THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI
I.A.No.2 of 2020
IN/AND
CRIMINAL PETITION No.334 of 2012
COMMON ORDER:
Petitioners / A-1 to A-3 and respondent No.2 / defacto
complainant appeared before this Court. Both the parties filed their Aadhar Cards in proof of their identity and their respective counsel identified them. The 2nd respondent / defacto complainant reported that she voluntarily agreed for compromise and intended to compromise the matter.
Both the parties filed a Joint Memo vide I.A.No.2 of 2020 submitting that they settled the matter amicable between them and as such respondent No.2 / defacto complainant has no objection to quash the proceedings in Crime No.535 of 2010 of Amberpet Police Station (P.R.C.No.9 of 2011 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad).
The case in Crime No.535 of 2010 of Amberpet Police Station is registered for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC / ST (POA) Act, 1989, which was a non-compoundable offence. However, as the parties reported that they voluntarily entered into compromise and as per the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramawatar v. State of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1393 of 2011 decided by the Hon'ble Apex 2 Court on 25-10-2021, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/ settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a 'special statute' would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Considering the above judgment, as there are civil disputes between the parties and the parties have amicably settled the matter between them and were intending to compromise the same it is considered fit to allow the petition and quash the proceedings in Crime No.535 of 2010 of Amberpet Police Station (P.R.C.No.9 of 2011 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad).
Accordingly, I.A.No.2 of 2020 is ordered and the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in Crime No.535 of 2010 of Amberpet Police Station (P.R.C.No.9 3 of 2011 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad) in view of the compromise between the parties.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.
_______________________ DR.G. RADHA RANI, J November 16, 2021 PN 4 THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI I.A.No.2 of 2020 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.334 of 2012 November 16, 2021 PN 5 On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a 'special statute' would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C.