The High Court · 2025

Application under Section 359 (6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner/Respondent No.2/complainant to compound the matter with the Respondent no. 1 / Accused in Crl.A. No.42612019 on the file of the Xl Additional District and Sessions Judge, at LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy District in C.C.No.13012018 on the file of ll Special Magistrate at Hasthinapuram, Ranga Reddy District. lA NO: 5 OF 2025 Application under Section 359 (2) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise and allow the Crl.R.C No.115412024 by setting aside the Judgment & Conviction daled 2311012024 in Crl.A.No.42612019 on the file of the Xl Additional District and Sessions Judge, at LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy District in C.C.No.'1 3012018 on the file of ll Special Magistrate at Hasthinapuram, Ranga Reddy District Crl.R.C.No.1'1 54 ot 2024 : Crl. Revision Case Under Section 438 R/w.442 of BNSS against the Judgment daled 23-10-2024 passed in Crl.Appeal No. 426 c,f 2019 on the file of the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Rarrga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar preferred against the Judgment dated 25-04-2019 in C.C.No. 130 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the ll Special Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hastinapuram, Ranga Reddy District Between: B. Gnaneshwar, S/o. Late B. Shankaraiah, aged 61 years, Cc,:. retired employee, R/ o. H.No. 7-1-471, and 472, Flat no. 401, Gurukrupa Complex, Opp. Gurudwwar, Sathyam Theater Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .. Revision Petitioner/ Appellant AND 1 2 The State of Telangana,, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, tiigh Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana .. Respondent G. lVladhan Kumar, S/ o. Late G. Surya Prakash, Aged about 43 years, Occ Advocate, R/o. flat no. 507, Maruthi Homes, Maruthinagar, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District ...RESPONDENT/ Defacto Complainanl lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that n the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the l-1igh Court may be pleased to suspend the judgment dated 23.10.2024 passed in Crl.A. No. 426 of 2019 by the Learned Principal District AND Sessions Judge at Rajanna Sircilla confirming the judgment of conviction dated 25.04.2019 passed in C C.No 130 of 2018 by the Learned ll Special Magistrate, Cyberabad at l-lastinapuram, Ranga Reddy District and consequently suspend the judgment daled 25.04.201 9 passed in C.C.No.130 of 2018 by the Learned ll Special Magis;trate, Cyberabad at Hastinapuram, Ranga Reddy District convicting the Petitioner lo undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- as c.ompensation to the Complainant U/s. 357 (3) of Cr.P C. while recalling the NBW directed to be issued against the Petitioner by the Trial Court for undergoing .he sentence by the Appellate Court while passing the impugned confirmir<7 judgment dated 24.10.2024. lA NO:2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that rr the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the liigh Court may be pleased to list the Crl.R.C NO 1154 o'f 2024 along with the lA No 01 of 2024 under the caption of for being mentioned before Hon'ble smt Justice Juvvadi Sridevi for passing necessary order's for the facts and circumstances men tioned above. Counset for the Petitioner in Crl.R.C. and Respondent No.1 in l.A.Nos. 4 & 5 of 2025 : SRl. P. ANIMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 in Crl.R.C. and Respondent No. 2 in l.A.Nos. 4 & 5 ot 2025 : THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondent No.2 in Crl.R.C.and Petitioner in l.A.Nos. 4 & 5 ot 2O25 : Sri MIDHUN KUMAR ALLU The Court made the following Common Order: -l/ i/ I THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA I.A.Nos.4 and 5 of 2025 tn and CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1154 of ?.O24 COMMON ORDER: lt is submittcd by lcarned counsel appearing ior the petitioners zrs rvell as the respondent No.2, that during pendency of lhc prescnt Criminal Revision Case the partics have compromised the maLter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.4 and 5 ol 2025 have been filed to record the compronrise ltetwecn thcm and to cornpound the offences.

2. Vide orclt:r dated 24.10.2025, this Court drrected lhe parties aiong u-ith their rcspective counsel to a tltear beforc the Secretar_\, Higlr Cour-t Legal Services Com rittee , High Court for the SLate of Telangana, Hyderabad, for idcntification ancl to submit :r rcport.

3. Pursuirnt to the above said direction issrred by this Court, thc p:rrties have appeared and the Sec.rt:tary, High Court Legal Se rvices Committee, has identified thr, parties and submitted a report, dated 30.lO.2O2S and the sarle is placed I I on record. 2 \ c.r.n.c.ro. r rsc ori[?i

4. In view of the above, I.A.Nos.4 and S of 2025 are allowed. Consequentiy, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed in terms of compromise subject to the petitioner paying an amount of Rs.S,OOO/_ (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad (Savings State Bank of India, Shantinagar A/c.No.52188 926279, Branch !OOZO), No.5OOOO4057) and Rs.5,OOO/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) [o the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two (O2) weeks from today and file proof of thc same before the Registry. IFSC CCde:SBINbO2oO7o, MICR Miscellaneous appiications, if any pending, shall stand closed. sD/-N cHfl[D{4.:'-tBfrsr[tR / 6 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To I ' District and sessions Judge, Ransa Reddy District at Magistrate, cvberabad, ar Hastinapuram, Ranga Reddy High court for the state of rerangana ar ] ig:^i"!::i*' : i1"",.',';o*"' 3. Two CCs to pu . 1va"i"o-"ol id,lfi "to"""utor, 4. One CC to SRt p: ANtMt REDDy Advocate IOPUC] 5. One CC to SRl. MIDHUM KUMAR ALLU, Advocate [OpUC] Ixlo"roo",if+iA copy oF JorNr MEM. oF coMpRoMrsE w' 'll,,,;##;;tlu;;l.,rlt,tril!u*:1i,t:#,#l'jffi / Note: Total amount, ) HIGH COURT DATED:0711112025 COMMON ORDER r.A. NOS.4 AND 5 0F 2025 IN/AND CRLRC.No.I 154 of 2024 i ( '* lil l[i l',.)() (,) i, \\*. c4- \\ . \ \\ /'-'4. ('' \" t*-:i iU 20E ,-(',j .L'!i .;t.'.,;.' ALLOWING THE (]RI,-R-C, ANI) I.A. NOS, 4 AND 5 OF 2025 (MEMORANDUM OF CRL,REVISION I\{ISC.PETITION U/SEC'528 OF BNSS) IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA' AT HYDERABAD CRL.R.C. No. 1154 OF 2o24 BETWEEN: B. Gnaneshwar, S/o Late B. Shan karaiah, Aged about: 67 Years, Occ: Retired Employee, Rf o H.No. 7-l-471 and 472, Flat No 401, Cu,.rkt lp, Complex, Opp. Gurudwar, Sathyam Theater Road' Ameerpet, HYderabad. . .. Petitioner/ APPellart /Accused AND 1 . Thc State of Telangana Rcp by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at HYderabad.

2. G. Madan Kumar, S/o Late G' Surya Prakash' Aged about: 50 Years, Occu: Advocate, R/o H.No.2- 105, Maruthi Nagar' KothaPet, HYderabad. Respondent/ ResPondent/ ComPlainant JOINT MEMO 1 It is submitted that Respondent no'2 filed a case against the Petitioner herein U/sec.138 of NI Act for an amount of Rs'8'00'00O/-' After that the Honlcle Court conducted the trial and Respondent no'2 was examined as PW-1 and on behalf of him PW2 was examined and Ex Pl to P18 were marked. On behalf of petitioner/ accused DW-1 was examined and on behalf of petitioner EX-D 1 to D34 were marked' After completion of trial and after the arguments' the Hon'ble II Special Magistrate at Hasthinapuram, Ranga Reddy District convicted the Pctitioner sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment r ,y'J-- h.au- 4*- further the petitioner ordered to pay a sum cf Rs. 12,00,0O0/- AS compensation to the Respondent No.2. 2 It is submitted that against the judgment and corniction dated 25_04- 2019 on the ftle of the Hon,ble II Spccial Magistrate at Hasthinapuram, Ranga Reddy Di3trict, the petiti(,rer preferred appeal before the XI Additional Districf and Sessions .Iuclgc, at LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy District and the sarne \r'a s numbered as Crl.A.No.426/2019. Alter issuing notice, after hear.ing the both sides, the Hon'ble Appellate court conhrmed the convii:tion on 23-lO_2O24 vide Cr1.A.No.426 I 2019. J It is further submitted that after confirming the conviction of the Petitioner by the appellate court, petitioner pref.rred revision before this court during pendency of CRLRC at the ins;tance of elders and well wishers, both parties were compromised. .Both parties have entered into full and final compromise and have amicabie settlement all their disputes relating to the cheque transa(rt.1on. The petitioner has paid amount to the satisfaction and the respondent no.2 has no further claims.gainst the peti[ioner. Therefore respordent no.2 has no objection to allow the Crl.R.C.

4. It is submitted rhat we have filed petition before t'ris Hon,ble court to record the compromise. The contents mentirr-recl in the said compromise Peiition is true and correct to the bes-, of .ur knowledge /_.-- A'6*/ -il-bpL.::L- *e. and belief, the said compromise is entered with free will and consent i. and without undue influence from anyone 5 It is submitted that the Respondent No.2 has no objection to allow the Crl.R.C against the Judgment & Conviction dated 23-lO-2O24 in Crl.A.No.426l2Ol9 on the hie of the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, at LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy District in C.C.No. 130/2018 on the file of II Special Magistrate at Hasthinapuram, Ranga Reddy District. Hence this joint memo. Date: . ... l. October, 2025 Hyderabad (G. MADAN KUMARI RESPONDENT NO.2) , [.4*-4ur'- (8. Gnaneshwarl (PRrrTroNtrR) COUNSEL FO RESPONDENT No. 2 ry>- COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER