The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana. ...Respondent No.1

2. Perumalla Gadwin, S/o. Late Raja Rao, Aged about 44 yea$, Occ. Employee, R/o. Flat No.308, Miki Vihara Apartments, Guptha Gardens, Ramanathapur, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana - 500013 ...Respondent No.2/Defacto Complainant Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the FIR No.1203 of 2024 D1.12.09.2024 on the file of SHO, P.S. Uppal of Rachakonda for the offences under Section 318(4), 340(2), 336(4) & 316 (5) of BNS Act, in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 2OF 2024 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS 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 in Cr. No. 1203 ot2024Dt.12.O9.2024 on the file of on the file of SHO, P.S. Uppal of Rachakonda, pending disposal of the above Petition. l.A. Nos: 3 & 4 0F 2024 Between: Perumalla Gldwin, S/o. Late Raja Rao, Aged about 44 years, Occ. Emplovee. R/o. Flat No.308. Mitri Vihara Apartmentd,-cuptha Gaidens, nrma"iii,iilrr, Medchal-Malkajgiri District Telangana - 5O0O1i ...Petitioner/ Respondent No.2/Defacto Complainant AND

1. The State Telangana of Telangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court of 2 ...Respondent No.1 Ya.kub^ Moodavath, S/o. Late panthulu, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Employee, H. No.6-70, Mahamoodoatnam, Harichan-clru thanda, (omatip;ll;, W;;,U;; Telangana-5061 1 2. ... RespondenUpetitioner/Accused No.1 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 petitioner/ Respondent No.2/De iacto c6mptainint'to compromise the matter with RespondenUAccused No..1 in FIR No 1203 of 2024 Dt.12.09-2024 on ther fire of SHo, p.s. Uppar of Rachakonda for the offences under Section 318(4r,340(2), 336(4) & 3i6(5) of BNS Act and withdraw the same_ l.A. NO: 4 OF 2024 Petition under Section 359(2) R/w. 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds ot criminai p;titio;, ihe High court may be preased to record our statement of compromise ana tnereuy quash the FrR No 1203 or 2024 Dt.12.09.2024 on the fire oi sHo, e.s uffaiot Rachakonda for the offences.under section 318(4), 340(2), 336(4j ano sr'6isj ot BNS Act, in the intererst of justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri. Mohd. Baseer Riyaz, Advocate for the petitioner and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. ' and of sri p. sai santosh, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the foltowing: COMMON ORDER --?ffir ," '.i, , .r THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JIIT/VADI SRIDEVI INTERLOCUTO RY APPLICATION Nos.S&4of2024 IN/AND CRTMINAL PETITION No. 15 811 of 2024 COMMON ORD ER This Criminal petition is hled under Section 52g of BNSS by the petitioner-accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Crime No.1203 of 2024 of Station House Officer, Uppa.l police Station, Rachakonda District, registered for the offences under Sections 318(4), 340(2]and 336(4) of BNS.

02. It is submitted by learnect counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.1 as well as respondent No.2, that during pendency of the present Crimina,l Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, I.A.Nos.3 & 4 of 2024 bave been filed to record the compromise between them and to compound the olfences. ! I

03. Vide orders dated 26. 12.2024, this Court directed the parties along with their respective learned counsel to appear before the Secretaqr, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court for the State of ;:, { j ;ie 2 Telangana Hyderabad, for identification ald to submit a report.

04. .?ursuant to the above said direction issued by this C,lurt, the parties have appeared and the Secretary. High Court Legai Services Committee, has identified the parties and submitted report dated 30.72.2024 ald the sarne are placed on record.

05. In view of the above, I.A.Nos.3 & 4 of 2024 are a1lowed. Consequently, this Criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner_ accused No. 1 in Crime No.i2O3 of 2024 of Station House Officer, Uppal police Station, Rachakonda District, are hereby quashed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shra11 stand ciosed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, at L.B. Nagar.

1. The Vl Additional Metropotitan Magistrate, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Uppal 2. The Station House Officer, Uppal Police Station, Rachakonda. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at 4. One CC to Sri lr/ohd Baseer Riyaz, Advocate [OpUC] 5. One CC to Sri P. Sai Santosh, Advocate [OPU-C] 6. Two CD Copies Hyderabad. [OUT] Nj (ALONG W|TH A COpy OF JOTNT MEMO OF COMPROMTSE) +* I HIGH COURT DATED:02t0112025 t J U oR 1 F_ .S I.:l I4. ( ( o I B ,lAil zl]fr itr r,ATC\ itl) { * COMMON ORDER l.A.Nos.3&4ot2024 ln/and CRLP.No.15811 ot 2024 ALLOWING BOTH THE I.A'S & CRIMINAL PETITION a MEMORAND (UNDER SECTTON 528 OF .' .\ IN THE HON'BLE HI UM OF CRIMINAL PSIITION BHARATTYA NAGAzuK SURAKSHA SANHITA), GH COUR.T FOR THE.STATE OT ; TELANGANA I.A. No. oF 2024 IN Crl.P. No. oF 2024 . Between: , ,..Yakub Moodavath s/o. l^ate parthulu, .. Aged about 40 years, Occ.; Employee, f!.No.6. 70, Mahamoodpatnam, Harichandru thhnda, . I Komatipalle, Warangal, Telangana-5061 12. . . ' . , ., AND

1. The State of Telangana ' High Court of Telarrgala. Rep, by its Public Prosecutor, .; . .. ' ., . . , ' '. . ,:, . ... Respondent No. I ' ,, .' ' , .', '

2. Perumalta Gadwin S/o. Late Raja Rao, Agedabout44yearc,d;;;#;#,' , R/o. Flat No.3O8, Mitri Vihara ipirtments; Grrptha Gardens, Ramanathapur, Medchal- Mafkaj giri District, Telan[aria -: SOOO 1 3. . : ...:Resfondent No.2 /De facto Complain;i JOINT MEMO FILED BY BOTI{ THE PAR,TIES ,,',, It is submitted that the petitioner/Accused No. 1 and the 2.d .).. Responde;rt/De facto Complainant *.r". "o-pro-ised in terms of the compromise petition and the Respondent No.2 has no objection to quash :. the FIR No.1203 of 2024 DL.12.O9,2O24 on the frle of SHO, p.S. Uppal of ',:" Rachakonda for rhe offences under Section 318 (4), 34O (2], $6;$l & 316 , ^i ,'"'' j :'l: ..., '1 ':"i-: ., :, I , (5) of BNS Act, in the interest ofjustice and to pass sucfr bttrer order or . ;,. - , .., . o, orders as this Hou'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the ci ponde4t No.2 ,/ Defacto ComPlainant v Petitione Counsel De facto ComPlainant spondent No 2l Co Acci.rsed No. i No.1 ,,,:. ner I