THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1522 of 2009 DATED: 08-10-2010 ORDER: On the basis of a report given by one G.Suvarna, the Sub- Inspector of police, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District registered a case in Cr.No.30 of 2003 against the petitioners herein for the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 326 IPC and after investigation filed the charge sheet. The same was numbered as C.C.No.1354 of 2003 on the file of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District. 2. During the course of trial, the said Suvarna was examined as P.W.1 and four more witnesses were examined and ExsP1 to P3 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the defence. 3. Having analyzed the entire evidence, the learned Magistrate though came to the conclusion that the petitioners are not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC, however found them guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 323 IPC and accordingly sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC instead of 324 IPC. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners filed Crl.A.No.174 of 2006 on the file of the learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, and the learned Sessions Judge allowed the appeal in part and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs.500/-each for the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs.500/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC instead of Section 324 IPC. Aggrieved thereby, the present revision is preferred. 4. On 15-09-2009, this Court admitted the revision and granted bail to the petitioners. Thereafter, it appears there was compromise between the parties and the complainant has come forward and filed an affidavit stating that she is not interested in getting the matter prosecuted. 5. Today, parties are present and when questioned, the complainant-G.Suvarna submitted that the accused-petitioners herein are her husband’s brother and his wife and that she does not want to prosecute the matter further and the said offences alleged against the petitioners may be compounded. 6. In fact, the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC is not compoundable, however having regard to the relationship between the parties, this Court is of the view that the said offences can be compounded. Accordingly, the same are compounded. The judgments impugned in this revision are hereby set aside. 7. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed. ______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 08th October,2010 Tsy