Telangana High Court
Mr. Chityala Naresh Kumar vs K Venugopal on 17 April, 2025
Author: N.Tukaramji
Bench: N.Tukaramji
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
I.A.Nos.5 AND 6 OF 2025
In/And
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.173 OF 2025
COMMON ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 438 and 442
of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, being aggrieved by the
judgment dated 27.02.2023 passed in Crl.A.No.185 of 2017 by the
learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-II Additional
Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Medchal Malkajgiri District, at
Kukatpally, confirming the judgment and sentence dated 20.01.2017 in
C.C.No.65 of 2017, on the file of the VIII Special Magistrate Court,
Kukatpally at Miyapur, Ranga Reddy District.
2. Heard Mr.C.Sunil Anand, learned counsel for the revision
petitioner, Mr.S.Ram Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent
No.1/de-facto complainant (died, per legal representative) and
Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
representing the respondent No.2-State.
3. During pendency of the Criminal Revision Case, the revision
petitioner has filed Interlocutory Applications vide I.A.Nos.5 and 6 of
2025 seeking permission to compromise the matter and to record the
2 NTR,J
I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025
in/and
terms of compromise between the respondent No.1/legal
representative of the de-facto complainant and the revision petitioner.
4. This Court vide order dated 03.04.2025 referred the parties to
the High Court Legal Services Committee for identification and to verify
the voluntariness in arriving the settlement. The Secretary, High Court
Legal Services Committee, has submitted report dated 10.04.2025
stating that the parties were identified by their respective counsel and
also on verification of Aadhar Cards/Identity Cards and the enquiries
revealed that the parties have willfully and without coercion entered
into settlement/compromise.
5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and
perused the materials on record.
6. Having considered the allegations, the charged offence, which is
essentially inter-personal in nature and taking into account the
amicable settlement between the parties and to restore peace among
them, in the light of the dictums in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and
another 1 and Anil Mishra v. State of U.P. 2; State of Madhya
2012 (10) SCC 303
2024 INSC 189
3 NTR,J
I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025
in/and
Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others 3, this Court is of the
considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view
of the settlement by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482
Cr.P.C./528 of BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest of justice.
7. Accordingly, I.A.Nos.5 and 6 of 2025 are allowed and the
conviction recorded under Section 138 of N.I.Act, against the revision
petitioner/accused vide order dated 20.01.2017 in C.C.No.65 of 2017,
on the file of the VIII Special Magistrate, Kukatpally, at Miyapur, Ranga
Reddy District, is set aside as the offence is compounded by the
respondent No.1/legal representative of the de-facto complainant. The
bail bonds of the revision petitioner/accused shall stand cancelled.
8. In the above terms, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in this Criminal
Revision Case shall stand closed.
_______________
N.TUKARAMJI, J
Date:17.04.2025
svl
2019 (5) SCC 688
