The High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana, through Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad Sri B Naveen Kumar, S/o. Chennaiah, Age 28 yrs, Occ: Cab Driver, R/o Kammadanam Village, Farooq Nagar lvlandal, Ranga Reddy Dlstrrct Phone No 7893030805 ...Respondents/Defacto ComplainanURespondents in l.A.No.3 ot 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated rn the [\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in relation to the Cr. No. 494 of 2025 on the file of the Hon'ble XVll Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad agarnst the Petitioner/Accused. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the clrcumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings rncluding the appearance of the Petitioner/Accused in the proceedings under Cr.No.494 o'f 2025 on the file of the Hon'ble XVII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition. l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 l.A. NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359(6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated rn the [\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitior the High Court may be pleased to permi me to compound the offences with tt r Accused and quash the proceedrngs agarnst the Accused rn Cr.No. 494 of 2( 25 on the file of the Hon'ble XVllAddrtronal Chief Judicial t\/agistrate, at Hyderr )ad, in the interest of justice l.A. NO: 4 OF 2025 Betvveen: Sri B Naveen F.umar, S/o. Chennarah, Age 28 yrs, Occ lab Driver, R/o Kamrnadanam Village, Farooq Nagar Mandal, Ran; I Reddy District Phone No. 7893030805 ...Petitioner/l )efacto Complainant V/s 1 The State of Te,iangana, through Public Prosecutor, Hig I Court for the State of Telangana, tlyderabad. ...Respondent No.1 2. Kuntla Bharath Simha Reddy, S/o K Shekar Reddy Age 34 yrs, Occ. lvl p Colony, Restaurant at Bangalore R/o Plot No 217 , Road no. l ( C, Jubilee Hills, H,rderabad. Cell No.9705836079. -lVlLA . . Petitio n e r/Ac c u s ed Petition under Section 359(2) of BNSS praying that I the circumstances stated in the I\/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitior, the High Court may be pleased to recorrl the compromise the Petitioner / Do rcto complainant to compound the offence with the Respondent No. 2/Acc I ;ed and quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Defacto Complainant in (l .No. 494 of 2025 on the file of the Hon'ble XVll Addrtional Chief Judicial Magistr: te, at Hyderabad, in the interest of justice. This Petition c:ming on for hearing, upon perusing re Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing 1e arguments of Sri T Jayant Jaisoorya, Advocate for the Petitioner an I Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the tt )spondent No..l and of Sri J. Dheeraj Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA l.A.Nos.3 AND 4 OF 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.12780 OF 2025 COMMON ORDER This Criminal Petition rs filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Crime No.494 of 2025 on the file of Jubilee Hilts Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 110, 125 and 281 of BNS and Sections 184 and 185(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act

2. Heard Sri T. Jayant Jaisoorya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.'l-State and Sri J. Dheeraj Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2

3. lt is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petttioner- accused as well as respondent No.2-de facto complainant that during pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 have been filed to permit respondent No.2 to compound the offences and to record compromise

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the said compromise petition ) DID I Crl PNo t-t78()of2025

5. Perused the affidavit filed by the de facfut complainant in l.A No.4 of 202!j, which discloses that he has willinS y consented for compromise. S jnce the parties were willing to enter i to compromise, they were given a chance to setile the matter by app: tring along with their respective counsel before the High Court -egal Services Committee, vide order, dated 26.09.2025, passed by th s Court. 6. pursuant to ths ,g.r. said direction issued b1, this Court, the parties along with their respective counsel have appe; "ed before the High Court Legal Services Commrttee for the State of elangana and the Secretary of tlre above said Committee has identif :d the parties and submitted a report, dated 09.10.2025, stating that th I parties were identified and they have wirfuriy and w*hout any coercio rentered into . comprom ise

7. Hyderabad, ln view of the above, LA.Nos 3 and 4 of ZO25 are allowed Consequenily, this rlriminal petition is allowed and the p,r tceedings in Crime No.494 of 2025 on the fite of Jubilee Hills Pc ice Station, agains: the petitioner_accused are hererl y quashed paytng an amount 0 Rs.5,000/_ the Secretary, High r )ourt Legal Court for the State of felangana, (Rupees Five Thousand Crr ly) to the Services Committee. High Hyderabad and Rs.5,000/_ Thousand Only) to petit io n e r-acc u sed (Rupees Five subject to I l l E l I l ITD.J ( rl P N(' ill80 ol ll)2i Telangana High Court Advocates' Association' Hyderabad' within a period of two (02) weeks from today and file proof of the same before the Registry lt/iscellaneous applicatrons, if any, pending shall stand closed SD/. C.DE ASSISTANT RE A TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER .1 To, The XVll Addrtional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nam il Hyderabad p yderabad The Station House Officer, Jubilee Hills Police Statio Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] One CC to Sri T Jayant Jaisoorya, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri J. Dheeraj Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies 1 2 3 4 5 6 AllK /PSt \y Along with a copy of Joint Memo of Compromise Note:TotalAmountofRs,10,000l(RupeesTenthousandonly)hasbeenpaidby sn T Jayant Jaisoorya, counsel for the Petitioner as directed by the Hon'ble court vide order dated 27.10.2025 as Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees Five thousand only ) to the "Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court for the State of Telangana"andRs.5,000/-(RupeesFivethousandonly)totheTelanganaHigh Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad and flled N/emo as proof of compliance USR No. 4128 oI 2026 and Recerpt No 0Bl dated 09-01-2026' HIGH COURT DATED: 2711012025 COMMON ORDER l.A.Nos.3 and 4 ot 2025 ln/And CRLP.No.12780 of 2025 Ca .d. 1 CLA s s- \ *- I 3 >: C) I I I ALLOWING THE l.A.No.3 and 4 of 2025 AND THE CRIMINAL PETITION \Ek b\\r It,*-- /: (MEMORANDUM oF CRTMINAL pETrTroN FrLED U/S.s28 OF BNSS) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF 1ELANGANA AT:: HYDERABAD Crl.p.No. cr.No. ottt#'o" OF 2O2S ro* (H on'ble XVrI Add i rional Chief .rudict.i iraig'i1ir.t., at Hyderabad) Between:- Kuntla Bharat Simha Reddv S/o K Shekar Reddy. Age: 54 yrs, (Jcc: Restaurant at Banlalore R_/o Plot No 217, Road no. iO C, yL+ Ml Cotony, Jubilee Hilts, Hyderabad, Cell No. )Z05S360Z/ v/s The State of Telangana through public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad. PETITIONtrR/ACCUSED Sri B Naveen Kumar S/o'C-hennaiah, Age 2g yrs, 9:^91? ,l*er, R7o Kammadanam Vitrage, r arooq Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District Phone No: 7893030805 . Respondent No. 1 1 2 ..RESPONDENT NO.2/DEFACTO COMPLATNANT JOINT MEMO 1 It is submitted that the petitioners/Accused herein fiied the present joint memo to compound the offences between petitioners and Respondent No.2 as the matter is settled out of court amicably. 2 whereas the Defacto compiainant/Respondent No. 2 herein frred a case in cr'No' 494 0f 2025 0n the Hon'bre XVI, Additionar chief Judicial Magistrate, at Hyderabad. / B l^^]-- fi';o@ r-_l

3. It is submitted that the matter is settled out of cou - at the instance of both the parties and elders. One of the offences is tr rn-compoundable, but the parties herein enter into compromise. The i :spondent No 2 / Defacto Compllinant herein voiuntarily undertook e compromise the matter. Hence, the quash petition may be allowecl.

4. Whereas the Respondent No. 2 / Defacto compla I ant also filed her . affidavit disclos;ing her willingness for the compronl se along r'vith this joint memo as lart of this record. b N"lft' / Respondent No. 2 )L Pet tione t) r /Accused Counsel for ondent No. 2 Counsel for the O"- etltloner/ I I Accused