IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.9110 OF 2009 BETWEEN: 1. Mohd. Abdullah Khan S/o. Late Mahboob Khan 2. Mahboob Bee W/o. Late Mahboob Khan 3. Mohd. Raheem Khan S/o. Late Mahboob Khan. …. Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 AND 1. Smt. Parveen Sultana W/o. Mohd. Abdullah Khan 2. The State of A.P., rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. …. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.9110 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioners Mohd. Abdullah Khan, Mahboob Bee, Mohd. Raheem Khan – accused Nos.1 to 3 respectively, seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C. No.690 of 2007 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, arising out of Crime No.232 of 2006 of Women Police Station, South Zone, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A & 406 read with 34 IPC and 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short ‘DP Act’). 2. Heard. 3. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of the de facto complainant Smt. Parveen Sultana, respondent No.1 herein, and petitioner No.2 is the mother and petitioner No.3 is the brother of petitioner No.1. 4. On 04-11-2009, this Court passed the following order: “The matter is referred to the Secretary, State Legal Services Authority, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad for recording the compromise between the parties, as the name of petitioner No.1 Mohd. Abdullah Khan, who is husband of the de facto complainant – respondent no.1 herein, is show as “Abdullahkhan Late” on the household card bearing No.PAP167559200999 of F.P. shop no.592, which was produced by the de facto complainant in proof of her identity for recording the compromise, but he is present in the Court and by appearance he looks younger than his wife. Hence, special care has to be taken for identifying the parties. However, an amount of Rs.60,00/- (Rupees sixty thousand only) was given by the petitioners to respondent No1. in the open Court towards full and final settlement of the matter.” 5. Accordingly, the parties have appeared before the A.P. High Court Legal Services Committee. As per the report dated 30-11-2009 of the Secretary, A.P. High Court Legal Services Committee, the identity of the parties has been established. 6. Today, again the de facto complainant is present before this Court and she reported that the matter was settled out of Court and in pursuance of the settlement, petitioners paid an amount of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only) as recorded by this Court on 04-11-2009 towards full and final settlement of the dispute to her. As such, the impugned proceedings against the petitioners may be quashed. 7. As the parties have amicably settled the matter out of Court and in view of the nature of the offence, which pertains to matrimonial one, the impugned proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No. 690 of 2007 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, are quashed. _____________________ December 17, 2009 P. SWAROOP REDDY, J KTL