Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Juneboina Sujin Kumar vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 September, 2022
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATHI
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.1837 OF 2022
1.Juneboina Sujin Kumar and Others ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Represented by its Public Prosecutor
and Another. ... Respondents
Counsel for the petitioners : Mr.P.V.N.Kiran Kumar
Counsel for R1 : The Assistant Public Prosecutor
Counsel for R2 : Mr.Mohammad Nayab Rasool
ORDER:
I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the cause title.
These petitions are filed under Sections 320(2) and 320(6) r/w 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking permission to record compromise, compound the offences and to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.2 of 2022 on the file of SHO, Yelamanchili Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam.
The 2nd respondent-de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners /A1 to A4 before the Yelamanchili Town Police 2 Station, Visakhapatnam, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 448, 427, 323, 379, 506 and 509 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code(for short 'I.P.C.') and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The petitioners /A1 to A4 and the 2nd respondent/ de facto complainant are present and they are identified by their respective counsels and produced Photostat copies of Aadhar cards to prove their identity.
A joint memo of compromise is filed by the parties, when terms of joint memo of compromise are explained in Telugu language, they are admitted to be true and correct. It is submitted that the petitioners/A1 to A4 and the 2nd respondent-de facto complainant voluntarily entered into compromise, settled the matter outside the Court with the intervention of elders and that there are no disputes between both the parties.
This Court had gone through the complaint lodged pursuant to which the case is registered, affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent-de facto complainant as also Joint Memo including the Memorandum of Understanding, dated 20.08.2022, wherein it was stated that both the parties agreed to withdraw all the cases filed against each other. Hence, continuation of proceedings against the petitioners/accused 1 to 4 would be a futile exercise. In the light of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to compound the 3 offence, in the interest of both the parties and continuation of criminal proceedings, is not warranted.
As the compromise is voluntary, in the interest of both the parties, permission is granted to compound the offence. Accordingly, compromise is recorded in terms of the joint memo filed along with the petition and the petitions are ordered.
Crl.P.No.1837 of 2022
In view of the orders passed by this Court in I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022, this Criminal Petition is allowed by quashing the proceedings in Cr.No.2 of 2022 on the file of SHO, Yelamanchili Town Police Station,Visakhapatnam, against the petitioners/A1 to A4 are concerned.
Registry is directed to annex a copy of joint compromise memo to this order.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J Date : 19-09-2022.
BLV 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.1837 OF 2022 Dt: 19.09.2022 BLV