High Court · 2025

stated in the rvr"rn'o-rrn'o* oloigr"nlJfictilii*r F"iition' the High Court may be pleaseO to qu"-"ti'iil"'i.i.n fU".'iieJ of ZOzS' oi F'S' Miyapur' Cvberabad Commissionerate' Ranga Reddy District' t !$. NO: 2 OF 2025 Between: X':v.",':ff "ialk'*ipi:;ji$'n*tuHi};nift iil;;"i Avinue' Sai RangaPut 'xFtE'""ffi :*:9" AND ..PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No' 2 7

1. The Stale of Telangana; through S.H.O., P.S. Miyapur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High court at Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT 2. Bollepalli Satyanarayana @ Sathyanarayana S/o. Surya Narayana Bollepalli, Age. 32 \/ears, Occ. Private Employee, Fi/o. Flat No. 202, Jai Durga Nivas Apartment, Nagarjuna Enclave, Miyapur, Hyderabad- 500049

3. Pamball 1@ Pamballa Shiva Teja, S/o. Pamballa Bapu, Age. 33 Years, Occ. Private E:mployee, Rl/o. Flat No. 44B, Block-B, Sai Krupa Apartments, Kompally Village, Dundigal Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District500014. ...RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED No's. 1 and 2 Petition under Section 359(6) R/w 528 ot 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 for compromise in F.l.R. No. 1384 of 2O25, of P.S. Miyapur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District, in term:; of the accompanied compromise memo. l.A. NO: 3 OF 21125 Petition under Section 359(2) R/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to compound the offences for quashing the F.l.R. No.13B4 of 2ol>-S,ot P.S. Miyapur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District, in terms of the accompanied compromise memo. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Rajath Kumar Pradhan, Advocate for the Petitioner, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, ' Additional Pub ic Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri K. Venumadhav, l\dvocate for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT ITTDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO and 3 of 2O25 -I.A.Nos.2 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.16527 of 2O25 Date: 22.L2.2O25 Between : Bollepalli Satyanarayana @ Sathyanarayana and another ....Petitioners/Accused Nos. I and 2 AND The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S. Miyapur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad, and another ....Respondents COMMON ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.1384 of 2025 of Miyapur Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate.

2. Heard Mr.Rajath Kumar Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.K.Venumadhav, Iearned counsel for respondent No.2 and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of respondent No.l-State. 2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the pendency of the present Criminal Petition, at the instance of the well wishers, relatives and elders, the parties have settled the disputes pending between them and entered into compromise and filed Joint compronise Memo. Accordingly, the parties have filed I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2ct25 seeking permission to compromise the matter and to compou nd the offences respectively.

4. Ttris court uide order, dated rl.12.2o25, directed the parties i.e., the petitioners and respondent No.2, to appear before the High court l,egal Services committee, Hyderabad, on rr.r2.2o2s. In compliance of the said order, the Secretary, High court Legal Services committee, has sutrmitted report, dated 16.12.2025, stating that the petitionr:rs and respondent No.2 were duly identified with copies of their Aadhar Cards. It'is further stated that the parties have willfully and without any coercion entered into compromise.

5. In view of tht: said report and also in view of the compromise entered between the petitioners and respondent No.2 as well as the submissrions made by the respective parties, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2o2s are allorved. Consequently, the proceedings in FIR No.1384 of 2o2S of Miyapur Police Station, cyberabad commissionerate, are hereby quashecl against the petitioners. r/ J

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to payment of costs of Rs.S,OOO l- (Rupees five thousand only) to the High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad and Rs.S,OOO/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, by the petitioners, on or before 31.L2.2O25. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed Sd/. MOMINA MEHAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY/ To,'1. The Vlll Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, at Kukatpally, Cyberabad 2. The Station House Officer, Miyapur Police Station, Cybepbad District 5. fwo CCs to the Public Piosectitor, High Court for the State of Telangana at 4. oh" CC to Sii Raiiath Kumar Pradhan Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri K. Venumadhav, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies Hyderabad.[OUTI (Alon.g with a coPY of Joint Memo) VH NOTE : Total Amount of Rs. 10,000/- ( Rupees Ten thousand only ) has been paid by Sri Rajath Kumar. Pradhan, Counsel for the Petitioner as directed by the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 22.12.2025 as Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees Five thousand only ) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad and Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to The High Court Legal Services Committee and filed [\Iemo as proof of compliance USR No. 1 52370 of 2025 and Receipt No. 045, dated a 30-12-2025. HIGH COURT DATED: 2211212025 COMMON ORDER l.A. NO: 2 AND 3 OF 2025 IN/AND CRLP.No.16527 ot 2025 o() ( t HE SIA ?t JAN 2 026 I I :f, .}. 't' o ALLOWING THE CRIMII{AL PETITION 4 gt, iris. rN TrrE HrcH FoR TrrE siarrc oF TELAnTcANA AT:: nnE,n^lfaO Crt.P. Np; i w25 IN FIR. No. 1384 of 2025 Of P.S. Miyapuilclberaiiad Commissionerate, ' , Ranga Reddy,.pi.strict Between:- !). B ollenalli Satyanaraya na @ Sathyanarayana S/o. Sgrya Narayana Bollepalli, Age:.32 iYears;,.0cc::Private Employtie, . : R/9. Flat No;202, Jai Durga Nivas Aparfment, Nagarjr.nii EnclaVe, Miyapur, Hyderabad- 500M9 ; 2). Pamball @ Pambirlla Shiva Teja S/o- pamballa Bapra Age:33 Years, Occ: Private Employee, R/o. Flat No. 448, Block-B, Sai Knrpa Apartments, Kompally Village, Drmdigal Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri Disrrict-5000 I 4. ...Petitioners/Accused No's. I and 2. AND 1). The State of Telangana, rhrough S.H.O., p.S. Miy.apur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District; represented by Pubtic Prosecutor, Hryh court a[ Hyderabad. 2). Visweswar Reddy @ Egga Visweswar Reddy S/o. Late. E. Jagan Mohan Reddy, Age: 34 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No. 402, Plot No. 36, M iyapur, Hyderabad-500049 - -Respondent. a i! i I ,i I : 'l I I ! . .Respondent/De-facto-coqplainant. t\--\$t a- I I I 'r 2 Jr 1). It is submitted that, this quash petition is frled by the petitioners/ltccused No's. I and Z,,P*y*gthis Hon'ble Court to quash the F.I.R. No. 1384 of 2a25,of P.S. Miyapur, Cyberabad QqmmisSionerate' Ranga Reddy District- 2). ttis submitted that, basing on a cornplaint filed by the respondent No' 2, thePolice Miyapur, cyberabad commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District' registered ,the said F.I.R for the offences punishable under section 351 (2) of B.N.S. (Se,ction 506 of l-P-C.)' 3). .tt is submitted thag the petitionerslAccused No's. I and 2 and the respondeut No. 2, at tl1e advice of the elders and well wishers got resolved the differences which arose between thern, as srch the respondent No- 2 have no grievance at all against the petitioners, therefore the respondent No' 2 doesn't want to p::osecute the petitioners/Accused No- 1 andl,therefore the respondent No.2havenoobjectionforquashingoftheF.I.R.againstthe petitionerVAccused No- I andZ' 4). It is submitted that, the petitioners and the respondent No' 2, got reduced a joint compromise memo and the respondent No' 2 has no objection for quashing of the FIR, the said joint compromise memo may be treated as part , I i i *-< r>\ b\.*r*\$\ 3 and parcel of this quash petition. It is firther submitted that, the respondent No. 2 also frling an affrdavit stating that, he has no objection for quashing the F.I.R. 4). It is submitted that, the petitioners and the respondent No. 2, got reduced this joint compromise memo and the respondent No. 2 has no objection ,I for quashing of the FIR. this joint compromise memo maybe treated as part and parcel of this quash petition It is further submiffed that, the respondent No. 2 also filing an affrdavit stating that, he has no objection for quashing the F.I.R. 5). For all the reasons stated above, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the F.I.R No. 1384 of 2025, of P.S. Miyapur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District, and to pass zuch other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest ofjustice. No. 1. OP PetitionerNo.2. a Date: 08-12-2025.- Place: Hyderabad. Couusel for [],;^// th6Petitioners o.2 Qsrrnsel for No.2.