Telangana High Court
G.Ravi vs The State Of Telangana on 18 July, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2024
In/and
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6125 of 2024
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quash the
proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 in
S.C.No.207 of 2022 on the file of the learned IX Additional
Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307 read
with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'I.P.C.') and
Section 25 (1B) (b) of the Arms Act, 1959.
2. Heard Sri. N. Purushotham Reddy, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri S.
Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of respondent No.1-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3 were residing in the
same house in weaker section locality and they are workers.
He further submitted that in the said locality, the common
SKS,J
toilet was constructed by GHMC and the same is only
available to them to use. The only allegations against the
petitioners are that petitioner No.1 took the knife and attacked
respondent No.3, who is the victim, and he received bleeding
injury from his left hand wrist and in the meantime, petitioner
No.2 caught hold the hand of petitioner No.1. The entire
incident was happened in the toilet at the time of using it.
Learned counsel further submitted that in the said incident
respondent No.3-victim received only minor injury and
therefore, Section 307 of I.P.C do not attract to the present
incident.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted
that petitioners due to the intervention of the well-wishers and
friends the matter between the parties has been settled
amicably out of the Court and agreed to compromise the
matter. Therefore, he prayed the Court to compromise the
matter.
5. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied
upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan 1, wherein it is
AIR 2019 SUPREME COURT 1296
SKS,J
categorically held that it would be open to the High Court to
examine as to whether the incorporation of Section 307 of IPC
is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected
sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the
charge under Section 307 of IPC. For this purpose, it would
be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury
sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the
vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc.,
6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
vehemently opposed for compounding the offence under
Section 307 of IPC as there are serious allegations against the
petitioners and they attacked the victim, as such, prayed the
Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
7. In the light of the submissions made by both the
learned counsel and a perusal of the material placed on
record, it appears that the petitioners and respondent Nos.2
and 3 were residing in the same house. The main allegations
against the petitioners are that petitioner No.1 attacked
respondent No.3-victim, who received bleeding injury from his
left hand wrist and in the meantime, petitioner No.2 caught
hold the hands of petitioner No.1. Learned counsel for the
SKS,J
petitioners informed this Court that the matter was
compromised between the parties and they filed I.A.Nos.2 and
3 of 2024 to record the compromise between them and to
compound the offences.
8. In view of the above submissions and as per the law laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Narayan
(supra), there is no injury on vital part, this Court deems it fit
and proper to compound the offences against the petitioners.
Further, vide order dated 11.06.2024, this Court directed the
parties along with their respective counsel to appear before
the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High
Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad, for identification
and to submit a report.
9. Pursuant to the above said direction, the parties have
appeared before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services
Committee, who has identified the parties and submitted
report, dated 22.06.2024 and the same is placed on record.
10. In view of the above, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2024 are
allowed. Consequently, this Criminal Petition is allowed and
the proceedings in S.C.No.207 of 2022 on the file of the
learned IX Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally,
SKS,J
Hyderabad, against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are
hereby quashed subject to the petitioners paying an amount
of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Director,
Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad (Savings A/c.No.52188926279,
State Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch (20070), IFSC
Code:SBIN0020070, MICR No.500004057) and Rs.5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court
Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two (02)
weeks from today and file proof of the same before the
Registry.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
______________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 18.07.2024
NOTE: Registry is directed to
upload/supply certified copy of the
order only after payment of above
said amount.
SAI
