Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/5226/2023 of SHAIK NAZRUL ISLAM ALI Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 8 September 2026
for orders : Date of pronouncement : 09-09-2026 Date of uploading : 10-09-2026 APHC010359342023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3604] WEDNESDAY, THE 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM CRIMINAL PETITION
Date of reserved for orders :
Date of pronouncement : 09-09-2026
Date of uploading : 10-09-2026
APHC010359342023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5226/2023
Between:
SHAIK NAZRUL ISLAM ALI, S/O SHOUKATH ALI, AGED 33 YEARS, R/O
D.NO.5-4-108/2,
BHAVANI
COLONY,
PREMAVATHI
PETA,
RAJENDRANAGAR MANDAL, RR DIST., TELANGANA.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PP., HIGH COURT OF
AP., NELAPADU, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. GOLLAPALLI LILLYPUSHPA, W/O RAJENDRA PRASAD VANAM, AGED 30 YEARS, R/O DONTHIKURRU VILLAGE, KATRENIKONDA
MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to Quash the proceedings in SC SPL.NO. 98 OF
2020 IN CRIME NO. 18 OF 2019 on the file of the Hon'ble X Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for SC
and
ST
(POA)
cases,
Rajahmahendravaram, E.G. District, lodged against petitioner under sections 376, 384, 506 IPC and 3(2)(va) 3(v) Of SC and ST ACT and pass
SUN, J
Crlp_5226_2023
Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in SC SPL.NO. 98 OF
2020 IN CRIME NO. 18 OF 2019 on the file of the Hon'ble X Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for SC
and
ST
(POA)
cases,
Rajahmahendravaram, E.G.District, lodged against petitioner under Sections 376, 384, 506 IPC and 3(2)(va) 3(v) of SC and ST (POA) ACT and pass
Court may be pleased to receive the documents annexed to this I.A. as documents in CrI.P.No.5226/2023 and pass
Court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner herein to file the Compromise Petition in SC SPL No.98 of 2020 in Cr.No.18 of 2019 on the file of the Hon’ble X Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for SC and ST POA cases Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and pass
Court may be pleased to record the compromise and quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused in SC SPL No.98 of 2020 in Cr.No.18 of 2019 on the file of the Hon’ble X Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for SC and ST POA cases Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. VARREY VENKATA NAGA VISHNU TEJA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
2. SURAGANI KRISHNA VAMSI
The Court made the following:
SUN, J
Crlp_5226_2023
HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 5226 OF 2023
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
4
Decisions referred to
In this index
2
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:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/ accused to quash the proceedings in S.C. SPL. No.98 of 2020 in Crime No.18 of 2019 on the file of learned X Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for SCs and STs (POA) Act Cases, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District, for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 384, 506 IPC & Section 3 (2)
(va) 3 (v) of SC & ST (POA) Act.
2. Heard Sri V.V.N. VISHNU TEJA, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Vamsi Surgani, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
3. Respondent No.2 filed two petitions i.e., I.A. Nos.2 of 2026 and 3 of 2026 along with joint memo stating that subsequent to filing of charge sheet, she married other person and gave birth to a child and with the intervention of elders and well wishers, they settled the dispute out of court and sought permission to compromise the matter in S.C. Spl. No.98 of 2020 pending on the file of learned X Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for SCs and STs (POA) Act Cases, Rajamahendravaram, E.G.District.
4. Petitioner/ accused and respondent/ de facto complainant are present.
5. Heard respondent No.2/ de facto complainant personally and she has submitted that she has no objection to quash the proceedings against the
SUN, J Crlp_5226_2023
petitioner/ accused as the matter is settled out of Court. Identity of respondent No.2 is confirmed by her counsel Sri Krishna Vamsi Suragani.
6. Basing on the report of the de facto complainant, a case in Crime No.18 of 2019 is registered against the petitioner/ accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 384, 506 IPC & Section 3 (2) (va), 3 (v) of SC & ST (POA) Act. After completion of investigation, the investigating officer filed charge sheet and the same is pending on the file of X Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for SCs and STs (POA) Act Cases, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District.
7. Both parties settled the matter out of Court, in view of subsequent changes in the life of respondent No.2/ de facto complainant and as per the judgment of Apex Court in Jagdish Channa & others Vs. State of Haryana & another1, Shiji Vs. Radhika & Another2, Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab 3 and Anita Maria Dias and Another vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr4, even in non- compoundable cases, on the basis of compromise, criminal proceedings can be quashed to save the valuable time of the Court.
8. In the given facts and circumstances and having given thoughtful consideration to the aforementioned principles, this Court is of the considered 1 AIR 2008 SC 1968 2 (2011) 10 SCC 705 3 (2014) 6 SCC 466 4 (2018) 3 SCC 290
SUN, J Crlp_5226_2023
opinion that in view of the compromise between both the parties, continuance of the prosecution in this matter is of no use and would become futile exercise and as such, inclined to give permission to both parties to compromise the matter and accordingly, petitions in I.A. Nos.2 of 2026 and 3 of 2026 are allowed.
9. Recorded the submissions of both parties. Compromise memo shall form part of the record.
10. In the result, this Criminal Petition is allowed, and the proceedings in S.C. SPL. No.98 of 2020 in Crime No.18 of 2019 on the file of learned X Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for SCs and STs (POA) Act Cases, Rajamahendravaram, E.G.District, are hereby quashed against the petitioner/ accused.
As a sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ SUNITHA GANDHAM, J
09.09.2026 knl