HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10995 OF 2009 DATED 6TH JULY, 2010. BETWEEN M/S. Sri Sai Engineering Constructions Co., 115, Ashoknagar, rep. By Sri KPV Subbaiah and ors ….Petitioners/Accused 32,34 & 35 and The State of AP Rep. By its Public Prosecutor and anr. … Respondents/Complainant HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10995 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. This Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is ﬁled by the petitioners seeking to quash the proceedings pending in Cr.No. 6 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the learned First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 2. The case of the prosecution is that: the petitioners are the accused Nos. 32, 34 and 35 in CC.No. 6 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the 1st Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The petitioners along with other accused are being prosecuted for the oﬀences under Section 409, 420 r/w Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of the Depositors Financial Establishments Act, 1999. The ﬁrst petitioner is the ﬁrm registered under the partnership Act represented by Managing Partner Sri KPV Subbaiah who is shown as Accused No.33 in the above CC.No. 6 of 2002. The second petitioner is the company registered under the Companies Act represented by the Managing Director. The petitioners are ﬁling the present criminal petition to quash the proceedings on the ﬁle of this Honourble Court in accordance with G.O.Rt.No. 288, dated 20.2.2009 wherein the State Government issued proceedings for withdrawal of the case under Section 321 of Cr.P.C. The petitioners submit that a complaint was lodged by the Principal Secretary to Government along with the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies, Hyderabad on 25.2.2002 against the management of the Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Limited, Hyderabad and its oﬃcers and loanees before the Police Station, CID, Hyderabad. The same was registered as Cr.No. 3 of 2002 under Sections 409, 420, 120(B) r/w 5 of the A.P. Protection of the Depositors Financial Establishments Act, 1999. It was alleged in the complaint that the Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Limited was a ﬁnancial institution registered under the provisions of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act. It is submitted that one late Syed Alamdar Hussain Sajjad Aga was the Chairman of the Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Limited. It was alleged that the Chairman, Managing Director, staﬀ and the family members of the Chairman misappropriated the funds by granting loans to various institutions. It is alleged that the petitioner as they obtained the loan from the bank they were arrayed as accused Nos. 32, 34 and 35 in Cr.No. 3 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the CID of Police, Hyderabad. The CID Police after investigation ﬁled the charge sheet and the same was taken on ﬁle as CC.No. 6 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. It is submitted that the proceedings in C.C.No. 6 of 2002 was pending for framing the charges. 3. The petitioners approached this Court with a prayer to quash the said proceedings on the ground that the Government has passed an order vide G.O.Rt.No. 288 (Law (L.A.&J.Home.Courts.B) Department, dated 20.2.2009 for withdrawal of the case pending against the petitioners. The relevant portion of the said Government Order runs as follows: “In the reference ﬁrst read above, Sri K.P.V. Subbaiah has further requested the Government to withdraw prosecution against other accused i.e. A.32,A.34,A35 A36 and A.37, borrowers of Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Limited, Hyderabad, in Cr.No. 3 of 2002 under Sections 409, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1880 and Section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors Financial Establishments Act, 1999 of Crime Investigation Department Police Station which is pending before Honourable Metropolitan Sessions Judge Court, Hyderabad vide C.C.No. 6 of 2002 on the same and similar grounds. Government after careful examination of the matter, based on the material made available have decided to withdraw prosecution against other accused i.e. A.32, A.34,A.35, A.36 and A.37, borrowers of Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Limited, Hyderabad in Cr.No. 3 of 2002 under Sections 409, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code 1880 and section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors Financial Establishment Act, 1999 of Crime Investigation Department Police Station which is pending before Honourable Metropolitan Sessions Judge Court, Hyderabad vide C.C.No. 6 of 2002. The Collector and District Magistrate, Hyderabad District is therefore directed to instruct the Assistant Public Prosecutor concerned to ﬁle a petition under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Central Act 2 of 1974) for withdrawal of Prosecution against the following accused mentioned below in Cr.No. 3 of 2002 under Sections 409, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Central Act 45 of 1860) and Section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors Financial Establishments Act 1999 of Crime Investigation Department Police Station, which is pending before Honourable Metropolitan Sessions Judge Court, Hyderabad vide C.C.NO. 6 of 2002 under intimation to Government.” 4. On ﬁling of the present application, the aggrieved party, which is Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Limited ﬁled a memo before the trial Court consenting for withdrawal of the case against the petitioners herein. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor is also not having serious objection for quashing of the proceedings in Cr.No. 6 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the learned First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 6. The question that now arises for consideration before this Court is whether based on the said G.O. expressing consent by the Government for withdrawal of the case can be a ground to quash the complaint on the ﬁle of the learned First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 7. A perusal of the entire record and also memo ﬁled by the aggrieved party, it is evident that the petitioners and the aggrieved party intended to compound the oﬀence in view of the fact that the entire amount borrowed by the petitioners was deposited before the concerned bank. The Apex Court in catena of decisions expressed its view that when the parties intended to compound the oﬀence and the same is not against the public interest, pendency of the case against the parties concerned will be a futile exercise. When the prosecuting agency also expressed its view not to proceed further in the case against the petitioners, this Court is of the view that the proceedings pending in Cr.No. 6 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the learned First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad can be quashed in the interest of justice. In that view of the matter, the proceedings pending in Cr.No. 6 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed as far as the petitioners herein are concerned. 8. The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed. ----------------------------------- JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO DATED 6th JULY, 2010. Msnr.