IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO : 1773 of 2006 (Criminal Revision case under Section:_______ against the Judgement in CRL.A NO : 66 dated 07/09/2006 on the file of the Court of the to set-aside the Judgment of the Sessions Judge, Warangal, passed in Crl.A.No. 66 of 2005, dt. 7-9-2006 against the Petitiioners / A-1, confirming the Judgment of the J.F.C.M., Jangaon passed in CC.No. 446 of 2002, dt. 27-06-2005. ,preferred against the order in CC 446 2002 dated 27/06/2005 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon) Between: Thadem Mark @ Chitti, S/o Anjaiah, R/o H.No. 8-3-228/1280/354, Jawahar Nagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., at Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VISHNUVARDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following : PSR, J. Crl.R.C.No. 1773 of 2006 Judgment On 2-4-2009, the following order was passed by this Court: “The de facto complainant present along with the accused and states that they are living together. She filed household card bearing No. WAP210101400058 showing her name and photograph in proof of her identity. Though the de facto complainant states that the matter is settled between them and they are living together, it appears that she is somewhat reluctant. Considering these circumstances, it is directed that the matter shall be recalled after six months. It is reported that the de facto complainant and the accused are living together. Post after six months” 2. Today, the de facto complainant is present and submits that she has taken divorce from the present petitioner; that she was paid an amount of Rs.50,000-00 (Rs. fifty thousand only) by the petitioner; she has compromised the offences and therefore the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner may be set aside. 2. In such view of the matter the revision case allowed. The conviction imposed on the petitioner by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon in C.C.No. 446 of 2002, as confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Warangal in Crl.A.No. 66 of 2005 are hereby set aside and the petitioner is acquitted under section 320 (8) Cr.P.C. _______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. March 29, 2010. *BVS