logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 149 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : I.A. Nos. 1 & 2 of 2026 In/& Criminal Petition No. 793 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
Parties : SK. Chan Basha & Others Versus The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh & Another
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: P. Madhu Sudhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Kothapalli Kodandapani, Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 03-02-2026
Head Note :-
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 492 -
Judgment :-

1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C’)/Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.135 of 2024 of Thottambedu Police Station, Srikalahasti Town, Tirupati District registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, ‘the IPC’).

2. I.A.No.1 of 2026 is filed by the Petitioner/Respondent No.2 seeking permission to record the compromise in Crime No.135 of 2024 of Thottambedu Police Station, Srikalahasti Town, Tirupati District against Respondents/Accused Nos.1 to 3.

3. I.A.No.2 of 2026 is filed by the Petitioner/De-facto complainant/Respondent No.2 seeking permission to record the compromise and consequently quash the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.135 of 2024 of Thottambedu Police Station, Srikalahasti Town, Tirupati District against Respondents/Accused Nos.1 to 3.

4. Today, when the matters were taken up for hearing, the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 and Respondent No.2/de-facto complainant were present before this Court. They produced their respective attested copies of Aadhar cards in proof of their identity, and the same were placed on record for proper identification. Both the learned Counsel on record identified both the parties in open Court.

5. Ms. P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State, reported no objection to record the compromise.

6. On perusal of the record, a joint memo has been filed by the Petitioners and Respondent No.2, countersigned by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the Respondent No.2. It is stated therein that, with the intervention of family members, village elders, and well-wishers, the dispute has been amicably settled and that the parties intend to live peacefully without any further litigation. The major offence alleged is compoundable.

7. Considering the submissions and in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another(2012(10)SCC 303), since there is an amicable settlement between the parties, in the interest of justice, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2026 are allowed.

8. Consequently, Criminal Petition is allowed, and the proceedings against the accused persons in Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.135 of 2024 of Thottambedu Police Station, Srikalahasti Town, Tirupati District is hereby quashed.

                  As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal