HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION. NOs.3372, 10002, 10003, 10004 and 10025 of 2010 and Crl.P.Sr.No.33271 of 2010 DATE: 05.10.2010 Crl. P. NO.3372 of 2010 BETWEEN: Chandra Sekhar Akinepally .. Petitioner And The State of A.P. and another ` .. Respondents Crl. P. NO.10004 of 2010 BETWEEN: Chandra Sekhar Akinepally and others .. Petitioners And The State of A.P. and another ` .. Respondents Crl. P. NO.10003 of 2010 BETWEEN: Chandra Sekhar Akinepally and others .. Petitioners And The State of A.P. and another ` .. Respondents Crl. P. NO.10002 of 2010 BETWEEN: Chandra Sekhar Akinepally and others .. Petitioners And The State of A.P. and another ` .. Respondents Crl. P. NO.10025 of 2010 BETWEEN: Kantheti Ramanuja Namberumallu and others .. Petitioners And The State of A.P. and another ` .. Respondents Crl. P. SR.NO.33271 of 2010 BETWEEN: Smt Kantheti Sowjanya and others .. Petitioners And The State of A.P. and another ` .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NOs.3372, 10002, 10003, 10004 and 10025 of 2010 and Crl.P.(SR) No.33271 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: Crl.P.No.3372 of 2010 is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.1065 of 2010 of Uppal Police Station, Cyberabad registered for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 506 and 120 IPC. Crl.P.No.10004 of 2010 is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.92 of 2009 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B.Nagar filed for the offences punishable under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Crl.P.No.10003 of 2010 is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.11 of 2010 of CID (WPC) Police Station, Hyderabad for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 506, 494 and 495 IPC. Crl.P.No.10002 of 2010 is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in D.V.C.No.3 of 2009 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at LB Nagar, for the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act. Crl.P.No.10025 of 2010 is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.309 of 2008 of Karimangar II Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 323, 506, 290 and 34 of IPC. Crl.P.SR.No.33271 of 2010 is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.588 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of II Class, Karimnagar filed for the offences punishable under Sections 290, 323 and 504 of IPC. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. All these criminal petitions arise out of the matrimonial dispute between Smt. Sowjanya and Chandra Sekhar. Subsequent to filing of all these cases, both parties entered into compromise and they have decided to compound the offences, but some of the offences alleged are non compoundable. Crl.P.Nos.3372 and 10003 of 2010 are at the stage of investigation. The de facto complainant and the accused are present and they filed the Xerox copy of memorandum of compromise. Smt. Sowjanya submitted to the Court that she entered into a compromise and she is no longer interested to prosecute the case. Similarly, the complainant in Crl.P.No.10025 of 2010 and Crl.P.(SR) No.33271 of 2010 also stated that they have compromised the matter with Smt. Sowjanya and her family members and therefore, they are no longer interested to prosecute the respective cases. Smt. Sowjanya also admitted that she received an amount of Rs.32 lakhs by way of two demand drafts each Rs.16 lakhs from her husband Chandra Shekar towards permanent alimony and also towards the value of the articles gifted to her at the time of marriage. Smt. Sowjanya filed a petition seeking divorce against Chandra Shekar-husband in O.P.No.748 of 2009 before the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District and obtained ex parte decree. In view of the compromise, Chandra Sekhar Akinapalli undertook not to take any steps seeking to set aside the said decree. Since, all the cases are between the two families of Smt. Sowjanya and Chandra Sekhar Akinapalli and some offences being non-compoundable, it is appropriate to quash all the cases including the cases in which the investigation is pending. Thus, if the cases are kept pending any longer, it would cause undue hardship and inconvenience to the parties. Further, in view of the compromise between the parties, the complainants and witnesses in the respective cases will not support the prosecution version and therefore, there is no possibility for the prosecution to secure a conviction. For the reasons aforementioned and in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, all the proceedings in the aforesaid criminal petitions are hereby quashed. Accordingly, the Criminal Petitions are allowed. ___________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J Date: 05.10.2010 kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION. NOs.3372, 10002, 10003, 10004 and 10025 of 2010 and Crl.P.Sr.No.33271 of 2010 DATE: 05.10.2010