Telangana High Court
CRLP/15878/2013 of Shri Rupenaguntla Venkata Ramana Vs State of A.P., on 31 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR Crl.P.No. 15878 of 2013 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashing the proceedings in DVC No. 12 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram. A complaint has been filed under
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMARCrl.P.No. 15878 of 2013
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seekingquashing the proceedings in DVC No. 12 of 2013 on the file of thelearned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram. A complaint hasbeen filed under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Domestic ViolenceAct, 2005.
Along with the present application, the petitioners filedCrl.P.M.P.No.14303 of 2013 seeking permission of the Court to quashthe case in DVC No.12 of 2013.
The parties are present today and were identified by theirrespective counsel. When examined, the 2[nd] respondent stated that shehas settled the dispute with the accused and is not interested in pursuingthe matter. She further stated that at the instance of elders and well-wishers, they have settled the matter out of Court.
In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another[[1]], the ApexCourt held that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, thepossibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminalproceedings would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice andextreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal casedespite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.
In view of the judgment of the Apex Court in GIAN SINGH (supra)and taking into consideration the fact of compromise arrived at betweenthe parties, this Court is of the view that continuation of theinvestigation against the petitioners is being an abuse of process of lawas the chances of conviction would be remote and bleak. It is not in dispute that the dispute between the parties is purely matrimonial innature and the public at large are not affected. In view of the same, therespondent can be permitted to compound the offence and theproceedings against the petitioners can be terminated.
Accordingly, Crl.P.M.P.No.14303 of 2013 is ordered. Consequently, the Criminal Petition filed for quashing the proceedingsagainst the petitioners in DVC.No.12 of 2013 on the file of the learnedJudicial First Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram is allowed.
As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shallstand closed.
__________________________________
JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR.
Date : 31.12.2013Gvl
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
Crl.P.No. 15878 of 2013
Date : 31-12-2013
Gvl
[1](2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 303
Page 1 of 1
Loading citations and judicial treatment…