Telangana High Court
CRLP/13263/2010 of Mohd. Jamal, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 December 2010
SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.13263 OF 2010 ORDER: 1 The Bahadurpura police registered a case in Cr.No.7 of 2008 against the petitioner herein for the alleged offence punishable under section 324 of IPC and after investigation the police filed a charge sheet against
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADACRIMINAL PETITION NO.13263 OF 2010
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.
ORDER:
1 The Bahadurpura police registered a case in Cr.No.7 of 2008against the petitioner herein for the alleged offence punishable undersection 324 of IPC and after investigation the police filed a charge sheetagainst the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 326 ofIPC. The same was numbered as C.C.No.1280 of 2008 on the file of theCourt of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
2 During the pendency of the said proceedings, it appears, therewas a settlement between the parties and accordingly the petitioner filedthe present petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. requesting this court toquash the said proceedings.
3 Today parties are present. When questioned the de factocomplainant Smt. Saleema Bee stated that there is a compromisebetween her and the petitioner and hence she is not interested in gettingthe matter prosecuted. She further submitted that she has no objection ifthe said proceedings against the petitioner are quashed.
4 The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable undersection 326 of IPC, which is non compoundable and the courts in normalcircumstances shall not compound the said offence. But, however, as thecomplainant herself appeared before this court and stated that she is notinterested in getting the matter prosecuted, this court is of the opinion thatthe said proceedings pending against the petitioner can be quashedbecause even if the said proceedings are allowed to be continued,ultimately, the witnesses including the first respondent herein who is thede facto complainant may not support the case of the prosecution duringthe course of trial and the entire exercise would become futile in view ofthe settlement arrived at between the parties.
5 Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in
C.C.No.1280 of 2008 on the file of the court of the Chief MetropolitanMagistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad pending against the petitioner arehereby quashed.
-----------------
SriT.G.K, J.
30.12.2010Kvsn