o APHC010031002023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI j 13^ MONDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI l■A.Nos.2.3■4■5.6 & 7 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 520 OF 2023 Between: 1. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 2. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary,, s/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Petitioners / A1 & A2. AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Respondents »2_ Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in . the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court to stay all further proceedings in C.C. 127/2021 pending on the file of the court of the 1st Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri including dispensing with the personal appearance of the petitioners before the court in the interests of justice. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dt. 30--01-2023 passed in I.A.No. 1 of 2023 in CrI.P.No. 520 of 2023 lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Between: 1. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 2. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary,, s/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Petitioners / Accused AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. ...Respondent / Respondent 2. Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Respondent / Complainant Petition under Section 320(6) R/w 482 of Cr.P.C,1973 and Section 359(6) R/w 528 of BNSS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to compromise the case in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Civil (Junior Division)Judge, Mangalagiri. lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Between; Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Petitioner / Complainant AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. ...Respondent / Respondent 2. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 3. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary,, s/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Respondents/ Accused. 4- Petition under Section 320(6) R/w 482 of Cr.P.C,1973 and Section* 359(6) R/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to compromise the case in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Civil (Junior Division)Judge, Mangalagiri. lA NO: 4 OF 2025 Betyyeen: 1. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 2. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary,, s/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Petitioners / Accused AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. ...Respondent / Respondent 2. Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Respondent / Complainant Petition under Section 320(6) R/w 482 of Cr.P.C,1973 and Section 359(6) R/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased ,to record the compromise entered vide Memorandum of Understating dated 08/10/2025 and consequently quash the C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Civil (Junior Division)Judge, Mangalagiri. lA NO: 5 OF 2025 Between: Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Petitioner / Complainant AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. ...Respondent / Respondent 2. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 3. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary,, s/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District Near ...Respondents/ Accused. Petition under Section 320(6) R/w 482 of Cr.P.C,1973 and Section 359(2) R/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise entered vide Memorandum of Understating dated 08/10/2025 and consequently quash the C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Civil (Junior Division)Judge, Mangalagiri. I.A NO: 6 OF 2025 Between: Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Petitioner / Complainant AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. ...Respondent / Respondent 2. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 3. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary, S/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Respondents/ Accused Petition under Section 320(8) R/w 482 of Cr.P.C,1973 and Section 359(8) R/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to compound the offenses registered against the Respondents/Accu sed under Sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 R/w 34 Of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 vide FIR No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District and quash the C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Civil (Junior Division)Judge, Mangalagiri. lA NO: 7 OF 2025 Between: 1. Maganti Adarsh, S/o. Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 Years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 2. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdhary,, s/o.late Mallikarjuna Rao, age 66 years, r/o.Plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Petitioners / Accused AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of A.P., Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. ...Respondent / Respondent 2. Kondrupati Mohana Rao, s/o.Krishnaiah, Age 69 years, Occ Retd. SBH Manager, r/o. Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. Petition under Section 320(8) R/w 482 of Cr.P.C,1973 and Section 359(8) R/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to compound the offences registered against the Petitioners Accused under Sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 R/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 vide FIR No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District and quash the C.C.No. 127 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Civil (Junior Division)Judge, Mangalagiri. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI. M R K CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent No 2 : SRI. SATYANARAYANA DHARA Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: APHC010031002023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Monday, the Thirteenth Day of October, Two Thousand Twenty Five Present The Honourable Ms.Justice B.S.Bhanumathi [3311] l■A.Nos■2. 3. 4. 5. 6 & 7 of 2025 In/and Crl.P.No.520 of 2023 Between: 1. Maganti Adarsh, son of Subrahmanyam Chowdary, age 40 years, resident of plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 2. Maganti Subrahmanyam Chowdary, son of late Mallikarjuna Rao, aged 66 years, resident of plot No.5, D.No.59-8-7/5-6, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. ...Petitioners / A1 & A2 and 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Nelapadu, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. Kondrupati Mohana Rao, son of Krishnaiah, aged 69 years, occupation retired S.B.H.Manager, resident of plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, Telephone Exchange road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ...Respondents 2 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520of2023 Counsel for the petitioners / accused: 1 .M.R.K.Chakravarthy Counsel for the respondents: I.Satyanarayana Dhara 2. Public Prosecutor (AP) The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Criminal Petition No.520 of 2023 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (‘the Cr.P.C.’) is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.127 of 2021 against the petitioners/AI and A2 in Crime No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Rural police station, Guntur District. 2. I.A.No.2 of 2025 is filed under sections 320 (6) r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) r/w 359 (6) r/w 528 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) to permit the petitioners /accused Nos.1 and 2 in the criminal petition to compromise the case in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. 3. I.A.No.3 of 2025 is filed under sections 320(6) r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), 359 (6) r/w 528 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) to permit petitioner / complainant to compromise the case in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. 3 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520of2023 I.A.No.4 of 2025 is filed under sections 320(2) r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), 359 (2) r/w 528 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) to record compromise entered by petitioners / A1 and A2 with respondents vide memorandum of understandi..g dated 08.10.2025 and consequently quash C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. 4. 5. I.A.No.5 of 2025 is filed under sections 320(2) r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), 359 (2) r/w 528 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) to record compromise entered by petitioner / complainant with respondents / accused vide memorandum of understanding dated 08.10.2025 and consequently quash C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. 6. I.A.No.6 of 2025 is filed by petitioner / complainant under sections 320(8) r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), 359 (8) r/w 528 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) to compound offences registered against the respondents / accused under sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 r/w 34 of I.P.C vide F.I.R.No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District and quash C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. I.A.No.7 of 2025 is filed by petitioners / Accused Nos.1 & 2 under sections 320(8) r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), 359 (8) r/w 528 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) to compound offences registered against the petitioners / accused Nos.1 and 2 under sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 r/w 7. 4 BSB,J Crl.P.No,520of 2023 34 of I.P.C vide F.I.R.No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District and quash C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of I- Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. 8. The case of the prosecution, briefly stated, is that the complainant, Kondrupati Mohana Rao retired as Bank Manager in 2009, got 3 daughters, out of which his 2'^'^ daughter / Nalajala Renuka got married to Nalajala Srinivasa Rao and acquired one vacant site to an extent of 82 cents in Survey No.399/1 from Maganti Anjani who is no other than wife of A2 and mother of A1 and got registered document dated 10.07.2003 in her favour vide Doc.No.3973 of 2003, S.R.O.,Mangalagiri. Later, with the permission of VUDA, Vijayawada, Nalajala Renuka got constructed a compound wall around her site. On 06.07.2016, the complainant, on behalf of his daughter, went to the vacant site and noticed that the compound wall on both western & northern sides of the site was demolished and works were being carried on by the developers of Manjeera Monarch Constructions to construct residential apartments. On enquiry, he came to know that A1 and A2, who are father and son, are entering into development agreement with the Chairman & Managing Director of Manjeera Constructions and started construction of multi-storeyed residential and commercial apartment complex building in 82 cents land of Nalajala Renuka. Later, it was identified that A1 and A2, having occupying the site of 17 cents, started construction. When the complainant questioned the accused about the illegal constructions, the accused offered 8 residential plots proportionate to their occupied land and also prepared memorandums of understanding dated 17.11.2016 and 02.02.2017 to hand over the plots to Nalajala Renuka. But, all the accused failed to fulfill the terms & conditions of the M.O.Us. and hand over 8 residential plots. The 5 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520of 2023 complainant, being the father and G.P.A. of Nalajala Renuka, asked them to fulfil the terms and conditions of M.O.Us., but the accused threatened him with dire consequences and warned to kill him, if he asks again and cheated complainant and her daughter Nalajala Renuka. The complainant filed O.S.No.164 of 2018 before IV-Additional District Judge Court, Guntur. Later, in I.A.No.343 of 2018 in O.S.No.164 of 2018, an advocate commissioner was appointed to measure the plaint schedule property with the help of the Mandal Surveyor, Mangalagiri. While it was so, on 6.5.2019, when complainant along with his relatives visited the site, A1 picked up quarrel with the complainant and assaulted him with hands and legs and threatened the complainant with dire consequences i.e., death. As a result, the complainant sustained injuries. On the basis of his complaint, a case in crime No.207 of 2019 was registered under sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 r/w 34 IPC of Mangalagiri Rural police station. A1 to A3 obtained anticipatory bail. The charge sheet was numbered as C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. Aggrieved by the same, the present criminal petition has been filed. Pending the proceedings in the main petition before this Court, I.A.Nos.2,3,4,5,6 and 7 of 2025 were filed under sections 320(6) and 320(2) Cr.P.C. and 482 Cr.P.C. by the complainant stating that both the parties have settled the dispute amicably out of the Court at the intervention of their elders and well wishers. In view of the settlement arrived between both the parties, they sought permission to compound the offence and to record the compromise and consequently to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. 9. 6 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520of2023 On 10.10.2025, when the matter came up for consideration, the petitioners / accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the 2""' respondent / complainant were present before this Court and reported that the matter had been settled out of Court and there was no objection to quash the criminal case in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Judicial Magistrate of l-Class, Mangalagiri. The Station House Officer was directed to identify the parties. 10. On 13.10.2025, both the parties have been duly identified by their respective counsels and Sk.Subhani, A.S.I.No.2910 of Mangalagiri Rural P.S who is the S.H.O. identified the parties. They produced copies of original aadhar cards for their identity proof and photostat copies of which are filed along with the petitions. Both the parties stated that they have voluntarily entered into compromise and the matter was settled and the defacto complainant has no objection to dismiss the against the accused. 11. case 12. The terms of compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a memorandum of compromise, which is signed by the parties and their counsels. The accused were mentioned as ‘parties of first part’ and complainant mentioned as ‘party of second part’ and the contents of the memorandum of compromise read as follows and: “a) That the alleged offences under Sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 R/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereby compounded owing to the out of Court Settlement entered by the parties hereto, the party of Second Part (complainant) unconditionally agreed to withdraw all the allegations against parties of first part (accused) including that are 7 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520 of 2023 they have committed the offences of trespass, mischief, criminal intimidation, breach of trust and cheating. b) That Party of Second Part hereby declares that he is not interested in prosecuting the Calendar Case No. 127 of 2021 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri any further owing to the amicable settlement. The Party of Second Part hereby unconditionally withdraws all the allegations including that of trespass, mischief, criminal intimidation, breach of trust and cheating and the Complaint vide vide FIR No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District against the Parties of First Part. c) The Party of Second Part hereby declare and agree that he shall appear before the Court or the Flon'ble Fligh Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati as and when necessary for recording the compromise entered between the parties hereto and recorded under this Memorandum of Understanding. d) The Parties of First Part and Party of Second Part hereby declare that there is no collusion in entering into this Memorandum of Understanding and that the same is entered with their free will and volition. In witness whereof parties of first part and party of second part have put their signatures on this the 08.10.2025 at Vijayawada”. In view of the above, it is prayed to record the compromise and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri, Guntur District, in the interest of justice. 8 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520 of 2023 13. The Supreme Court in Daxaben Vs. The State of Gujarat & others^ had an occasion to deal with various decisions in Monica Kumar (Dr.) Vs. State of UP^, Mrs. Dhanalakshmi Vs.R. Prasanna Kumar^, Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Ram Kishan Rohtagi and others'^, State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Gourishetty Mahesh^, Paramjeet Batra Vs. State of Uttarakhand®, Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Smbhajirao Chandrojirao Angre^ Goswami Vs. State of Uttaranchal®, State of PanJab Vs. Gurdial Singh®, Kapil Agarwal & Others Vs. Sanjay Sharma & Others^®, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab^\ PanJab Finally, it was held in paragraph No.46 of the said decision as follows: Inder Mohan Narinder Singh Vs. State of State of Maharashtra Vs. Vikram Anantrai Doshi^®. 12 “46. In Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbathbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Others v. State of Gujrat and Another^'*, a three- Judge Bench of this Court quoted Narinder Singh (supra), Vikram Anantrai Doshi (supra), CBI V. Maninder Singh (supra), R.Vasanthi Stanley (supra) and held;- ‘ 2022 Live Law (SC) 642 ' (2008) 8 see 781 ^ AIR 1990 SC 494: 1990 Supp SCC 686 '(1983) 1 sec 1 '(2010) 11 SCC 226 "(2013) 11 SCC 673 ’(1988) 1 SCC 692 *(2007)12 SCC 1 "(1980) 2 SCC 471 (2021) 5 SCC 524 2012 (9) Scale 257 (2014) 9 SCC 466 (2014) 15 SC 29 (2017) 9 SCC 641 10 12 9 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520 of 2023 “16. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents on the subject, may be summarised in the following propositions: 16.1. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court. 16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a first information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable. 16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482. the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power. 16.4. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court. 16.5. The decision as to whether a complaint or first information report should be quashed on the ground that the 10 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520 of 2023 offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated. 16.6. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences. a serious 16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned. or on a 16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fail for quashing where parties have settled the dispute. 16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the 11 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520 of 2023 continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice: and 16.10. There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions 16.8. and 16.9. above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the State have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance.” 14. Perused the record. When this Court has questioned the de facto complainant with regard to compromise, he has categorically stated that he has no objection to quash the case against the accused and voluntarily entered into compromise with the petitioners /accused Nos.1 and 2. It is not a serious and heinous crime to refuse permission to compound the offence. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid decision of the apex Court and as the chances of conviction are bleak and remote due to the compromise, continuation of the impugned proceedings nothing but abuse of process of Court. The memorandum of understanding dated 08.10.2025 filed by the parties shall form part of this order. IS 15. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to quash the proceedings by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. So, there is no need to pass any order under Section 320 Cr.P.C. and accordingly, I.A.Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of 2023 are allowed. 12 BSB,J Crl.P.No.520of 2023 16. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the case against accused in C.C.No.127 of 2021 on the file of l-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri police station, Guntur District, is hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P VINOD KUMAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The I Additional Civil (Junior Division) Judge, Mangalagiri. 2. The Station House Officer, Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District 3. One CC to Sri. M R K Chakravarthy Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri. Satyanarayana Dhara Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OU i ] 6. Two CD Copies PR vna (enclosing the joint memo) \ HIGH COURT DATED:13/10/2025 COMMON ORDER I.A.Nos.2,3,4,5,6 & 7 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO; 520 OF 2023 ALLOWING THE CRLP AND 2,3,4,5,6 & 7 of 2025 r n MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE FILED ON BEHALF OF PARTIES HEREIN THIS MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE is executed on this the 08'^ day of October, 2025, by and between 1. Maganti Adarsh, S/o M.Subrahmanyam Chowdary, Aged about 44 years, Occ: Business, R/o.Flat No.5, D.No.59-8-7/56, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada. 2. Maganti Subrahmanyan Chowdhary, S/o late M.Maganti Mallikarjuna Rao, Aged about 70 years, Occ: Doctor, R/o.Flat No.5, D.No.59-8- 7/56, Vasudha Apartments, Near Bhashyam Public School, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada. (Hereinafter shall be referred to as Parties of First Part) AND Kondrupati Mohana Rao, S/o K.Krishnaiah, Aged about 69 years, Occ:Retd SBH Manager, R/o.Plot No.409, Sai Rajani Block, Brindavanam Apartments, . Telephone Exchange Road, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. (Hereinafter shall be referred to as Party of Second Part) WHEREAS ;- (1) Party of Second Part alleging that a part of the vacant site to an extent of Ac.0-17 Cents (out of total extent of Ac.0-82 Cents) situated in RS.No.399/1 of Atmakuru Village, Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District acquired under Sale Deed No.3973 of 2003 dated 10/07/2003 on the file of Sub- Registrar, Mangalagiri in the name of his younger daughter viz., N.Renuka, resident of the USA was encroached upon by the Accused Nos.1 & 2 (Developers) under the guise of Development Agreement with the Petitioners. f])(JicrudaH Parties of FirstPart Party of Second Part I :: 2 ;; * (2)That, the Accused including Parties of First Part offered eight (08) residential apartments in proportion to the aforesaid land occupied and entered Memorandum of Understanding dated 17.11.2016 and 02.02.2017 and thereafter, did not come forward to perform their part of the contract and accordingly, the Party of Second Part lodged Complaint under Sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 R/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 vide FIR No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District. (3)The Police filed Final Report and the offences under Sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 R/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 were taken cognizance in CC No.127 of 2021 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri. (4)The Petitioners/Accused (Parties to First Part) filed Criminal Petition No.520 of 2023 to quash the CC No.127 of 2021 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri on various grounds among others. Pending the Criminal Petition, by Order dated 13.01.2023 the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the Petitioners pending further orders. The said order was extended from time to time viz., on 17.10.2023 (lA No.3 of 2023), 16.11.2023, 19.12.2023, 13.02.2024, 12.03. 2024, 10.05.2024 and 05.12.2024. The interim order as of today was lastly extended till further orders. (5) Pending the Criminal Petition the parties hereto have entered into an out of court settlement under which Party of Second Part agreed to withdraw the complaint against the Parties of First Part and decided to settle the matter amicably and peaceably; Party of Second Part Parti^^s Part :: 3 NOW THiS MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE IS EXECUTED ON THE FOLLOWING TERMS & CONDITIONS a) That the alleged offences under Sections 447, 427, 420, 506, 323, 341 R/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 gre hereby compounded owing to the out of Court Settlement entered by the parties hereto, the Party of Second Part unconditionally agreed to withdraw all the allegations against Parties of First Part including that they have committed the offences of trespass, mischief, criminal intimidation, breach of trust and cheating. b) That Party of Second Part hereby declares that he is not interested in prosecuting the Calendar Case No. 127 of 2021 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri any further owing to the amicable settlement. The Party of Second Part hereby unconditionally withdraws all the allegations including that of trespass, mischief, criminal intimidation, breach of trust and cheating and the Complaint vide vide FIR No.207 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District against the Parties of First Part. c) The Party of Second Part hereby declare and agree that he shall appear before the Court or the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati as and when necessary for recording the compromise entered between the parties hereto and recorded under this Memorandum of Understanding. d) The Parties of First Part and Party of Second Part hereby declare that there is no collusion in entering into this Memorandum of ’ Understanding and that the same is entered with their free will and volition. Parties of First Part Party of Second Part / \ \ :: 4 :: In witness whereof Parties of First Part and Party of Second Part have put their signatures on this the 08/10/2025 at Vijayawada. Parties of First Part Party of Second Part 4 Counsel for the Parties of First Part Counsel for the Party of Second Part WITNESS: 1. 2. /v£D0L'v,T^Yfle,«v,A/DMBAi,u3