Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24132 (AP)

MS. HANNANEH HAJIAGHABABA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/7516/2024 · 2026-03-31

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010471032024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7516/2024 Between: 1.MS. HANNANEH HAJIAGHABABA, D/O MOHSEN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, C/O LANCERS INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, DLF PHASE-V, SECTOR-53, GURGAON, HARYANA, INDIA-122 001. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. 2.M TRINADH KUMAR, S/O VENKATA NAGENDRA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF BLOOMINGDALE INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT 40-27-16, POLYCLINIC ROAD, MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES COLONY, ACHARYA RANGA NAGAR COLONY, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.D NARENDAR NAIK Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.AISHWARYA NAGULA 2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), seeking to quash the proceedings against the Petitioner in Cr.No.78 of 2024 on the file of Machavaram Police Station, N.T.R. Commissionerate. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for Respondent No.2. 3. The Petitioner as well as Respondent No.2 were personally present before this Court. Pursuant to the appointment of a learned Mediator by this Court, the parties were referred to mediation, which was duly conducted in accordance with law. Upon completion of the mediation proceedings, the Mediator submitted a report stating that the dispute between the parties had been amicably resolved through mediation. 4. It is borne out from the mediation report that the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 have voluntarily entered into a lawful compromise, resolving all issues arising out of the present proceedings. In furtherance of the said settlement, the Petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) to Respondent No.2. 5. On careful perusal of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and taking into account the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties as reflected in the mediation report, this Court is of the considered opinion that no purpose would be served in permitting the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. 3 6. Consequently, the proceedings in Cr.No.78 of 2024 on the file of Machavaram Police Station, N.T.R. Commissionerate, are hereby quashed. Both parties, who are present before this Court, have unequivocally undertaken that they shall not initiate any civil or criminal proceedings against each other in respect of the subject dispute in future. The mediation report shall form an integral part of the record. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 01.04.2026 VTS