Telangana High Court
CRLP/13594/2010 of Vemula Rajiv Goud , Raju (A-1) Vs Smt. Padilam Venkata Shashi Kala on 30 December 2010
SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.PETITION Nos.13594 & 13595 OF 2010 COMMON ORDER: 1 On the basis of a report given by first respondent in Crl.P.No.13594 of 2010 by name Smt. P.Venkata Shashi Kala, who is student of I year M.B.A, a case in Cr.No.271 of 2010 was registered against her
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADACRL.PETITION Nos.13594 & 13595 OF 2010COMMON ORDER:
1 On the basis of a report given by first respondent inCrl.P.No.13594 of 2010 by name Smt. P.Venkata Shashi Kala, whois student of I year M.B.A, a case in Cr.No.271 of 2010 wasregistered against her seniors, who are the petitioners in the saidpetition, for the offences punishable under sections 4(i) (ii) (iii) and7(1) of Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997 (for short ‘the Act’) byGhatkesar Police. Alleging that the relatives of the said ShashiKala outraged their modesty, the said seniors, who is the secondrespondent in Crl.P.No.13595 of 2010 gave a report on the basis ofwhich another case in Cr.No.272 of 2010 was registered againstthe relatives of said Shashikala for the offences punishable undersections 354, 323, 509 and 427 r/w 34 of IPC. In the light of thesaid commonness these two petitions are disposed of by thiscommon order.
2 However, it appears, during the pendency of the saidcrimes, there was a compromise entered into between the partiesand in the light of the said compromise, the parties in both thecases filed these two Criminal Petitions under section 482 ofCr.P.C. requesting this court to quash the said proceedings.
3 Today and the complainants in both the cases i.e. thestudent who was teased and the other students whose modestywas outraged appeared before this court and stated that they arenot interested in getting the matters prosecuted.
4 Apparently, the petitioners are all students aged around20 years and are studying M.B.A. However, it shall be noticedthat there is no provision in the Act to the effect that the saidoffences are not compoundable. If there is a specific provisionstating that the said offences are non-compoundable, it may not beproper for this court to exercise the inherent powers conferredunder section 482 of Cr.P.C. But in the absence of any specificprovision to that effect, this court is of the view this court canexercise its extraordinary inherent jurisdiction ad get the offencecompounded taking the totality of the circumstances intoconsideration. Hence, in the light of the said submissions madeby the students, and in view of the fact that the carrier of thestudents will be spoiled this court is of the view that the saidproceedings can be quashed.
5 Accordingly, these two petitions are allowed and theproceedings in Cr.No.271 of 2010 and 272 of 2010 on the file of theStation House Officer, Ghatkesar, Cyberabad are hereby quashed.
Sri T.G.K, J.30[th] December 2010Kvsn
___________