.3946t2[.21 on the file of ilt Additional Junior Civ I Judge-Cum-XlV Additional Judicial l\/agislrate of First Class, Medchal-lvla lkajgiri District, at Kukatpally, Telangla ra State, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition in the interest of justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing |^e [Vlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the ,rrguments of Sri P.VENKANNA Advocate for the Petitioner and the Sri i/r ,,ekananda Reddy, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent l, o 1 and of Sri Syed Minaaz, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2025 in/and CRIMINAL PETITION No.10002 ot 2025 COMMON ORDER: 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No,1 in C.C.No.3946 of 2021 , on the file of the learned lll Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XlV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-4 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. lt is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent No.2idefacto complainant that during pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the mafter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2025 have been filed to record compromise between them and to compound the offences.

3. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has opposed the compromise petition.

4. Since the parties were willing to enter into compromise, they were given a chance to settle the matter by appearing along with their respective counsel before the High Court Legal Services 2 - Crlp 100U )025 committee for the state of rerangana vide order:;,jated 06.0g.2025 passed by this Court. But the parties failed to r,,ppear on the said date and sought extension of time for their app(:afance before the Committee. Considering the said request, this (}:,urt, vide orders dated 28.0g.2025 had given another chance to sr:rl|e the matter by appearing along with their respective counsel befcrre the High Court Legal Services Committee for the State of Telarlg6n3 and the Secretary, Legal Services Committee is directed to r;r bmit a report to that effect 5' Pursuant to the above said direction issued t:r,,this court, the parties along with their respective counsel have appr;arred before the High Court Legal Services Committee for the State c , _..elangana the Secretary of the above sard Authority identified the parties and submitted report dated OB.O}.2O2S stating that thr parties were identified and they have willfully, without any coerc,(:n compromise entered into

6. ln view of the above, l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2O2ti are allowed. Consequenfly, the Criminal petition is allowed and t : proceedings in C.C.No.3946 of ZO21 . on the file of the learncd lll Acldrtional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XlV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, 3 I:TD, J C.b 10002 2(D5 Medchal-l\/alkajgiri District at Kukatpally, are hereby quashed subject to the petitioner paying an amount of Rs.5,0001 (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court Bar Association and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana State Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, within a period of two (02) weeks from today and file proof of same before the Registry.

7. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/- N,CHA DRA SEKHAR RAO PUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To &

1. The Xl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Kukatpally, Cyberabad. 2. The Station House Officer, Jagadgirigutta Police Station, Cyberabad. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

4. One CC to Sri P.Venkanna, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Syed Minaaz, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies NVB/PSL (Along with joint ltilemo is enclosed herewith) -- ------- t Note: Total Amount of Rs 10,000/- ( Rupees Ten thousand :,n!y ) has been paid by Sri P.Venkanna, counsel for the petitioner as directed by :nr: Hon,ble court vide order dated 17.09.202s as Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees Five fl^ :rsand onry ) to the Telangana state Legal servrces Authority, High court pren,sies, Hyderabad, and Rs. 5,0001 ( Rupees F:ive thousand onry ) to the Terangana r- igh court Advocates Association, Hyderabad and fired Memo as proof of compriarrr:r: USR No. i 03256 of 2025. ,::,., t. .- \.-- . HIGH COURT DATED:1710912025 COMMON ORDER l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2025 ln/And CRLP.No.10002 of 2025 .:'... ::1 a,i: [[i ffi \'.|i' '...i ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION trrttD t.A.NOS.2 AND 3 OF 2025 10 i; IN THE HIGH COTJRT OF-JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD ! CRL.P.NO. OF 2025 BETWEEN: Sri Mathi Manoj Kumar, S/o M. Venkateshwarlu, Hindu, aged about 34 years, Occ: Pvt.Service, R/o H.No. 1 5- 1 8-263 I 6l2,Prasanthinagar, Beside'Pragathi School, Khanapuram I-laveli, Khammam City, Khammam District, Telangana State-507002. ...Petitioner/ AccusedNo.l A'ND

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

2.Smt. Mathi Lavanya @ Vepuri Lavanya, Wo Mathi Manoj Kumar, Hindu, a/a33 years, Occ; Software Employee, R/o H.No.4-34-116, Road No.3, Near BaPuji High School, Jagathigirigutt a, Balmagar, Rangareddy District, Hyderabad, Telangana State-S0003 7. ...Respondents/ Complainants JOINT MEMO OF COMPROMISE The present petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the l. petitioner/Accused No.1 in c.c.No.394 61202l on the file of III Addl. Junior civil Judge-Cum-XIVAddl.JudicialMagistrateofFirstClass,Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at Kukatpally, Telangana State, for an alleged offence Under Section 498-A, IPC and Sec. 3 & 4 of DP Act.

2. It is respectfully submitted that the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant filed an alleged complaint stati-ng'fhat on 25'08'2018, she got married with Mathi Manoj Kumar, S/o Venkateshwarlu, a/a 30 yeais, Occ: Software Engineer' R'/o H.No.15-18-2631612, Prashanthinagar, Khanapur Haveli, Khammam' in the presence of elders. At the time of Rs.30,00,000/-, 53 Tolas of Gold, iPhone with watch (1,50,000/-) presented towards clowry' After marriage, her husband ..Cont.P.2 \AT \J'A -2- harassed physicatly and mentalry ror airditional dowry, r() only her husband, her mother-in-law, Vijaya Lakshmi, Father-in-raw venka -.i rrwarru, father of her mother-in-law, Uppu Narsimha Rao, and her brother_ in_l,r r,, Hcmanth, all of them harassed, mentalry for additionar dowry. Her husland har,r.;ed for sexua,y. Many times elders counseled her husband, but no change, but r,. ,:ontinued to do so, for additional dowry, or else he threatened to get another ma-r.i:rge. Two rnonths back her husband sent her to her sister's house, afler beating. /\ rrcsenI she residing at her sister's house. As such, take necessary action agair;r her rrusband and his family members for harassing her mentally and physicarrr,. \fter investigation the police filed charge sheet against A-l to A-5, off-ence pr rr sharrre U/S 49g-A of IPC and Section 3 and,4 of D.p. Act, vide C.C.No.i94(r,l )21 on the file of the Hon'ble III Addl'Junior civir Judge-cum-XlV Addl. Judir: rLI Magistrate, of First Class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at Kukatpally, Telang: r.r Stare. 3' It is respectfully submitted that erders of the both sir r,.; arso have tried their Ievel best to suggest an amicabre solution as to restore thi. rratrimoniar life with an intention to safeguard their maritar rife. But the effbrt:; r f trre erders, proved futile' the petitioner and 2nd respondent decided to Iivc ,:paratery even after deliberations and mediation being held by the elders of.botlr :. des. 4- It is respectfulry submitted that petitioner and ,Dd re .p rndcnt both are weil educated, professionals, matured, independent and arc ,..r,ell aware of the consequences of their actionso The parties are firm in th.ir resolve to part the ways by dissolution of the mJrriage as there is no possibir r., of reconciliation to save the institution of rnarriage and they are incomparible .r each other. During the course of discussion the Accused No.1 agreed to return r..:- Gord chain, Two Rings' Apple I Phone and Apple watch (which were prescnl,)d by the parents of 2'd respondent at the tirre of engagement and marriage) to tlrr, l,,d respondent at ..Cont.P.3 lqf', -3- the time of recording of Chief examination in Mutual Divorce Petition The petitioner/Accused No.1 also agreed to pay Rs.25,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) to the 2nd respondent towards full and final settlement amount of permanent alimony including past, prcsent and ''future maintenance. The 2nd Respondent/de-facto complainant also agreed to retum Gold omaments i.e. Necklace-l (30 grams) Pusthelathadu (30grams), Nallapusala Golusu-l (20 grams),Rings-3 (15 grams), Engagment Ring-l (5 grams), Ring-l Presented to brother of 2nd Respondent (5 grams), Marriage Ring-l (5 grams), Pusthe-l (3 grams), Laxmi Ammavari Rupalu-2 (5 grams), on Varalaxmi vratham day vatillu-l (2 ll2 F;ams) and at the time of enter into house vatillu-l (2 ll2 grams), Total (103 Grams) approximately (which rvere presented by the parents of Accused No.l at the time of engagement and marriage and different occasions) to the Accused No.l at the time of recording of Chief examination in Mutual Divorce Petition. After negotiations and mutual discussions, finally both panies comes to an understanding that the mariage shall be dissolved, by way of Mutual consent, by filing Divorce Petition before the Family court, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar, u/s l3-B of Hindu Marriage Act. That on 01.08.2025 to avoid mis- understandings both parties agreed to draw the contents in writing'and bg|h parties signed the MOU-cum-Agreement. tr .a 1 q1r i1j i Ii is further submitted that as per terms of MOU-cum-Agreement a d1.01.08.2025 the 2d respondent agreed to co-operate to quash the case c.c.No.3946l2021 on the file of III Addl. Junior Civil J.qdge-cum-XlV Addl.Judicial Magistrate of] First class, Medchal-Malkajgiri bistrict, at Kukatpally, Telangana State, and she expressed her intention to withdraw the DVC No.48/2020 pending on the file of III Addl. Junior civil Judge-cum-XlV Addl.Judicial Magistrate of First class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, at Kukatpally, Telangana State case. In view ofthe above, it would be unfair and ...Cont.P.4 {$n 4- '1 contrary to the interest ofjustice, and would be r law' ir the criminar proceedings continue prosecution, the petitioner will be put to great hardslip "-",J" l,i'r.ri:TH ;iJ""""T :: It is further r ". ff

6. pres en t petiti on," au;;Th:: #:;T, H;] J I ;lil:T: I: : of Dp Act in C.C.No.394 6/2021 onthe file of III Xrv Addr.rudicial Masistrate or First .,".., J::l "H:ffil Kukatpally, Telangana State, now the 2nd res ;;:::"il,o j;fi ::: votunrar,v presenting berore the Hon,bre *-, ;:;. compromise the case con rpc and Sec 3 & . ".,,';1i'#J.l.,[.,iil)ii,i]; ,;," ?,::lil:H i::: Magistrate c f First class, Medchal- Kukatpally' TelanganrL State, against the Civil Judge_Cu._Xry Markajgiri District, .Addl'Judicial petitioners/Accusecl - r;:.T":::; No. I . Hence thi s nlemo of compromise. Accused No.1 Counsel r Accus No.I ] 2 s Counsr:l for 2nd respo dent