APHC010722692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No: 60/2026 Between: KOILAPU SURESH, S/O. CHITTAYYA, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O. N.K. RAJAPURAM VILLAGE,PALAKONDA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI,THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER,SEETHAMPETA POLICE STATION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. MACHARLA REVATHI, S/O. SRINIVASARAO,AGED 27 YEARS, R/O. VEERAGHATTAM VILLAGEAND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. MAHESH ADAVIVARAPU 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the 2 Petitioner / Accused, seeking to quash the proceedings against him in S.C.No.36 of 2023 on the file of the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam for the offences under Sections 376, 417 and 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 2. I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 are filed by Respondent No.2 seeking permission to compound the offences and to record the compromise between her and the Petitioner / Accused. 3. Petitioner / Accused and Respondent No.2 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. It is represented that the Petitioner / Accused is working in Indian Army at Rajasthan. 4. Both parties would submit that they came to an amicable settlement for withdrawal of the case in S.C.No.36 of 2023 on the file of the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam pending between them and a Joint Memo is also filed to that effect. Respondent No.2 would submit that, at the intervention of elders and well-wishers on both sides, the matter has been settled between the parties and she is not interested to prosecute the matter and hence, the case may be closed. 3 5. Considering the submissions, in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another1, in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, since there is an amicable settlement between them, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 are allowed. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the Petitioner / Accused in S.C.No.36 of 2023 on the file of the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, are hereby quashed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:05.01.2026 Dinesh 1 2012(10)SCC 303 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No. 60/2026 Dt.05.01.2026 Dinesh