IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 6045 of 2009 Between: Ayesha Ansari W/o. Shaik Fareedu Zaman R/o. 9-4-131/1/B/133/1, Tolichowki, Naddem Colony, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Shaik Fareed Uz-Zaman S/o. Shaik Waheed Uz-Zaman Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 2 Kaleemunnisa Begum W/o. Shaik Waheed Uz-Zaman R/o. 8-2-100, Dharu Galli, Mominpura, Nizamabad. 3 Syed Abdul Khadar S/o. Not known to Complainant R/o. 15-132, P & T Colony, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. 4 Azeezunnisa Begum W/o. Syed Abdul Khadar R/o. 15-132, P & T Colony, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. 5 Jaleel Ahmed S/o. Shaik Waheed Uz-Zaman H.No. 8-2-100, Dharu Galli, Mominpura, Nizamabad. 6 Vakeel-uz-Zaman S/o. Shaik Waheed Uz-Zaman H.No. 8-2-100, Dharu Galli, Mominpura, Nizamabad. 7 The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased toto quash the proceedings in CCNo.213 of 2008 including pending warrants, on the file of the XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad against the petitioners 1 to 6. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.VAMSHEEDHAR REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the 7th Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner and the 1st respondent are present in person. Respondents 2 to 6 are not present. Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of the learned Public Prosecutor for the 7th respondent. Heard Sri P. Vamsheedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the 7th respondent. The criminal petition itself states that due to mediation of elders, the matter was settled amicably and that the petitioner and the 1st respondent reunited to lead a happy matrimonial life, to which effect, a memorandum of understanding was also entered into between the petitioner and the 1st respondent on 05-03-2009. A copy of the said memorandum is also filed along with the criminal petition. The petitioner and the 1st respondent stated before the Court that they settled all their differences, compounded all the compoundable offences and they are leading a happy marital life. The disputes are purely personal in nature not involving any public policy and continuance of the calendar case is but a futile exercise. In such cases, the Apex Court has ordered that a pragmatic view has to be taken and inherent jurisdiction has to be invoked to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, the further proceedings in C.C. No.213 of 2008 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are quashed and the criminal petition is allowed accordingly. The petitioner and the 1st respondent are informed. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 06-08-2009 Svv ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.Two CC's to Public Prosecutor 2.Two CD Copies 3.One CC to Form-NIC-0GS/CRLP{MSN}