APHC010076922010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1512/2010 I.A.No.1of 2025 in/and Crl.R.C.No.1512 of 2010 Between: Shaik Khader, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T D PANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The petitioner and the de-facto complainant are present. 2. Mr. A. Sree Ram, learned counsel representing Sri T.D.Phani Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the matter is settled between the parties and he has filed an application in I.A.No.1 of 2025 seeking to compound the case. I.A.No.1 of 2025 is filed seeking to compound 2 the offence. It is mentioned in the accompanying application and also the affidavit filed by the de-facto complainant/P.W-1 along with joint memo filed by the petitioner and the de-facto complainant stating the petitioner and the de- facto complainant have been living together happily and peacefully; the petitioner and the de-facto complainant submitted that they are blessed with two children, who are aged about more than 25 years; the petitioner and the de-facto complainant are working as Government Teachers. 3. I.A.No.1 of 2025 is allowed, inasmuch as the offence under Section 498-A of ‘the IPC.,’ can be compounded as per the amendment w.e.f., 01.08.2003 vide Act No.11 of 2003, under Section 2. The application was filed on 02.04.2025 as per Section 320 (2) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ as the offence can be compounded by the de-facto complainant, provided that ‘the Act’ allows a minimum period of three (03) months for the lapse from the date of request or application for compromise before the Court and the Court can accept the request for compounding the offence under Section 498-A of ‘the IPC.,’ provided further that none of the parties withdrew the case in intervening period. The petitioner and the de-facto complainant have been living together for more than 6 years. 4. In view of settlement of the matrimonial disputes in between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant, the Criminal Revision Case can be disposed of as compromised. 3 5. In the result, the de-facto complainant/P.W-1 is permitted to compound the offence under Section 320 (6) of ‘the Cr.P.C’. The Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as compromised, acquitting the petitioner under Section 320 (8) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ by setting aside the judgment in S.C.60 of 2010 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Darsi, dated 31.05.2010. Consequently, the judgment in Crl.A.No.98 of 2010, dated 24.08.2010 on the file of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Markapur, is also set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 09.04.2025 RSI 4 119 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO I.A.No.1 of 2025 In/And CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1512 of 2010 Date: 09.04.2025 RSI