Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Done Bhanuraju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 18 September, 2024
APHC010381612024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
[3368]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6251/2024
Between:
Done Bhanuraju ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
The State of Andhra ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)
Pradesh and Others
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. V SAI KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2. RAJA SEKHAR SYKAM
The Court made the following:
COMMON ORDER:
IA Nos.2 and 3 of 2024
in/and
Criminal Petition No:6251 of 2024
This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
(Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023) has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner herein/Accused, to quash the proceedings in C.C No.91
of 2017 on the file of Spl.Judicial First Class Magistrate for
Prohibition & Excise-cum-VII Addl.Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada,
which is subject matter of Criminal Appeal No.82 of 2021 on the
file III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel representing for the unofficial respondent No.2 (defacto-
complainant) and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
representing the State present.
3. Today, when the matter is taken up, petitioner
herein/Accused and 2nd respondent herein are present before this
Court. They produced their respective aadhar cards in proof of
their identity. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for 2nd respondent have identified both the parties in the
open Court.
4. This Court has questioned 2nd respondent herein/de facto
complainant with regard to compromise, and she categorically
stated to that extent that she has voluntarily entered into
compromise with the petitioner herein/Accused. This Court is
satisfied with the identification of the parties and voluntariness in
arriving at the compromise. In view of the compromise between
the parties, the chances of conviction are remote and bleak.
5. In the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & another1, on
quashing of criminal case, when the parties entered into
settlement and compromise, the Criminal Petition is allowed and
therefore, the case proceedings in C.C No.91 of 2017 on the file
of Spl.Judicial First Class Magistrate for Prohibition & Excise-
cum-VII Addl.Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, which is subject
matter of Criminal Appeal No.82 of 2021 on the file III Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada, against the petitioner
herein/ Accused are hereby quashed.
6. Accordingly, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2024 and Criminal Petition
No.6251 of 2024 are allowed.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any,
pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
____________________ _
B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI, J
18th September, 2024.
Dmr
2012 (9) Scale 257
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
I.A Nos.2 and 3 of 2024
in/and
Criminal Petition No:6251 of 2024
18th September, 2024
Dmr
