Sajja Srinivasa Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.

Petitioner as well as respondent No.2 filed two petitions in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2026 seeking permission to compound the offences under Sections 353 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.

As per the version of petitioner as well as respondent No.2, they settled the disputes out of court as they have been working together in police department at Vijayawada and they have also filed joint compromise memo which shows that to maintain cordial relationship, they both settled the matter.

Heard the leaned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No.2 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

Petitioner as well as respondent No.2 are present. Heard them personally. Compared their names and details.

Recorded the submissions of both the petitioner as well as respondent No.2. Joint compromise memo shall form part of the record. It is needless to say that in view of the amicable settlement arrived at by both the parties, this court can give permission to both the parties to compound the matter as per the judgment of Apex Court in Jagdish Channa & others Vs. State of Haryana & another^{11.AIR 2008 SC 1968}, Shiji Vs. Radhika & Another^{22.(2011) 10 SCC 705}, Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab^{33.(2014) 6 SCC 466} and Anita Maria Dias and Another vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr^{44.(2018) 3 SCC 290}, even in non- compoundable cases, on the basis of compromise, criminal proceedings can be quashed to save the valuable time of the Court. Accordingly, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 are allowed.

In the result, and in view of the settlement between both the parties, this Criminal Petition No.4770 of 2022 is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.560 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada against the petitioner/accused of the offences under Sections 353 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

As a sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.