IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH (29TH) DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.6210 of 2011 Between: Jagdish Kandikattu … Petitioner And: State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.6210 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner and the 2nd respondent present. Sri Raja Gopallavan Tayi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Madhavi Priya Manthena, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent present. 2. Both parties stated that they have settled their matrimonial dispute amicably out side the Court and entered into a compromise the terms and conditions of which are reduced into writing by way of Memorandum of Agreement, copy of which is filed along with the petition. Both parties have stated that the terms and conditions of compromise have been fulfilled and divorce has already been granted by the Family Court at Bangalore and other criminal cases pending at Bangalore are also closed. The 2nd respondent stated that in view of the compromise and the terms and conditions of the memorandum of agreement, she is no longer interested in pursuing the matter any further and seeks permission to withdraw the same. 3. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties settling the dispute amicably out side the Court, it is considered that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings against the petitioner and others in CC No.162 of 2009 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and it is a fit case to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash further proceedings against the petitioner and others in CC No.162 of 2009 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 4. In the circumstances, further proceedings against the petitioner and others in CC No.162 of 2009 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are held liable to be quashed and are accordingly quashed. 5. In the result, the criminal petition is disposed of as stated above. ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 29.07.2011 bss