Stafe of Punjab and anothe/ and Anit Mishra v. State of ll.P

1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana HYderabad.

2. ./E,ari Srinivas, S/o Gajanan , Age 49 years, Occ Business, R/o near Jama Masjid, Ashok Road, Adilabad District RespondenUComplainant Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C R/w 528 of BNSS Act praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to call for the records relating to cc No. 248 ol 2021 pending on the file of the Judicial First class Magistrate, At Adilabad for the offenc€s-punishable UtS 427,447.354,324,506 R/w 34 IPC and quash tt€ same. l.A. NO: 1OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of Cr P.C R/w. 528 of BNSS Act, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including arrest of the peiitioner in CC No. Z4B oI 2021 pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, At Adilabad for the offences punishable UIS 427,447'3il,324'506, R/w 34 lPC, pending disposal of the present quash petttion' ! I l I l i I l.A. NO: 1OF 2025 Between: Udari Srinivas, S/o Gajanan , Age 49 years, Occ Business, R/o near Jama Masjid, Ashok Road, Adilabad District. ...Petitioner/2nd Respondent in l.A.Nos.1 & 2 OF 2025 AND 'l . The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana Hyderabad. ...RespondenuRespondent in l.A'Nos.1 & 2 OF 2025

2. Rudroii Jeevan @ Laxmikanth, S/o Ramulu, Age 51 years' Occ Business' Rl/o Ashok Road, Adilabad, Telangana.

3. Rudroii Rohit, S/o Jeevan, Age 25 years, Occ Business, R/o Ashok Road, Adilabad, Telangana.

4. Rudroji Praneeth, S/o Laxmikanth, Age 28 years, Occ Business, R/o Ashok Road, Adilabad, Telangana. ...RespondenUPetitioner/Accused A1 to A3 in l.A.Nos.1 & 2 OF 2025 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 parties herein to compound the offence in FIR No.125 of 2018 on the file of the l-Town Police Station Adilabad District l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that ir the ctrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition. the High court may be pleased to record compromise in FIR .No.125 of 2018 on the file of Adilabad l-Town Police station Adilabad District, registered against the respondents 2 to 4/accused No.1 to 3. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Ramesh Kadari, Advocate for the Petitioners and the sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Sri s Ravi Kiran Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

1.A.Nos. 1 AND 2 OF 2025 ln/And CRIMINA L PETITION No.13890 OF 2024 co MON ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (fot short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.248 of 2021, on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adilabad.

2. The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 3 in the Calender Case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 427' 447' 354,324 and 506 read with Section 34 of the lndian Penal Code, 1860'

3. Heard Mr.K.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State and lr/r.S. Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2l deJacto com plai nant.

4. Pending this petition, the parties have entered into the compromise and, accordingly, they moved l.A.Nos l and 2 of 2025 with the prayer to permit them to enter into compromise and by recording the settlement to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos l to 3 in C.C. No.248 ot 2021. 2 r\'lR,,i

1.- i.-\ar- / and 2 o/ 2t)25 in/ and C:'i.P-No. I -t890 o[ 202-i

5. This Court vide otdet dated 19.06.2025 referred the parties to the High Court Legal Services Committee for identification and to verify the voluntariness in arriving the settlement. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has submitted report dated 23.06.2025 stating that except petitioner No.2/accused No.2, other parties were identified by their respective counsel and also on verification of Aadhar Cards/ldentity Cards and the enquiries revealed that the parties have willfully and without coercion entered into settlemenUcompromise.

6. On this date, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that tae petition of the petitioner No.2/accused No.2 is not pressed 7 i have considered the submissions of the learned counsel ard perused the mate:'ials on record.

8. Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petiticn€:rs, Criminal Petition is dismissed in respect of petitioner No.2/accused No.2 as not pressed

9. Having considered the allegations, the nature of charEed offences and taking into account the amicable settlement between ihe parties and to restore peace among them, in the light of the dictums in Gian Singh v. ;c.- 3 ,\.rR..ir [tl.Not. I ad2oJ2025 in/ azd Cr/.1'.N0. I 3890 o/ 2024 Stafe of Punjab and anothe/ and Anit Mishra v. State of ll.P.2; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and otherss, this Court is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of the settlement by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.1528 of BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest of justice.

10. Accordingly, l.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 are allowed. Consequently, all proceedings in C.C. No.248 of 2021, pending on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Adilabad, are hereby quashed against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3

11. in the above terms, the Criminal Petition is disposed of Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. REKHA RANI.B T NT REGISTRAR AS //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Adilabad' i iii;bi;iid; #u5gotrrclji-doiuoi6-! roryn potice station, Adilabad District. 5 i; -cc; t" ii,JFunric pririiirtoi, High court for the state of Telangana at Hvderabad [OUTI 6i.r"-cdio Sii Ra'mesh Kadari' Advocate [oPU^C-l .^. One CC to Sri S.Ravi Kiran Reddy.Advocate [oPUUl Two CD CoPies 4 5 6 NVB/PSt ' 2n12 (C) SCC 303 ' 2i)24 Irusc 189 i z',lr s 1sy scc saa HIGH COURT DATED:0310112025 COMMON ORDER lA.Nos.1 AND 2 ot 2025 ln/And CRLP.No.13890 ot 2024 ,,, f ,s,4

14. ! I .-) O 3 SEP 2OE c1 c (i .. DISPOSING OF THE CRLP AND ALLOWING THE lA.Nos.1 &2OF2025 'I IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT::HYDERABAD I.A. No, OF 2025 IN CRL.P. No. 13E90 OF 2024 Between : l.Rudroji Jeevan @ Laxmikandl S/o. Ramulu, Aged 51 years, Occ: Business, R-/o. Ashok Road, Adilabad, Telangana.

2.Rudroji Rohit S/o. Jeevan, Aged 25 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Ashok Road, Adilabad, Telangana.

3. Rudroji Praneeth, S/o. Laxmikanth, Aged 28 years, Occ: Business, PJo. Ashok Road, Adilabad, Telangana. AND l.The State s[ fg[angana Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, I{igh Court o[ Telangana, at Hyderabad,

2. Udai Srinivas, S/o. Gajanan, Aged 49 years, Occ: Business, R/o. near Jama Masjid, Ashok Road, Aditabad District. ... Petitioners / Accused I to 3 . -. ... Respondents/Conrplainant JOL\T COMPROM E MEMO FILED BY THE PETITIONF,R ANI) ) RESPONDENT/ DE FACTO COMPLA IN ANT May it pleasc your Lordship, l. That on the advice of well wishers both parties have come lorward to compromise the matter outside dre Hon'ble Co urt, as the case filed against the Petitioners/Accused I to 3 was due to misunderstanding. That both parties i.e. the Petitioners/Accused I to 3 and the 2"d Respondent/De-facto Complainant have expressed no objection if the criminal case is closed in FIR No. 125/2018, on the file of the Adilabad I Town Police Station, Adilabad District. I

2. It is submitted that in fact the issue arose between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent was due to the phone conversations between the son of the 2"d respondent ancl daughter of 1n petitioner and due to misunderstandings under those circumstances, the 2d re spondent got filed the impugned crime against the petitioners and in fact the 2'd respondent did not intend to do so- The 2d respondent had visited the police station in order to call the petitioners to the police station and to settle the matter there that no firther phone conversations shall take place between liem. but unforhmately as fte 2d respondent do not have any knowledge about the sections lhat are imposed against the petitioners and he was unaware that it would lead to registration of

3. It is submitted that upon intervention of well wishers of both the parties, and upon realization by the 2d respondeng the issues are sorted out and the petitioners and 2d responded have taken amicable decision 10 close the lnattcr.

4. That the 2"'r Rcspondent keeping the interest of the career and future of the petitioners has voluntarily decided to comprolnise the case. Further both the Petitioners / Accused I to 3 and the 2dRespondent are not having any further issues except the said misunderstandings between them and in order to live happily hereafter both parties have decided to compromise the case.

5. That in vierv of the disputes between the petitioner / Accused and the de facto Complainant / 2"d respondent have been seftled / compromised. continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise il futility and.justice in the case demands the dispute between the parties is put to an errd- 1

6. That the Petitioners have been doing a small business to meet the day to day requirements of the family and the continuation of rhe criminal proceedings is coming in their way of living a peaceful li[e'

7. That the 2nd Respondent has voluntarily ilecided to compromise the matter and no pu4)ose shall be served if the matter is kept pending and that the 2"d Respondent has no objection to proceed to close the case'

8. Therefore both parties, i.e. the Petitioner / Accused and the 2d Respondent / De-facto Complainan! pray that this Honble Court may be pleased to compound the offences in FIR No' 12512018 ' on the file of the Adilabad I Town Police Statior" Adilabad District' in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and nccessary in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of Justlce R Rudroj i Jeevan @ Laxmikanth (Petitioner No, 1/ Accused No. 1) Rudroji Rohit (Peti tioner No. 2/ Accused No.2) R Rudro L.^ aneeth (Petitioner No. 3/ Accused No.3) Uda" S -"*""t 1zdn".pooa"nt / De facto Complainant) o {r) Counsel for 2 Respondent Counsel for Petitioner Date: I t.06.2025 Place: Hyderabad J