IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINTH (9TH) DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.11148 of 2010 Between: N. Subhash & 4 others … Petitioners And: State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.11148 of 2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash further proceedings against the petitioners-A.1 to A.5 in CC No.116 of 2010 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. All the petitioners-A.1 to A.5 and the 2nd respondent- complainant are present. Sri P. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners-A.1 to A.5 and Sri V. Raja Manohar, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent-complainant, are present. Both parties have stated that the disputes have been settled out side the Court and the first petitioner and 2nd respondent-complainant have also obtained divorce by mutual consent by order dated 23.02.2010 in F.C.O.P.No.199 of 2009 on the file of the I Additional Chief Judge, Secunderabad. Both parties have stated that the memorandum of understanding was also entered into with the terms and conditions stipulated therein and in pursuance thereof, an amount of Rs.15,000/- was also received by the 2nd respondent-complainant towards permanent alimony. The 2nd respondent-complainant further stated that she is no more interested in prosecuting the case in view of the compromise entered between them. 3. Having regard to the fact that the disputes have been settled out side the Court and both parties have entered into memorandum of understanding and the marriage between the first petitioner-A.1 and 2nd respondent-complainant has been dissolved by grant of decree with mutual consent and the 2nd respondent-complainant is no more interested in prosecuting criminal proceedings against the petitioners- A.1 to A.5, it is considered that no useful purpose would be served by continuing further proceedings in CC No.116 of 2010 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, against the petitioners-A.1 to A.5. It is therefore considered a fit case to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash further proceedings against the petitioners-A.1 to A.5 in CC No.116 of 2010 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 4. In the circumstances, further proceedings in CC No.116 of 2010 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, against the petitioners-A.1 to A.5 are held liable to be quashed and are accordingly quashed. 5. In the result, the criminal petition is disposed of as stated above. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 09.11.2010 BSS