HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.5668 of 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused to quash the proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.192 of 2010 on the file of W.P.S., Central Crime Station, Hyderabad. 2. The 2nd respondent herein filed a complaint before the W.P.S., Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, on 06.04.2010, against her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in- law and sister-in-law, petitioners 1 to 5 herein respectively, alleging the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered Crime No.192 of 2010. 3. When investigation is in progress, it appears that both parties compromised the matter and the 1st petitioner-A.1 and the 2nd respondent-defacto complainant entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on 26.04.2010, on the following terms and conditions: a) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant insisted for “Qula Divorce” and the 1st petitioner-A.1 has accepted the same on 26.04.2010. b) The 1st petitioner-A.1 undertakes to return back the Jahez articles on or before 27.04.2010 as per the list to the 2nd respondent-defacto complainant for which the 2nd respondent shall issue a receipt in favour of the 1st petitioner-A.1 after receiving the articles. c) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant acknowledges that all her claims have been fully and finally settled and that she shall not make any claims against the 1st petitioner-A.1 in future. d) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant confirms that there are no further articles of any matter, including gold jewellery, clothes, documents and other household articles with 1st petitioner-A.1 or any of his family members and that there is no further claims whatsoever nature against each other. e) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant undertakes to hold the permanent custody of minor children namely 1) Safa Siddiqua, aged about 9 years, 2) Abu Bakar Siddiqui, aged about 6 years and the same has been accepted by the 1st petitioner-A.1. f) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner- A.1 further declare that neither they nor anybody on their behalf will not initiate any criminal or civil proceedings of whatsoever nature against each other including maintenance of minor children by the 2nd respondent and custody and visiting rights of minor children by the 1st petitioner. g) The 1st petitioner-A.1 and the 2nd respondent-defacto complainant have agreed that they will not interfere with the personal life of each other in any manner and they are at liberty to live as per their interest and choice including choosing another life partner. h) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant undertakes to withdraw the complaint which is pending before W.P.S., C.C.S., Hyderabad, after completion of the conditions complied. i) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner- A.1 have agreed that all their claims and rights have been settled, as such, after signing of the M.O.U. no party have any right or claim against the other party. j) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant is not pregnant and the same is acknowledged by the 1st petitioner-A.1. k) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner- A.1 agreed that the Memorandum of Understanding shall be made on two original sets and each party shall retain one set after signing the M.O.U. l) The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner- A.1 declare that they have signed the M.O.U. after understanding the contents, in free state of mind without any threat or coercion from any side. 4. When the matter is taken up for hearing, both the parties are present, and when enquired the 2nd respondent-defacto complainant, submitted that herself and the petitioners have compromised the matter and entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on 26.04.2010, and hence, she is no more interested in prosecuting the case. She also submitted that on her own volition, she agreed for the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. 5. In the light of the submission made by the 2nd respondent and also having gone through the Memorandum of Understanding dated 26.04.2010, this Court is of the view that the proceedings impugned in this Criminal Petition may be quashed by exercising the inherent powers conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and Crime No.192 of 2010 on the file of W.P.S., Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, is hereby quashed. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 28th June, 2010 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.5668 of 2010 (Allowed) Date:28-06-2010 CBS