IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 7049 of 2008 Between: Smt.B.Sandhya, W/o Rajendra Prasad, R/o H.No.1-8-701, Nallkunta, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P., Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 2 Garine Srinivasa Rao, S/o Late Janaki Ramaiah, R/o Flat No.1, Konanki Towers, Behind Bus Depot, Dwarakapuri, N/o Pondugala, Dachepalli Mandal, Guntur Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Section ____ of Crl.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased toto permit the petitioner herein to withdraw the complaint in C.C.No.860 of 2007 on the file of the II Metropolitan Magistrate, L.B.Nagar, Cyberabad (Cr.No.728 of 2005 of Saroornagar P.S., Cyberabad Commissionerate) and acquit the 2nd respondent from the offences U/s. 420 & 406 I.P.C. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.JAYA REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER PSR, J. Crl.P.No. 7049 of 2008 O r d e r: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri T. L. Nayan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The de facto complainant and the second respondent/accused are present. In proof of her identity, the de facto complainant produced a Photostat copy of her Driving License bearing No.10855/HW/199400D dated: 21—7—2008. She reports that the matter is settled out of the court and the case pending against the second respondent/accused may be quashed. The offences alleged against the second respondent/ accused are that they did not provide sufficient facilities as advertised by them and tried to close the school in the middle of the academic year. 3. In the circumstances of the case, where the allegations are not of serious nature and in view of the fact that the de facto complainant and the accused have compromised the matter out side the court, the petition is allowed and the proceedings pending against the second respondent/accused are hereby quashed. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. February 17, 2010. *BVS