Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.S.BHANUMATHI, J.
Naralasetty Meera Bai – Appelant
Vs.
The State ff Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
I.A.Nos.3 & 2 of 2023 and Crl.P.No.8928 of 2023 and Crl.P.No.8393 of 2023
Decided on : 04-12-2023
Compounding of Offence - Criminal Procedure - Section 482 CrPC - Sections 306 & 498 IPC - [306 r/w 34 IPC, 498A IPC] - The court allowed the compounding of the offence under Section 306 r/w 34 IPC and 498A IPC and quashed the proceedings in P.R.C.No.31 of 2023 and Crime No.577 of 2022, based on the settlement between the parties. The court relied on various precedents and legal principles to exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent an abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved two criminal petitions seeking to quash proceedings under Section 306 r/w 34 IPC and 498A IPC. The parties had voluntarily settled the issue and filed joint memos for compounding the offence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had amicably settled the matter and voluntarily entered into a compromise. It allowed the compounding of the offence and quashed the proceedings based on the settlement and the bleak chances of conviction.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings based on the settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the legal principles outlined in various precedents to exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC. It considered the nature and gravity of the offence, the voluntary settlement between the parties, and the remote chances of conviction.
Final Decision: The court allowed the compounding of the offence and quashed the proceedings in both cases based on the settlement between the parties.
ORDER:
1. The Criminal Petition No.8928 of 2023, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (‘the CrPC’) is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.31 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, Krishna District, as against the petitioner/A-2 by name Naralasetty Meera Bai.
The Criminal Petition No.8393 of 2023, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (‘the CrPC’) is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.577 of 2022, Kothapet Police Station, Guntur District, as against the petitioners/A-1 & A-3 by name Duvvarapu Satyavathi and Duvvarapu Rambabu.
2. The brief facts in the present case are as follows:
Crime No.926 of 2022, Ajith Singh Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada City was registered under Section 306 r/w 34 IPC against the petitioner in view of the death of Surampudi Jyothi @ Ambati Jyothi, W/o Manikanta on 28.11.2022 by committing suicide.
3. Crime No.577 of 2022 of Kothapet Police Station was registered on 01.12.2022 against Duvvavarapu Satyavathi, Rambabu/A-1 and A-3 for the offence under Section 306 r/w 34 IPC due to death of Manikanta who is the husband of the deceased in Crime No.926 of 2022.
4. Pending the criminal petition, I.A.Nos.3 & 2 of 2023 are filed by the petitioner/R-1 under Sections 320(2) and 320 (6) CrPC, requesting to permit the parties to compound the offence and to record the compromise between the parties and consequently to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.31 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, Krishna District and Crime No.577 of 2022, Kothapet Police Station, Guntur District.
5. When the matter was taken up, Petitioner/A-2 by name Naralasetty Meera Bai and the second respondent/de facto complainant, by name, Duvvarapu Satyavathi, are present and are duly identified. Sri S.Mahesh Naik, learned counsel representing the counsel for the petitioner is present. Sri B.Srinu, S.I. (6424) of Ajit Singh Nagar Police, Vijayawada City, is present. They produced copies of their respective identity proofs. They are also identified by their respective counsels.
6. Both parties submitted that due to the intervention of the elders, the matter is amicably settled and that they voluntarily settled the issue. The second respondent/de facto complainant expressed that there is no objection to set aside the case against the petitioner/A-2.
7. When examined, they stated that they amicably settled the matter and the complainant has no interest to prosecute the accused and is withdrawing the case and she has no objection to allow the criminal petition and quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.31 of 2023 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, Krishna District under Sections 498 A and 306 IPC and Crime No.577 of 2022, Kothapet Police Station, Guntur District under Section 306 r/w 34 IPC.
8. The terms of compromise are reduced into writing in the form of a joint memorandum of compromise, which is signed by the parties and their counsels. The contents of the joint memo in Crl.P.No.8928 of 2023 read as follows:
2. It is submitted that at the intervention of the disinterested mediator, the petitioner and I compromised the above said complaint and accused No.1 also died and the p
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent an abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice, especially in cases whe....
Offence can be compounded and quashed where chances of conviction are bleak and remote.
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings if a compromise is reached, provided the nature of the crime allows for such action and the possibility of conviction is deemed remote.
A redundant criminal prosecution cannot be allowed to continue.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
