APHC010439482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.Nos. CRIMINAL Between: 1. BALASADI KRISHNA VARMA, s/o Bhyravaswamy A/21 years, R/o Pedavalasala, H/o Gadimoga Village, Tallarevu mandal, Kakinada dist. 1. BALASADI VEEERA BRAHMAM, S/o Kamaraju, A/48 years,R/o Pedavalasala, H/o Gadimoga Village, Tallarevu mandal, Kakinada dist. 2. The State, , SHO, Coringa PS,Tallarevu mandal Rep. through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, A.P. Amaravathi, Guntur District Counsel for the Petitioner: ANGADA Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondents:JITHENDRA P The Court made the following COMMON ORDER: The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed, by the Petit 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9621 OF 2025 1. BALASADI KRISHNA VARMA, s/o Bhyravaswamy A/21 years, R/o Pedavalasala, H/o Gadimoga Village, Tallarevu mandal, Kakinada dist. ...Petitioner AND 1. BALASADI VEEERA BRAHMAM, S/o Kamaraju, A/48 years,R/o /o Gadimoga Village, Tallarevu mandal, Kakinada dist. 2. The State, , SHO, Coringa PS,Tallarevu mandal Rep. through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, A.P. Amaravathi, Guntur District ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: ANGADA SATYA RAGHAVENDRA Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondents:JITHENDRA P The Court made the following The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed, by the Petitioner/ Accused, seeking quashment of the IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 1. BALASADI KRISHNA VARMA, s/o Bhyravaswamy A/21 years, R/o Pedavalasala, H/o Gadimoga Village, Tallarevu mandal, Kakinada dist. ...Petitioner 1. BALASADI VEEERA BRAHMAM, S/o Kamaraju, A/48 years,R/o /o Gadimoga Village, Tallarevu mandal, Kakinada dist. 2. The State, , SHO, Coringa PS,Tallarevu mandal Rep. through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, A.P. Amaravathi, Guntur District ...Respondents Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha ioner/ Accused, seeking quashment of the 2 calendar and judgments in C.C No. 180 OF 2016 in Cr.No. 72 of 2016 on the file of the Hon’ble Spl. Judicial First class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise Cum VII Additional Junior Civil Judge Kakinada, dated 27.09.2016 registered under section 326 ,324 R/w 34 IPC. 2. I.A.No.3 of 2025 is filed by the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant, seeking to compound the criminal case in FIR No.72 of 2016, by recording compromise. 3. I.A.No.4 of 2025 is filed by the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant and petitioner and respondent No.2, seeking to compromise by compounding the criminal case in FIR.No.72 of 2016 on the file of Judicial First class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise Cum VII Additional Junior Civil Judge Kakinada. 4. Sri A.Satya Raghavendra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Jithendra, learned counsel for respondentNo.2 and Sri Lakshmi Prasanna, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State is in attendance. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after a full-fledged trial, the learned trial Judge imposed fine upon Accused No.1, convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC. Insofar as the petitioner/Accused No.2 is concerned, he was convicted under Section 326 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one (1) month. He was also convicted under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one (1) month. It is further submitted that the petitioner and the de-facto complainant are close 3 relatives. The unfortunate incident arose out of a pending civil dispute between the parties. Considering the future prospects of the petitioner and the relationship between the parties, the de-facto complainant is not inclined to prosecute further and has expressed his no-objection for quashing the conviction recorded against the petitioner. 6. Both the petitioner/Accused No.2 and the de-facto complainant have appeared before this Court and were identified by their respective learned counsel. Copies of their Aadhar cards attested by their respective counsel are filed for proper identification. 7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that since the case in C.C. No.180 of 2016 ended in conviction after trial, and the parties have now approached this Court seeking to compound the matter, the Court may consider the request by imposing appropriate costs on both parties. It is also pointed out that a criminal appeal, i.e., Crl.A. No.346 of 2019, filed against the judgment of the trial Court, is presently pending before the Court of the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada. 8. The petitioner and the de-facto complainant expressed their willingness to pay costs since they have come before this court after full-fledged trial and on conviction for the offence under Section 324 and 326 IPC against the petitioner. The record further shows that Crl.A.No.346/2019 is pending on the file of VII Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada which is filed impugned in the judgment of the trial court. 4 9. Considering the submissions, this Court finds that the petitioner and the de-facto complainant are close relatives and the civil dispute is also pending between the parties and the de-facto complainant has no objection to quash the proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, has held that even non-compoundable offences can be quashed by the High Court under its inherent powers where the dispute is private, and it does not affect the society at large, and where quashing would secure the ends of justice. 10. Admittedly, the present crime has been registered in the year 2016 and was numbered as C.C.No.180 of 2016. After full-fledged trial the case was ended in conviction on 27.09.2019. thereafter, Crl.Appeal No.346 of 2019 has been preferred by Accused No.2 on the file of the Court of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada and the same is pending. Whereas, the present Criminal Petition and also compromise petitions have been filed by Accused No.2 seeking permission to compound the offences, to permit them to compromise the matter and thereby to quash the judgment in C.C.No.180 of 2016. The parties have conducted the case for a period of nine years by consuming the precious time of the Court and now have come forward to settle the dispute by compromising the matter, that too at the stage of appeal. 5 11. Having regard to the compromise, and to secure peace and harmony between the parties, this Court finds it a fit case to set aside the conviction recorded against the petitioner. However, in order to balance equities, this Court deems it appropriate to impose costs of Rs.10,000/- each on the petitioner and the de-facto complainant, to be paid in the account of Advocate Bar Association, High Court of Andhra Pradesh within one week from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 12. Accordingly, I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 and Criminal Petition No.9621 of 2025 are allowed. The calendar and judgment dated 27.09.2019 in C.C. No.180 of 2016 in Crime No.72 of 2016 on the file of the Hon’ble Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise-cum-VII Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, convicting the petitioner/Accused No.2 under Sections 326 and 324 r/w Section 34 IPC, are hereby set aside, subject to payment of the costs as directed. There shall be no further order as to costs. As a sequel, thereto, miscellaneous pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 16.09.2025 KKV 6 THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.9621 OF 2025 Dated: 16.09.2025 KKV