The High Court · 2025
Case Details
Acts & Sections
rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad. 2 Bandari lvlounika, Wo Bandari Shreshu Kumar, Aged about 26 Years, Occ. Housewife, R/o H.No. 7-1-43713, Ganga Bai Basti, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ... Responde nUco m pla ina n t Petition under Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023 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 the charge sheet in C C.No.777B of 2021 on the file of Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, and to quash the same. l l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section S2g of BNSS Act, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in rhe Memorandum of crounds or irrminJ, putition, tn" High court may be pleased to grant stay of att furtner proceedings incruding the appe-arance of the petitioners in c c No.777B of 2021 0n the fire oixrrr nJJitionrr chief Metroporitan M:rgistrate at Hyderab"o, p"nJing disposar of the criminar Petition. l.A. NO: 3 OF 2024 BETWEEN: Bandari Mounika W/o Bandari Shreshu Kumar, Aged about 26 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o H.No 7_1_437t3, Ganga Bai ei.ti,'nme"rpet, Hyderabad. ...petitioner/Respondent No.2 in lA.Nos.3 &4 of 2024 AND
2. Bandari Ra Housewife, Hyderabad. 1 Bandari Shreshu (umar S/o Late.B prem Kumar. Aged about 32 yOarsi Occ. Government Emprovee nro H ruo ijri-d'bi3: GB:th;-R;;-e"sh, n;;i Sagar, Hyderabair .il:i rs, Occ. '"fl,il'',i# il5 &rlJ"'r5Jfir. $ffi. tb""rX, 3. Bandari Arvind Kumar, S/o Late B.prem Kumar, Aged about 2g years. Occ. [l&,ff3"r"e R/o H tto l-r-ebeTC"sletna H;;-B;s;, ;i#'"s"s",, 4. J Mallikariun. S/o. Jatigam Kistaiah. Aged^ about 50 years. Occ. ESI H No a nia ei-ij,fi'rurili'corony, Attapur, Ransa Reddy 5. Bandari Narender, S/9 !a^tg-Bfraldari Dayanand, Aged about 58 years, Occ. Business R/o H N, i r r 88e73.-s;;i^, Hlr-"argn rir"r6;;;;, HviEli'u"a Ellfl[,]*,'R/o Sagar,
6. The State of Telanqana. through S H O WpS CCS, DD Hyderabad District, rep. by pubtic prosecutor, figX c"tjrt,-iyd"rIu"o ...Respondents/petitioners in lA.Nos.3 &4 ot 2024 ... Respondents/Respondents in lA.Nos.3 &4 ot 2O24 Petition under Section 359(6) of BNSS Act, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum oi Grounds of Ciiminai p"titi"r, tf," High court may be preased to permit the petitioner to fire petition to t,u offences and to quash the proceedings in c c No.zz78 of 2021 on the fire of Xilr Additional Chief Metropolitan tVlagistrate at HyOeraOaA "or-por"# LA. NO: 4 OF 2024 Petition under Section 359(2) of BNSS Act, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandr* oi crorros of criminar petition, the High court may be pleased to compound the offences as per the compromise memo and quash the proceedings in c.c.No.777B of 2021 on the file of xlll Add itional C h ief [Vletropolitan tvlagistrate at Hyderabad. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Gajanand chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Additional public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.'l and of sri Vanam vinod Kumar. Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER I l HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI I.A.Nos .3 and4 of2024 in/and RTMI\ ALP TITTO N No. E C 16 314 o t2024 CO MMONO RDER; This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS Uy the petitioners/accused Nos'l to 5 to quash the proceedings againit them in C'C'No'7778 of 2O2l on the file of XIII Additional Chief MetroPolitan Magistrate at for the offences Punishable under Hyderabad, registered Sections 498A, 354A of tPC and Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2 Itissubmittedbylearnedcounselappearingfbrthe petitioners as ,.vell as the respondent No'2' that during pendency of the present Criminal Petition' the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly' I'A'Nos'3 and 4 of 2024 have been filed to record the compromise between them and to comPound the offences'
3. Vide order dated 07'01'2025' 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 ro 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 09.01 .2025 andthe same is placed on record.
5. In view of the above, I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2024 are allowed. Consequently, this Criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos. I to 5 jn C.C.No.7778 of 2021 on rhe file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, are hereby quashed Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/- N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTIO I OFFICER Hvderabad [OUT]
1. The Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally'. Hyderabad Z fn" Si"ti". House Officer, WPS' DD Police Station' Hyderabad - 3. Two CCs to the punf ic Frosecutot' Higl-' Court for the State of Telangana at a i# nOn ;ol"J#grr Services Committee' High Court for the State of s. o"" ic t" Sri ialanano Chakravarthi' Advocate-[oPUC] ; o;; cc to sri Vanam Vinod Kumar' Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD CoPies Telangana at HYderabad ADK/gh (J\(,- Along with Memorandum of Understanding by mutual consent' I HIGH COURT DATED:2210112025 COMMON ORDER l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2024 ln/and CRLP.No.16314 of 2024 F' t5 E STATC 1T ( 2 4 [[R ?[?5 a O,. qpAla ttC ALLOWING THE CRLP AND tA.NOs.3 & 4 OF 2024 ,s"' It c a oo11 oo1001001 t .- 6 9 o h- Ea ATTIIT;il TELANG ANA .g TftB Ld 241126165902071 469 2024,05:01 PM Dare: 26 ^-OV Purchrsed B]: BAM'ARI MOTJMKA w/o BANDARI SHESHU KUMAR R-i o HYDERABAD ror r+[om .. SELF.+ :.r BE UR E E \ \ BK 526832 THE ADVOCATES MUTUAIIY AIDED COOPEBATI\,4E SOCIETY LIMITED LICENSED STAMP VENDOR r-ic No. l6-08-0082017 Ren.No. l6{8{12023 City Civil Coui, Dcwan Dcvdi, Hydcrabad Ph7095tt1727 . , i MEMORANDUM OI.'UNDERSTANDING BY MUTUAL CONSENT This Memorandum of Understalding by Mutual consent is rrlade and executed on this the 27rb day of November, 20t24 at Flyderabad, bv and between: Smt. Bandari Mounika W/o. Bandari Shreshu Kumar, aged about: 29 years, Occ. Housewife R/o. H.No.7-1437 /3, GangaBat Bhsthi, Srinivas Colony, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. [Hereinafter referred to as "FIRST PARTY,] i AND Bhndari Shprhu Kumar S/o. Late B. Prem Kumar, aged about: 35 years, OEhfl..E^mployee R/ o 1 1 - 1 -23 3 / I / 3 Seetharambagh, Mallepally, Hyderabhd. [Hereinafter referred to as "SECOND PARTY"] V Cont...2 k. A,.oa;"tr^ e ! t - + I i:2i: Whereas the first party is the legally wedded wife of the second party and their marriage was solemnized on 27_02-2020 at Telangana Garden, Old Airport Road, New Bowenpally, ils per Hindu rites and customs and the said marriage was an arranged marriage and both side parents, well-wishers, relatives and friends were witnessecl the said i.narriage. Whereas after the marriage the Iirst party joined the company of the second party at his residence situated at Seetharambagh, Hyderabad. Thereafter the disputes arose between the parties and courd not abre to reunion and both the parties mutualry decided to take Mutual consent Divorce on the following terms and conditions: NOW THIS MEMORANDU M OF UNDERSTANDING BY MU,TUAL CONSENT WITNESSETH 1 2 3 Mutual there is the parties other frotn That, the amicable settlement was done betulben both the parties in the presence of elders and well wishers. Both agreed to take today onwards Consent Divorce no relationship between first pzrrty and the second party as husband and wife. Whereas from now onwards both parties shall lead the life with their free rvill and wish and they can choose their life partners either of the parties shall not interfere a,d ca,not demand, claim rvhatsoever in nature. F "JFo' tP Cont...3 I ( 4 5 6 7 B E ..o.. Whereas the first party. and second parlr herein sha-ll cooperate each other to file Mutual Divorce Petition U/Sec. 13(B) of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of Marriage dated: 27-02-2020 before Family Court at Hyderabad. Whereas the second party agreed to pay permanent alimony of Rs,10,OO,OOOl- (RupeesTenlakhs) byway of D'D' in favour of the First party on the day of final hearing of Mutual Divorce i.e, after the First party withdraws all the criminal cases which are pending against the second party' Whereas both the parties herein agreed that they will not lile any cases against each other or their lamily members before any court of law or before any P-S. in future' That, the first party herein agreed to withdraw criminal case vide C.C. No.777812021 tJ lSec.498-A IPC, 354(A), Section 4 - & 6 of D.P. Act, pending before Hon'ble XIII A.C.M'M Hyderabad and D.V.C. Case No.62/202 1 pending before Hon'ble III Metropolital Magistrate at Hyderabad, before disposal of Mutual Consent Divorce O.P. Whereas it is agreed by the first party that she will return loy2 tolas of gold ornaments which includes l.Pustalathadu, (4.7tula) 2-Nalapusalu( 2-3tulas) 3.Goldpendant (0.8tula) 4.Engagement Ring(0.5 tula) to the second party on the day of hnal hearing of Mutual Divorce and the second party herein agreed to return 6% tolas of gold ornaments(i.e. Bracelet, Chain, Batuvu & Engagernent Ring) to the first party on the date of execution of this MOU' cont"'4 K't"-Jc'- V lE----* I I I I t/ 1 ..4'. 9. Whereas the second ,p-arty helein agreed to return the furniture cons:isting of Almirah, Dressing table, cot, Fridge and houschold articles to the first party on l-he date of exectrtion ol' this M()U.
10. Both the parties herein should attend concernecl courts to withdraw the trbove said cases which are pending including mutual divorcc OP. IN WITNESS WHEREOF both the parties herein agreed and signed on this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDIN BY MUTUAL CONENT with their free will and consent without any forqo or coercion in the pr('sence of below mentioned witnesses on the day, month and year first above mentioned. Witnesses: 1 /-x Cd^"4rt)
2. crr*. Ca"r"-.-^\.^...-.') k F]RS'I PAR'I'Y v StrCOND PARTY