Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Goriparthi Srinivasa Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 March, 2023
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
I.A.Nos.2 & 3 of 2023
In / And
Crl.P.No.6692 of 2021
ORDER:
Crime No.687 of 2021 on the file of the Patamata Police Station,
Vijayawada, for the offences punishable under Sections 451 and 506 IPC
read with Section 34 IPC on the complaint of the de facto complainant /
applicant herein.
2. The respondents 1 to 3 / accused 1 to 3 had approached this
Court by way of Crl.P.No.6692 of 2021 for quashing the said cases.
Various grounds have been raised in support of the said petition.
3. The applicant, who is the de facto complainant, has now
moved the above interlocutory applications stating that the applicant/de
facto complainant and the respondents / accused are members of the
same family, in as much as, they belong to the branches of the same
family and are cousins. The applicant further states that the complaint
was filed in view of certain family disputes, which are now been settled
and both sides have agreed for withdrawing the complaints filed against
each other.
4. A perusal of the complaint in Crime No.687 of 2021 would
show that there are allegations making out a case under Sections 451 and
506 IPC. However, the de facto complainant has now approached this
2 RRR,J
Crl.P.No.6692 of 2021
Court for closure of this complaint in view of the family settlement and in
view of the necessity of closing these cases to ensure amity in the family.
5. The applicant / de facto complainant and the respondents /
accused Nos.1 & 3 were personally present before this Court on
27.02.2023 on which day the applicant / de facto complainant had stated
that he was not interested in pursuing the present complaint and was
desirous of withdrawing the same on account of the settlement of the
family disputes.
6. The 2nd accused was not present before this Court. However,
she was represented by accused No.1.
7. The learned counsel for the parties relies upon the judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramgopal and Anr. Vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh1 to contend that this Court would have discretion and
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to consider such cases for quashing
the same.
8. As the disputes, appear to be, settled between the members
of the same family, it would be appropriate that this criminal petition be
allowed to ensure that family disputes do not arise again. It may also be
noted that the complaints are essentially arising out of the private
disputes and falls squarely within the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the above judgment.
2021 SCC Online SC 834
3 RRR,J
Crl.P.No.6692 of 2021
9. Accordingly Crime No.687 of 2021 is quashed and the
criminal petition is allowed. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions,
if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
2nd March, 2023
Js.
4 RRR,J
Crl.P.No.6692 of 2021
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
I.A.Nos.2 & 3 of 2023
In / and
Crl.P.No.6692 of 2021
2nd March, 2023
Js.
