Smt. Arella Hemalatha

1

CC No. 1653 of 2023

IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM

X ADDL. JUDICAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

CYBERABAD AT : MEDCHAL

Present: SMT A. HEMALATHA

X Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class Cyberabad, at Medchal

Dated this the 28 th day of November, 2025

CC No. 1653 of 2023

Between:-

The State through Sub Inspector of Police

Jawaharnagar PS, ......Complainant

AND

A-1: Anoop Singh @ Babu s/o Late Omprakash, aged 32 yrs, occ: CISF Constable, caste: SC (Meghwal), r/o: room no.04 HQ Company, CISF, NISA Hakimpet, Shameerpet Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri dist., n/o: Rasoolpur (v) Pacheribadi post, Buhana Tahsil, Rajasthan State.

A-2: Prakash Chand Meena s/o Late Harisingh Meena, aged 31 yrs, oсс: CISF Constable, caste:ST (Meena), r/o: room no.06 HQ Company CISP, NISA Hakimpet, Shameerpet Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri dist., n/o: Ameerpur village and post, Bansur Tahsil, Rajasthan State.

This case came up before me for final hearing on 26.11.2025 in the presence of Learned A.P.P for the State and Sri T.Sai Krishna, Advocate

for the Accused and having stood over for consideration till this day this

court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

2

CC No. 1653 of 2023

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Alwal, filed charge sheet against accused in Cr.No.456/2023 for the offence under section 392 of IPC against accused .

2. Brief averments in the charge sheet are as follows:

On on 27.04.2023 at 0300 hrs LW1 Smt. Alakuntla Kavitha presented a report in P S Jawaharnagar stating that she is residing in the given address along with her family She has one daughter. She has been working in Biryani Mall, Lothukunta as housekeeping for 8 years.

She commutes by RTC bus and returns by evening. As usual on 26.04.2023 at 11 am, she boarded on RTC bus and reached her work place at Lothukunta and after completion of work at about 7 pm, she went to Lal Bazar Toddy shop by an auto and consumed toddy At about & pm she boarded on RTC bus to go to Shameerpet. When she was travelling in the bus, one known person by name Babu telephoned her vide phone no 72880-61692 and requested her to get down at Hakimpet as he wanted to discuss about cooking work. As such, she got down bus at about 8.30 pm By that time Babů, was waiting on his two wheeler along with another person . They discussed for some time Thereafter,

Babu promised her to drop at Shameerpet. Babu was riding and behind him the said unknown person and last she was sitting on two wheeler.

3

CC No. 1653 of 2023

At about 9 pm, they stopped the two wheeler at a secluded place situated between BITS PILANI College and RAF and they went to attend natural calls while she was waiting at the two wheeler Babu was speaking to other person in Hindi. Suddenly, they caught her neck and robbed her thali, her hand bag and also smart phone and fled away on the same Two wheeler She can identify them and requested necessary action.

Based on the above contents of report. L. W 8 Inspector of police,

Jawaharnagar, registered a case in Cr.No.456/2023 u/s 392 IPC and took up investigation.

During the court of investigation, he Immediately LW-8 alerted all police stations in Rachakonda and also neighboring districts and also Patrol mobiles, BC mobiles. Teams have been sent to various directions. LW-8 along with staff proceeded to the scene of offence along with the victim and observed the scene and issued crime detail form in the presence of two mediators i.e. L.Ws.3 and 4 and brought the observations on record. LW 8 recorded the statement of LW1. She spoke to contents of FIR and further added that she remembered the names of accused as Anupsingh and Prakash chand Meena. LW 1. VICTIM-

Stated that the actual name of Babu is Anoop Singh and he was working in CISF Hakimpet and that while committing robbery the accused No.1 4

CC No. 1653 of 2023

calling the other person with the name as Prakash Chand Meena.

Further she also stated that A1 is CISF constable. LW 8 also examined

LW2 who is younger sister of the complainant. Since the victim stated that A1 was CISF Constable, L.W.8 with staff proceeded to CISF Campus at NISA and enquiries have been caused on 27.04.2023 and at 1530 hrs

A1. Anoop Singh @ Babu was traced and when questioned. He gave name of Prakash Chand Meena and both confessed the offence. As such, both were taken into custody at 1530 hrs duly informing to their in charge officer. LW8 brought the accused to PS Jawaharnagar at 1615 hrs and questioned them. As they were in mood to confess of offence, secured two mediators ie. L.Ws.5 and 6 and recorded detailed confessional statement of the accused from 1645 hrs onwards. A-1 in his confession stated that he hails from Rajasthan State and that he is working as CISF Constable doing driving work and that he was married and his family and parents are residing at his native place. In the year 2022 he committed robbery in PS Karkhana and he was sent to jail A2 is his friend and he is also from Rajasthan State and both are residing in the room given in the NISA campus. A1 stated that due to financial crisis, he decided to commit robbery Further, he knows LW1/victim herein. He informed the plan to A2 who also agreed to participate.

Accordingly, on 26.04.2023 at 2000 hrs A1 called LW1 over phone to get 5

CC No. 1653 of 2023

down at Hakimpet. Then A1 and A2 reached Hakimpet at 20-30 hrs on his Hero Honda Splendor TN-23-L-1002 and picked up LW1 who got down the bus, took her to BITS College - RAF secluded place wherein A1 and A2 went to natural calls Thereafter, both pounced on LW1 and robbed her hand bag: pusthelathadu with billa; ear tops and her smart phone and left the place on bike. On the way they noticed hand bag containing net cash Rs.3,000/-. They took cash and threw the cash bag.

They tried to sell pusthelathadu in the market but it was informed that

Pusthelathadu is roldgold and only pusthe is gold. Out of the said

Rs.3,000/- they spent Rs.2,000/- and remaining Rs. 1,000/- with him. Out of the booty he gave victim smart phone to A2 Saying so, the accused

No.1 produced following items which are seized from his possession.

Thereafter, confessional statement of A2 also recorded and he too corroborated confession of A2 Saying so, he produced following which are seized. After confessions, recoveries, arrests both the accused were produced before Honourable Court wherefrom they were remanded to judicial custody. During the course of investigation, LW-8 addressed a letter to the Nodal, BSNL, APTS Circle, Telephone bhavan. Lakdikapool,

Hyderabad to furnish call data, CDR of the accused No. 9466558829 and issue certificate u/s; 65(B) of IEA. They have deputed their officer several times to collect the above documents from the Nodal officer, 6

CC No. 1653 of 2023

BSNL, but he informed that it takes some more time as the SIM Card belongs to Haryana state so they have to take the data from Haryana state. The case has been pending for the Call data for long time Hence,

Ihewill submit the Call data and other documents to the Hon'ble court by way of report as and when take them from the Nodal officer, concerned and after completion of entire investigation, police filed charge sheet against the accused NO.1 and 2 under section 392 of IPC.

3.This case was taken on file for the offences under section 392 of

IPC against the accused persons. On appearance of the accused before the court, copies of documents upon which the prosecution proposed to be relied upon was furnished to them as required under Section 207 of

Cr.P.C.

4.Accused were examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C., Charge under

Section 392 of IPC against the accused framed, read over and explained to them in vernacular language to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.In order to prove the guilt of the accused persons, prosecution cited 8 witnesses but could able to examine only 6 witnesses. Ex.P1 to

P8 are marked on behalf of the prosecution. LW6 evidence is closed based on police report. LW-7 evidence was given up by APP .

7

CC No. 1653 of 2023

6.After closure of the prosecution side evidence, accused No.1 and 2 were examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. but they denied the incriminating oral and documentary evidences adduced by the prosecution against them and reported no defense evidence.

7. Heard the arguments of the learned APP for the prosecution and the learned counsel for the accused. Perused the documents available on record.

8.Now the point for determination is: -

“Whether prosecution was able to prove the guilt of Accused for

offence under section 392 of IPC beyond reasonable doubt ?”

POINT:

9.PW.1/A.Kavitha, who is complainant deposed that some unknown person has snatched her gold chain and she cannot identify the accused.

Cross examination was closed.

10.Pw.2/P.Laxmi who is sister of PW1 deposed that she do not know anything about this case and turned hostile. During her cross- examination by the learned APP, nothing material could be elicited from her to connect the accused with this crime.

8

CC No. 1653 of 2023

11.Pw.3/R.Ramesh who is panch witness to scene of offence and CDF deposed that he do not know anything about this case and he did not sign on any papers and no panchanama was conducted in his presence and turned hostile. During his cross-examination by the learned APP, nothing material could be elicited from him to connect the accused with this crime.

12.Pw.4/Sai Kumar who is panch witness to scene of offence and CDF deposed that he do not know anything about this case and he did not sign on any papers and no panchanama was conducted in his presence and turned hostile. During his cross-examination by the learned APP, nothing material could be elicited from him to connect the accused with this crime.

13.PW-5/P.Nagaraju,who is panch witness for confession of accused and seizure deposed that at the instance of police he signed on some blank papers and turned hostile. During his cross-examination by the learned APP, nothing material could be elicited from him to connect the accused with this crime.

14.PW-6/K.Seetharam who is Investigating officer in this case deposed that On 02.10.2023 on receiving a report from Pw1, he registered FIR in Cr. No. 456/2023 for the offence U/s 392 IPC and took 9

CC No. 1653 of 2023

up the case for investigation to him. Thereafter he recorded the statement of Pw1, Pw2 he conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of PW3 and Pw4, he also conducted confession cum seizure panchanama in the presence Pw5 and Lw6 and seized gold Mangalsutra, rold gold tops, Roldgold pustalatadu, Cash of Rs. 1000, Realme cell phone and Hero honda splendar from the possession of A1 and one

Redme cell phone two Redme cell phone from the possession of A2. He affected their arrest and produced before Hon'ble court. He address letter to Nodal officer BSNL for collection of call data records of accused mobile but in-spite several efforts they did not choose to issue CDR and after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

During his cross-examination he admitted that as per ExP1, Pwl is drunken condition and she consumed toddy. He admitted that there is a delay of 6 hours in lodging complaint. He admitted that Vehicle number was not mentioned in ExP1. He admitted that ExP1 does not contains phone number through which Pw1 received calls and the same was not collected. He admitted that accused should take permission for going and coming from the campus. He have not examined any officials from the campus.

10

CC No. 1653 of 2023

15. In order to prove the offence under section 392 of IPC the following ingredients have to be satisfied:

the commission of an act with the intention to rob, the threat or use of force or violence, and the unlawful taking of property from a person or their presence.

16.From the evidence 6 witnesses were examined and PW1 is the complainant and PW2 is sister of PW1 and PW3 and PW4 who are panchas for scene of offence and CDF has turned hostile and PW3 is the investigating officer deposed that he registered the case , visited the scene of offence and conducted scene of offence panchanama and conducted confession cum recovery panchanama.

17.The learned counsel for the accused argued before the court that the allegation leveled against the accused are false and baseless there are no eye witness to the incident, the confession panchanama on which the prosecution is relying has no evidentiary value in the eye of law under section 25 of Indian Evidence Act, the case property alleged to have been recovered were planted in the possession of the accused person, Accused persons are innocent and falsely implicated in this case and prayed the court to acquit the accused persons.

18.Further, as per the record, PW1 who is complainant deposed that unknown person snatched her gold chain and she cannot identify the 11

CC No. 1653 of 2023

accused, PW2 who is the sister of PW1 also turned hostile. From the record, the confession was recorded by Police, in the presence of PW5, but the witness have turned hostile and as per the record also while the accused is in police custody, the confession was recorded and thus, I hold that the said confession is invalid in view of the bar contained

U/Sec.25 and 26 of Indian Evidence Act and thus no reliance can be placed on the same. When the confessional statement is hit by Sec.25 and 26 of Indian Evidence Act. PW 3 and PW4 who are the panch for scene of offence and CDF have turned hostile.

19.In view of the above circumstances, there is no direct evidence to connect accused persons with the offence and alleged stolen property alleged to be recovered from the possession of the accused is hit by section 25 of Indian Evidence act as the confession is not lead to recovery as per 27 of Indian Evidence Act. PW1 did not file any receipts to show that the stolen property belongs to him. Hence, Ex.P5 is not proved beyond all reasonable doubts and the confession panchanama as relied by prosecution is not valid in accordance with law, and even the panch witnesses for confession has turned hostile. Hence the evidence of PW1 to PW5 cannot be considered to sustain the conviction of accused and the PW1 who is the main witness in this case has deposed that she cannot identify the accused persons, hence there is no 12

CC No. 1653 of 2023

identification, thus the prosecution failed to prove its case for the offence U/Sec. 392 IPC against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and they are entitled for acquittal.

20.In the result, Accused NO.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offences, U/Sec. 392 IPC, accordingly, they are acquitted of the said offence under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled U/sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court this the 28 th day of November, 2025.

Sd/-

X Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Cyberabad, Medchal 13

CC No. 1653 of 2023

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

For Prosecution

Pw.1: A.Kavitha Pw 2: P.Laxmi Pw 3: R.Ramesh PW4: Sai Kumar PW5: P.Nagaraju PW6 : K.Seetharam/Investigating officer

For Defence- None -

Exhibits Marked for Prosecution

Ex.P1 is complaint Ex.P2 is 161 Cr.PC statement Ex.P3 is signature on scene of offence panchanama Ex.P4 is signature on confession panchanama Ex.P5 is signature on seizure panchanama Ex.P6 is attested copy of confession cum seizure panchanama of Accused. Ex.P7 is scene of offence in CDF Ex.P8 is confession cum seizure panchanama

Exhibits Marked for Defence - NIL -

Material Objects marked - NIL -

Sd/-

X Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Cyberabad, Medchal

1

CC No.614 of 2019

IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM

X ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

CYBERABAD AT : MEDCHAL

Present: Smt.A. HEMALATHA X Addl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal-Malkajgiri District

At Athvelly, Medchal

Dated this the 25 th day of November, 2025

CC No. 614 of 2019

Between:-

The State through Sub Inspector of Police

Alwal, P.S. ......Complainant

AND

A1. Mohammed Feroze Ahmed S/o late Mohd Anwar Baig, 38 years, AC mechanic Rio 1378/B Risala Bazar, Bollarum, Secunderabad.

A2. Smt Shahina Bhanu W/o late Mohd Anwar Baig, 60 years, housewife R/o H.No. 1378/B Risala Bazar, Bollarum, Secunderabad. ……Accused

This case came up before me for final hearing in the presence of Learned A.P.P for the State and of Sri.G.Gopal, Advocate for the Accused and having stood over for consideration till this day this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S. Alwal, filed charge sheet against accused in Cr.No.86/2019 for the offence under section 498-A of IPC against the accused NO.1 to 2.

2

CC No.614 of 2019

2. Brief averments in the charge sheet are as follows:

on 26/02/2019 at 1000 hours received a complaint from the

Lw-1 Smt Mohammadi Begum stating that she got married to Md

Feroz in the year 2012. It was an arranged marriage. They were blessed with a daughter Baby Zoya Bhanu, 6 years. Her husband was reciprocal with him for two years after which he started torturing her mentally and physically by scolding and beating indiscriminately. They had discussed the matter in the presence of elders several times, but there is no change in their behavior. Her mother-in-law Smt Shahina

Banu is provoking and encouraging her husband and torturing her.

Her husband developed extramarital affair with another woman and threatening her that he would marry that woman in the month of

March with the support of her mother-in-law. Her husband necked her out of the house about 5 months back due to which she along with her daughter are staying outside and neither her husband nor her mother-in-law are taking care of her and her daughter. Therefore, she has requested for legal action.

Basing on the above said contents, the Lw-07 B Bheem Kumar,

SI of police, Alwal PS has registered a case in FIR No. 86/2019 U/S 498-(A) OF INDIAN PENAL CODE and investigated into by Lw-08 BSS

Vara Prasad, SI of police Alwal PS.

3

CC No.614 of 2019

During the course of investigation the Lw-8 has examined and recorded statement of the complainant Lw-1 Smt Mohammadi Begum in detail. After further enquiries, the Lw-8 has also examined and recorded statements of Lw-2 and Lw-3 Mohd Shadulla the own brothers of the complainant. They also supported the version of the complainant and added that they tried to resolve the issues, but the accused persons did not heed their counseling and continued harassing her mentally & physically. The Lw-8 has visited the scene of offence situated P No. 148, H.No. 1-7-100/3 where the victim was residing along with her husband as tenant. Inspected it minutely in presence of mediators Lw-05 and Lw-06 and conducted scene of offence observation panchanama & also drawn rough sketch of it in the CDF. On 27/02/2019 at 0900 hours the Lw-8 has apprehended the accused A1 Mohammed Feroze Ahmed from his residence and brought him to the PS and on interrogation he has voluntarily confessed to have committed this offence with the active connivance and provocation of his mother A2. As such the Lw-8 affected his arrest by issuing arrest memo at 1000 hours and produced in the court. After further enquiries, the Lw-8 has examined and recorded statement of Lw-4 in detail. He has stated that accused A1.

Mohammed Feroze Ahmed and his wife Lw 1 Smt Mohammed Begum 4

CC No.614 of 2019

resided in his house as tenant, but the accused used to torture his wife mentally and physically every day. About six months back the accused deserted her and went away. As ample evidence is there against the accused A2, the Lw-8 has issued her a notice under section 41a-(1) CrPC calling for his identity etc. Responding to the notice dated 28/02/2019, the accused A2 Smt Shahina Bhanu appeared before the IO, identified herself by furnishing the photo IDs and complied with the directions laid therein the notice. Since the offence is established, she was issued with a notice under section 41a-(3) CrPC directing her to attend court on receipt of summons and after completion of entire investigation, police filed charge sheet against the accused under section 498-A of IPC .

3.This case was taken on file for the offences under section 498-A of IPC against the accused No.1 to 2. On appearance of the accused

before the court, copies of documents upon which the prosecution

proposed to be relied upon was furnished to him as required under

Section 207 of Cr.P.C.

4.Accused No.1 to 2 are examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C.,

Charge under Section 498-A of IPC against the accused No.1 and 2 5

CC No.614 of 2019

were framed, read over and explained to them in vernacular language to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.In order to prove the guilt of the accused personS, prosecution cited 08 witnesses but could able to examine only three witnesses,

PW1 and PW2 are Elder brothers of LW1 and witnesses, PW3 is the investigating officer. LW1, LW4 to LW6 evidence closed on report filed by police. LW7 evidence is given up by APP. Ex.P1 to P3 are marked on behalf of the prosecution.

6.After closure of the prosecution side evidence, accused no.1 to 2 are examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. but they denied the incriminating oral and documentary evidences adduced by the prosecution against them and reported no defense evidence.

7. Heard the arguments of the learned APP for the prosecution and the learned counsel for the accused. Perused the documents available on record.

8.Now the point for determination is: -

“Whether prosecution was able to prove the guilt of Accused

for offence under section 498-A IPC beyond reasonable

doubt ?” 6

CC No.614 of 2019

POINT:

9.PW.1/Sri Abdul Kadhar, deposed that LW1 is his sister he do not know where she is residing. They made efforts to find her. In the year 2012, they performed the marriage of LW1 with A1. They stayed happily for 1 year. Thereafter there were disputes between them. So many times he along with LW3 gave counseling to them. In the year 2019 despite of counseling accused kept harassing her due to which she came out and stayed separately from A1 along with her daughter.

He paid the house rent and look after her needs. After coming outside she gave complaint.

ii)During her cross-examination, he stated that After the marriage she got mentally disturbed. He denied that from childhood she mentally retired and by suppressing the fact they got her married.

She used to roam day and night lonely. He admitted that he have not mentioned in 161 statement that there were several mediation made and compromised LW1 and A1. He stays at Nizamabad. He denied that he do not know the day to day happenings of LW1 and A1. He denied that he did not pay any rents of LW1. He along with accused do not know where she is staying. She is completely disturbed. He denied that she lodged a false complaint and she voluntarily left the accused.

7

CC No.614 of 2019

10.PW2/ Md.Shadulla deposed that LW1 is his sister he do not know where she is residing. They made efforts to find her. In the year 2012, they performed the marriage of LW1 with A1. They stayed happily for 3 to 4 years. Thereafter there were disputes between them. So many times he along with PW1 gave counseling to them. In the year 2019 despite of counseling accused kept harassing her due to which she came out and stayed separately from Al along with her daughter. He paid the house rent and look after her needs. After coming outside she gave complaint.

During his cross-examination he deposed that After the marriage she got mentally disturbed. He denied that from childhood she mentally retired and by suppressing the fact we got her married.

She used to roam day and night lonely. He admitted that he have not mentioned in 161 statement that there were several mediation made and compromised LW1 and A1. He stay at Kotagiri. PW1 and A1 stayed at Alwal. He denied that he do not know the day to day happenings of LW1 and A1. He denied that he did not pay any rents of

LW1. He along with accused do not know where she is staying. She is completely disturbed. He denied that she lodged a false complaint and she voluntarily left the accused.

8

CC No.614 of 2019

11.PW3/ BSS Vara Prasad on 26.02.2019 at about 1000 pm Lw7 received compliant from LW1 on which he registered a case in Cr. No.

86/2019 U/s 498-A IPC issued FIR and case filed is handed over to him for investigation. During the course of investigation he examined and recorded the statements of Lw1 to LW3, he visited the scene of offence situated at Flat No. 148, Reddy colony Alwal, conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of Lw5, LW6 and he recorded the statements of Lw4 at the scene of offence. On 27.02.2019 he apprehend the accused no. 1 and he voluntarily confessed to have committed to this offence. As such he effected the arrest of accused no. 1 and produced before this Honourable court. Later he issued a 41-A Cr.P.c. notice to accused no.2 directing her to appearing before the Hon'ble court on receipt of summons. On completion of investigation he filed the charge sheet.

During his cross-examination he admitted that specific dates of the alleged harassment was not mentioned in ExP1. He admitted that in ExP1 and 161 statement there was not mentioned about the panchayat. He admitted that there was delay but delay reasons is also mentioned in ExP1. He do not know about the mental condition of the

Lw1 and the treatment taken by her in Erragadda hospital. He denied 9

CC No.614 of 2019

that due to mental physical problem Lw1 herself left the accused and accused never harassed Lw1.

12.In order to prove the guilt of the accused the prosecution have to prove the following ingredients under section 498A IPC.

Section 498-A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.— For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means— i.Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or ii. Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.

10

CC No.614 of 2019

13.From the above, it is clear that only two witnesses were examined. Evidence of PW1 and PW2 who are the brothers of complainant deposed that they performed marriage of LW1 with A1 and they stayed happily for one year. From the above evidence of PW1 and PW2 it is clear that LW1 is the wife of A1. The further deposed that thereafter there were disputes between them and so many times they have gave counseling to them. In the year 2019 despite of counseling accused kept harassing her due to which she came out and stayed separately from A1 along with her daughter and they paid house rent and look after her needs. After coming outside she gave complaint and during their cross-examination they admitted that after marriage she got mentally disturbed and she used to roam day and night lonely. They admitted that they along with accused do not know where LW1 is staying. The complainant was not examined by the prosecution who is the main witness in this case.

14.Hence, mere allegation that A1 torturing her mentally and physically by scolding and beating indiscriminately will come under the definition of matrimonial cruelty under section 498-A only when such conduct of the accused “ likely to drive the women to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health whether mental or physical of the women’’. As discussed supra LW1 11

CC No.614 of 2019

evidence was closed and prosecution failed to prove that there is danger to her life, limb, health. The second ingredient that should be satisfied is the harassment should be of such a nature that it is likely to drive women to commit suicide, here in the case at hand no such circumstances are seen. Hence, the allegation levelled against the accused does not attract the ingredients under section 498-A of IPC. It is settled principal of Law that mere petty issues cannot be termed as cruelty and the gravity of the cruelty should be seen by the court.

Investigating officer PW3 has deposed purely on the procedural aspects of the investigation done by him. The investigating officer of the case is not sufficient to fasten the culpability of the accused persons with the alleged offence as he is interest in the outcome of the case and the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. From the above evidence, there is no material incriminating against the accused person. Hence, the accused persons entitled for acquittal.

15.In view of the above circumstances and reasons stated this court opines that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is not sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence under section 498-A of IPC, 12

CC No.614 of 2019

therefore, the accused persons are given benefit of doubt and they are acquitted.

16.In the result, accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offence U/Sec. 498-A IPC and accordingly, they are acquitted of the said offence under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled U/sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court this the 25 th day of November , 2025.

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal – Malkajgiri District At Athvelly, Medchal

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

For Prosecution For Defence

PW1 : Abdul Kadhar - None - PW2 : Md.Shadulla PW3 : BSS Vara Prasad

Exhibits Marked for Prosecution

Ex.P1 is complaint Ex.P2 is FIR EX.P3 is Scene of offence panchanama

Exhibits Marked for Defence Material Objects marked Nil Nil

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal – Malkajgiri District At Athvelly, Medchal

CC 1272 of 20231

IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM

X ADDL.JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

CYBERABAD AT : MEDCHAL

Present: Smt A. HEMALATHA

X Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class Cyberabad, at Medchal

Dated this the 27 th day of November, 2025

CC No. 1272 of 2023

Between:-

The State through Sub Inspector of Police Jawaharnagar, P.S.

......Complainant

AND

Hema Ram Kumawath S/o: Laxman Rao, Age: 24 Years, Occ: Fancy and Gift Store Business, R/o: Dammiaguda X Roads, Keesara (M), Medchal Malkajgiri District. ……Accused

This case coming on today before me for final hearing in the presence of learned A.P.P. for the State and that of Sri B.Venuraj Yadav Advocate for the Accused and having been heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:- :: J U D G M E N T ::

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Jawaharnagar police station has filed the charge sheet against accused person in Cr.No.740/2023 for the offence U/s.420 IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential Commodities Act .

2.The brief facts of the prosecution are that This is a Suo-moto case and facts of the case are that Sri B. Anil Kumar, Sub Inspector of Police, Jawhar Nagar P.S,

Rachakonda Commissionerate stated that on 10/07/2023 at about 18:30 hours, while

CC 1272 of 20232

he was performing patrolling duty, he received credible information that one person is filling LGP Gas illegally into small cylinders without having valid license not taking any safety measures. Believing the information to be true and authentic he informed to superior officer and accorded the permission to raid the spot. The LW- 01 along with police staff rushed to the spot which located at Dammaiguda main road, Keesara (M), Medchal-Malkajgiri. On seeing police he was quick in position to escape, but SI and staff able to apprehend him. Secured 02 panchayatdars and explained them about the facts, conducted confession and seizure panchanama in the presence of mediators Le. LW's 4 & 5. On searching the premises found filling tool and seized 1) Gas Cylinders (Big)-01, 2) Small Cylinder: 05, 3). Gas filling tool-01,

4) Refilling Rods-01 under the cover of panchanama under the cover of panchanama. On enquiry he disclosed his credentials as Hema Ram Kumawath.

Further the LW-1 brought the accused along with the materials i.e. 1) Gas Cylinders (Big)-01 2) Small Cylinder 05, 3). Gas filling tool-01, 4) Refilling Rods-01 and brought to PS. Therefore it is requested to take appropriate action against the accused person as per law for misleading essential commodities of LPG Gas for their illegal gain.

Basing on receipt of the above petition of LW-1, B. Anil Kumar, Sl of Police,

P.S. Jawahar Nagar, the LW-07, B.V. Kausheek, SI of Police, Jawahar Nagar P.S.

registered a case in Cr. No. 740/2023 U/s 420 IPC & Sec 7 of EC Act and investigation entrusted to him LW-08, MD. Idris Ali, Sl of Police, P.S. Jawahar

Nagar

CC 1272 of 20233

During the course of investigation he, LW-08, secured the presence of LW- 1/complainant and LW'2 & 3 and recorded their statements U/s 161 (3) Cr.P.C and.

incorporated the same in Part II CD's in which they all corroborated with the contents of the FIR. After proper identification with his name as Sri. Hema Ram

Kumawath, and took into custody. Took the custody of seized property at PS

Jawahar Nagar at intact position. After completion of all paper work he, LW-08 issued notice U/s 41 (A)/41(1) Cr.P.C to accused person and let him go. As per the direction of the issued notice the accused person comply within time and submit copies of his ID duly acknowledged the issued notice. In due course of investigation on 11-07-2023, he LW-08 handover the seized materials I.e. 1) Gas Cylinders (Big)- 01 2) Small Cylinder 05, 3). Gas filling tool-01, 4) Refilling Rods-01 at Sri Srinivas

Assistant Civil Supply officer Uppal circle, Medchal District under proper acknowledgement. After completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet against accused.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence U/s.420 of IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential

Commodities Act against the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused, copies of documents u/sec.207 Cr.P.C was furnished to him and he was examined u/sec. 239 Cr.P.C. framed charges for the offence U/s.420 of IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential Commodities Act against him and the same was read over and explained to him in Telugu for which he pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.

CC 1272 of 20234

5.During the course of trail prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 4 and got marked Ex.P1 to P5. PW-1 and PW2 are panch witnesses for scene of offence, confession & seizure panchanama of accused

PW-3 is complainant. PW4 is the Investigation officer. LW-2 and 3 , LW6 and

LW7 evidence was given up by APP.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined U/s.

313 Cr.P.C. for the incriminating material appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses against the accused for which the accused denied and stated no defense evidence on his behalf. Hence defense evidence is closed.

7.Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel. Perused the documents available on record.

8. Now the point for consideration is

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offence U/s.420 of IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential

Commodities Act beyond reasonable doubt?

9. Point:-

In order to prove the case against accused person, the prosecution examined PW.1 to PW4 on their behalf and got marked Ex.P1 and P5.

10.Accordingly the PW-1/Goverdhan, who is cited as the panch for confession cum seizure panchanama. He deposed that he do not know

CC 1272 of 20235

anything about the case and turned hostile. He did not support the case of the prosecution.

11.PW-2/Sholam, who is cited as the panch for confession cum seizure panchanama. He deposed that he do not know anything about the case and turned hostile. He did not support the case of the prosecution.

12.PW-3/Sri.B.Anil Kumar, deposed that on 10.07.2023 he received credible information about that one person filling LPG gas cylinder from big cylinder to small cylinder without having any license and without taking any safety measure at Dammaiguda. He have taken permission from superior officer to raid at plot he along with Lw2 and LW3 secured the presence of

Pw1, Pw2 and conducted CDF, confession cum seizure panchanama and they found accused person filing of the gas cylinders on enquiry he revealed his name as Hema Ram Kumavath and he confessed that he is selling LPG gas cylinders higher rates by filing gas into small cylinders he recorded the confession panchanama in the presence of Pw1, Pw2 and seized Big gas Cylinder, small cylinders 5, gas filing tool one, re-felling rods one. He brought them to police station and lodged complaint and handed over seized property and accused to Lw7.

During his Cross-Examination he stated that he have taken the written permission but he do not kn ow whether they have filed or not. He denied that he have not conducted any Ex.P3 and accused persons never confessed anything before him. He denied that he have seized the LPG Gas

CC 1272 of 20236

cylinders from the possessed of the accused. He admitted that exact place of re-filling gas cylinders not mentioned. He have not mentioned the customers name.

13.PW4/Sri.Idris Ali, deposed that on 10.07.2023 at 1830 hours Lw7 received report complainant along with seized property and accused from

Pw1 basing on which Lw7 registered FIR in Cr. No. 740/2023 u/s. 420 IPC & Sec. 7 E.C. Act and entrusted the case for investigation. Thereafter he recorded the statement of Pw3, Lw2, Lw3. He issued 41A Cr.P.C. notice and accused complied with the same. Later he handed over seized property to

Lw6 under acknowledgment dated 13.07.2023. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

During the cross-examination, he admitted that he have not visited the scene of offence. He denied that accused is no where connected to this case and conducting table investigation he filed false charge sheet against accused. He admitted that there are no batch number on the cylinders.

14. PW-1 and PW2 who are panch witness to the confession cum seizure panchanama turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and did not deposed anything about the seizure from the possession of accused. PW3 is the complainant and PW4 who is the investigating officer who is police official are interested witnesses in the outcome of the case. But the prosecution failed to examine any witnesses from whom accused person had purchased the cylinders. Thus there is no independent evidence on

CC 1272 of 20237

record to prove and there is no ownership document filed and civil supply officer also not examined.

15.Except for the evidence of PW3 and 4 there are no other independent evidence, who supported the case of the prosecution on record to prove the seizure. In such circumstance, this court is of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of PW3 and 4, who are interested in the outcome of the case, without corroborating evidence. Hence it is concluded that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused person stored domestic big LPG cylinders and they were selling the same by filling into small cylinders for higher price and cheated people.

16.The prosecution contended that the accused person purchasing the big cylinders and and filling gas from it into small cylinders and is selling the same for higher price. But the prosecution failed to examine any witnesses from whom the accused person had purchased and civil supply officer also not examined. There is no independent evidence, who supported the case pf prosecution, on record to prove the seizure. In such circumstance, this court is of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of the PW3 and PW4, who are interested in the outcome of the case, without any corroborating evidence. Hence it is concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the case.

CC 1272 of 20238

17.In view of the foregoing discussion, this court is of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of accused person and against the prosecution.

18. R E S U L T: In the result, accused found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s. 420 of IPC and Sec.7 of Essential Commodities Act and he is accordingly acquitted u/sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused person shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my Dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day of November, 2025.

Sd/-

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal – Malkajgiri Distrcit

At Athvelly, Medchal

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE :: Witnesses Examined

For the Prosecution :-For the Defence:-

PW.1 Goverdhan- Nil – PW.2 Sholam, PW3 B.Anil Kumar PW4. Sri Idris Ali /Investigating officer

Exhibits Marked

For the Prosecution :-For the Defence:-

Ex.P1 – signature on confession cum seizure panchanama of PW1

CC 1272 of 20239

Ex.P2 - signature on confession cum seizure panchanama of PW2 Ex.P3 is confession cum seizure panchanama Ex.P4 is complaint Ex.P5 is FIR Ex.P6 is acknowledgment issued by LW6, dated 13.07.2023

Sd/-

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal – Malkajgiri Distrcit

At Athvelly, Medchal

CC 1272 of 20231

IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM

X ADDL.JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

CYBERABAD AT : MEDCHAL

Present: Smt A. HEMALATHA

X Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class Cyberabad, at Medchal

Dated this the 27 th day of November, 2025

CC No. 1272 of 2023

Between:-

The State through Sub Inspector of Police Jawaharnagar, P.S.

......Complainant

AND

Hema Ram Kumawath S/o: Laxman Rao, Age: 24 Years, Occ: Fancy and Gift Store Business, R/o: Dammiaguda X Roads, Keesara (M), Medchal Malkajgiri District. ……Accused

This case coming on today before me for final hearing in the presence of learned A.P.P. for the State and that of Sri B.Venuraj Yadav Advocate for the Accused and having been heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:- :: J U D G M E N T ::

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Jawaharnagar police station has filed the charge sheet against accused person in Cr.No.740/2023 for the offence U/s.420 IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential Commodities Act .

2.The brief facts of the prosecution are that This is a Suo-moto case and facts of the case are that Sri B. Anil Kumar, Sub Inspector of Police, Jawhar Nagar P.S,

Rachakonda Commissionerate stated that on 10/07/2023 at about 18:30 hours, while

CC 1272 of 20232

he was performing patrolling duty, he received credible information that one person is filling LGP Gas illegally into small cylinders without having valid license not taking any safety measures. Believing the information to be true and authentic he informed to superior officer and accorded the permission to raid the spot. The LW- 01 along with police staff rushed to the spot which located at Dammaiguda main road, Keesara (M), Medchal-Malkajgiri. On seeing police he was quick in position to escape, but SI and staff able to apprehend him. Secured 02 panchayatdars and explained them about the facts, conducted confession and seizure panchanama in the presence of mediators Le. LW's 4 & 5. On searching the premises found filling tool and seized 1) Gas Cylinders (Big)-01, 2) Small Cylinder: 05, 3). Gas filling tool-01,

4) Refilling Rods-01 under the cover of panchanama under the cover of panchanama. On enquiry he disclosed his credentials as Hema Ram Kumawath.

Further the LW-1 brought the accused along with the materials i.e. 1) Gas Cylinders (Big)-01 2) Small Cylinder 05, 3). Gas filling tool-01, 4) Refilling Rods-01 and brought to PS. Therefore it is requested to take appropriate action against the accused person as per law for misleading essential commodities of LPG Gas for their illegal gain.

Basing on receipt of the above petition of LW-1, B. Anil Kumar, Sl of Police,

P.S. Jawahar Nagar, the LW-07, B.V. Kausheek, SI of Police, Jawahar Nagar P.S.

registered a case in Cr. No. 740/2023 U/s 420 IPC & Sec 7 of EC Act and investigation entrusted to him LW-08, MD. Idris Ali, Sl of Police, P.S. Jawahar

Nagar

CC 1272 of 20233

During the course of investigation he, LW-08, secured the presence of LW- 1/complainant and LW'2 & 3 and recorded their statements U/s 161 (3) Cr.P.C and.

incorporated the same in Part II CD's in which they all corroborated with the contents of the FIR. After proper identification with his name as Sri. Hema Ram

Kumawath, and took into custody. Took the custody of seized property at PS

Jawahar Nagar at intact position. After completion of all paper work he, LW-08 issued notice U/s 41 (A)/41(1) Cr.P.C to accused person and let him go. As per the direction of the issued notice the accused person comply within time and submit copies of his ID duly acknowledged the issued notice. In due course of investigation on 11-07-2023, he LW-08 handover the seized materials I.e. 1) Gas Cylinders (Big)- 01 2) Small Cylinder 05, 3). Gas filling tool-01, 4) Refilling Rods-01 at Sri Srinivas

Assistant Civil Supply officer Uppal circle, Medchal District under proper acknowledgement. After completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet against accused.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence U/s.420 of IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential

Commodities Act against the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused, copies of documents u/sec.207 Cr.P.C was furnished to him and he was examined u/sec. 239 Cr.P.C. framed charges for the offence U/s.420 of IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential Commodities Act against him and the same was read over and explained to him in Telugu for which he pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.

CC 1272 of 20234

5.During the course of trail prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 4 and got marked Ex.P1 to P5. PW-1 and PW2 are panch witnesses for scene of offence, confession & seizure panchanama of accused

PW-3 is complainant. PW4 is the Investigation officer. LW-2 and 3 , LW6 and

LW7 evidence was given up by APP.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined U/s.

313 Cr.P.C. for the incriminating material appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses against the accused for which the accused denied and stated no defense evidence on his behalf. Hence defense evidence is closed.

7.Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel. Perused the documents available on record.

8. Now the point for consideration is

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offence U/s.420 of IPC and Sec. 7 of Essential

Commodities Act beyond reasonable doubt?

9. Point:-

In order to prove the case against accused person, the prosecution examined PW.1 to PW4 on their behalf and got marked Ex.P1 and P5.

10.Accordingly the PW-1/Goverdhan, who is cited as the panch for confession cum seizure panchanama. He deposed that he do not know

CC 1272 of 20235

anything about the case and turned hostile. He did not support the case of the prosecution.

11.PW-2/Sholam, who is cited as the panch for confession cum seizure panchanama. He deposed that he do not know anything about the case and turned hostile. He did not support the case of the prosecution.

12.PW-3/Sri.B.Anil Kumar, deposed that on 10.07.2023 he received credible information about that one person filling LPG gas cylinder from big cylinder to small cylinder without having any license and without taking any safety measure at Dammaiguda. He have taken permission from superior officer to raid at plot he along with Lw2 and LW3 secured the presence of

Pw1, Pw2 and conducted CDF, confession cum seizure panchanama and they found accused person filing of the gas cylinders on enquiry he revealed his name as Hema Ram Kumavath and he confessed that he is selling LPG gas cylinders higher rates by filing gas into small cylinders he recorded the confession panchanama in the presence of Pw1, Pw2 and seized Big gas Cylinder, small cylinders 5, gas filing tool one, re-felling rods one. He brought them to police station and lodged complaint and handed over seized property and accused to Lw7.

During his Cross-Examination he stated that he have taken the written permission but he do not kn ow whether they have filed or not. He denied that he have not conducted any Ex.P3 and accused persons never confessed anything before him. He denied that he have seized the LPG Gas

CC 1272 of 20236

cylinders from the possessed of the accused. He admitted that exact place of re-filling gas cylinders not mentioned. He have not mentioned the customers name.

13.PW4/Sri.Idris Ali, deposed that on 10.07.2023 at 1830 hours Lw7 received report complainant along with seized property and accused from

Pw1 basing on which Lw7 registered FIR in Cr. No. 740/2023 u/s. 420 IPC & Sec. 7 E.C. Act and entrusted the case for investigation. Thereafter he recorded the statement of Pw3, Lw2, Lw3. He issued 41A Cr.P.C. notice and accused complied with the same. Later he handed over seized property to

Lw6 under acknowledgment dated 13.07.2023. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

During the cross-examination, he admitted that he have not visited the scene of offence. He denied that accused is no where connected to this case and conducting table investigation he filed false charge sheet against accused. He admitted that there are no batch number on the cylinders.

14. PW-1 and PW2 who are panch witness to the confession cum seizure panchanama turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and did not deposed anything about the seizure from the possession of accused. PW3 is the complainant and PW4 who is the investigating officer who is police official are interested witnesses in the outcome of the case. But the prosecution failed to examine any witnesses from whom accused person had purchased the cylinders. Thus there is no independent evidence on

CC 1272 of 20237

record to prove and there is no ownership document filed and civil supply officer also not examined.

15.Except for the evidence of PW3 and 4 there are no other independent evidence, who supported the case of the prosecution on record to prove the seizure. In such circumstance, this court is of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of PW3 and 4, who are interested in the outcome of the case, without corroborating evidence. Hence it is concluded that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused person stored domestic big LPG cylinders and they were selling the same by filling into small cylinders for higher price and cheated people.

16.The prosecution contended that the accused person purchasing the big cylinders and and filling gas from it into small cylinders and is selling the same for higher price. But the prosecution failed to examine any witnesses from whom the accused person had purchased and civil supply officer also not examined. There is no independent evidence, who supported the case pf prosecution, on record to prove the seizure. In such circumstance, this court is of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of the PW3 and PW4, who are interested in the outcome of the case, without any corroborating evidence. Hence it is concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the case.

CC 1272 of 20238

17.In view of the foregoing discussion, this court is of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of accused person and against the prosecution.

18. R E S U L T: In the result, accused found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s. 420 of IPC and Sec.7 of Essential Commodities Act and he is accordingly acquitted u/sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused person shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my Dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day of November, 2025.

Sd/-

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal – Malkajgiri Distrcit

At Athvelly, Medchal

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE :: Witnesses Examined

For the Prosecution :-For the Defence:-

PW.1 Goverdhan- Nil – PW.2 Sholam, PW3 B.Anil Kumar PW4. Sri Idris Ali /Investigating officer

Exhibits Marked

For the Prosecution :-For the Defence:-

Ex.P1 – signature on confession cum seizure panchanama of PW1

CC 1272 of 20239

Ex.P2 - signature on confession cum seizure panchanama of PW2 Ex.P3 is confession cum seizure panchanama Ex.P4 is complaint Ex.P5 is FIR Ex.P6 is acknowledgment issued by LW6, dated 13.07.2023

Sd/-

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal – Malkajgiri Distrcit

At Athvelly, Medchal

1

CC No.747 of 2024

IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM

X ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

CYBERABAD AT : MEDCHAL

Present: A. HEMALATHA

X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate

Cyberabad, at Medchal

Dated this the 27 th day of November, 2025

CC No. 747 of 2024

Between:-

The State through Sub Inspector of Police Jawahar Nagar.

......Complainant

AND

Chinthakayala Mahesh S/o: Allaji Age: 26 Years, Occ: Business, R/o: Mohan Rao colony, Balaji nagar, Kapra Mandal, Medchal District. ……Accused

This case came up before me for final hearing in the presence of Learned A.P.P for the State and of Sri D.Raghu Ramulu Advocate for the Accused and having stood over for consideration till this day this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Jawahar Nagar, filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime No.323/2024 on its file for the offence punishable under section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act.

2

CC No.747 of 2024

2. Brief facts of the charge sheet are that on on 25.03.2024 at 2000 hours

LW-1 received a credible information that one is selling liquor illegally against the Government rules and violated the Government orders issued by

Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda issued by exercising his powers under section 20 of the T.S Excise Act 1968, with Vide Rc.No.

M4/Notification/208/RCK/2024 in view of Holi FESTIVAL in Malkajgiri and LB

Nagar Zones of Rachakonda limits, under the order Wine shop and Bar shop must be closed from 24.03.2024 at 1800 hours to 26.03.2024 at 0600 hrs. On receiving the information, he informed to superior officer and took the search proceeding from ACP kushaiguda division. Further he secured two panch witnesses namely Sri Putta Kanna Reddy and Sri Ragi Manukar Reddy and briefed them about the information and requested to act as panch witness to record panchanama of accused. Upon their acceptance, Lw's 1 to 5 surprised the house at Sai Sreekara Bar & Restaurant, Balajinagar, Kapra

Kapra(M), Medchal-Malkajgiri District and found one person is illegally selling liquor to needy people from back side gate of Bar & Restaurant. On interrogation the A1 admitted his offence. As such Lw-1 recorded the A1 detailed confession statement in presence of panch witnesses. During A1 confession he confessed that he is Chinthakayala Mahesh . His parents have two offspring and he is last one. He studied till degree. A1 working as a cashier in Sai Shreekara Bar & Restaurant. In view of Holi FESTIVAL in

Malkajgiri and LB Nagar Zones of Rachakonda limits, under the order Wine shop and Bar shop must be closed from 24.03.2024 at 1800 hours to 3

CC No.747 of 2024

26.03.2024 at 0600 hrs. But his owner by name Ravi Kumar Said him to if you sale liquor to needy people from back side gate of Bar & Restaurant he will give more money to him then he agreed with him and selling the liquor. On 25.03.2024 when he is selling liquor from back side gate of Bar & Restaurant at about 2030 hours the police raided and apprehended him red handedly.

During the course investigation, Lw-1 seized 1) King

Fisher Beer 650 ml-131 Bottles from the possession of accused under cover panchanama in presence Lw4 and LW5. On northern bound is one residential house, southern bound is Balaji Nagar

Man Road, on eastern bound is Hard ware shop and western side is VRO office are directions to scene of offence. Thereafter. Lw-1 brought the A1 to police station along with seized property for taking necessary action.

Based on contents of Complaint Lw-6, registered a case in Cr.

No.323/2024 U/s 34 (A) of Excise act and 188 IPC and took up the investigation

During the course of investigation, Lw-6 examined and recorded statements fo Lw's 1 to 3. During the course of investigation, Lw-6 served notice U/s 41 A Cr.pc to A1-Chinthakayala Mahesh under proper acknowledgment and recorded his interrogation report.

After completion of entire investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused.

4

CC No.747 of 2024

3. This case was taken on file against the accused for the offence under

Section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act.On appearance of the accused, copies of documents was furnished to the accused as required under section 207 Cr.P.C.

4. Accused was examined under section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. A charge under section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act is framed against the accused, read over and explained to accused in Telugu. Having heard and understanding the same, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In support of the case of the prosecution, PWs.1 to 4 are examined and

Exs.P.1 to P5 are marked.

6. After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material available against him for which the accused denied the same. Accused did not choose to examine any defence witnesses and no documents were marked on his behalf.

7. The learned APP argued that by examining Pws.1 to PW4 and by marking

Ex.P1 to Ex.P5, the prosecution established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and prays to convict the accused according to law.

8. The defence counsel argued that government officials to establish that the accused is in possession and selling IMFL Liquor and that confession made by the accused before police officials is hit by Section 26 of Indian Evidence Act.

5

CC No.747 of 2024

He further argued that the accused is no way concerned with the offence.

Thus, he prays to acquit the accused under benefit of doubt.

9. Heard both sides. Perused the oral and documentary evidence on record.

10.Now the point for determination is, Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offence under section 34(a) of A.P.

Excise Act beyond all reasonable doubts?

POINT:

11. PW1/ S.Puttakarna Reddy and PW2/ Manukar Reddy who are panch for scene observation and confession cum seizure panchanama in this case but did not support the case of the prosecution and turned hostile. During their cross-examination by the learned APP, nothing material could be elicited from them to connect the accused with this case.

12.PW3/ B.Anil Kumar/ SI of police/ complainant deposed that on 25.03.2024 at 2000 hours he received credible information one person selling illegally on day of holy festival vide ban of sale of liquor was in force as per the orders issued by commission of police Rachakonda. He informed the same to superior officer and obtained search permission from ACP, Kushaiguga division. Then he secured presence of Pw1, Pw2 and he along with Lw1, LW2 proceeded to Sri Sai Sreekara bar and restaurant, at Balajinagar, Kapra and found one person, he is illegally selling liquor by opening back side gate of bar and restaurant, on interrogation he is revealed his name Ch. Mahesh and he 6

CC No.747 of 2024

confessed on instructions of his owner Ravi kumar, he is selling liquor illegally.

he recorded his confession in the presence of Pw1, PW2 and sized 131 bottles of King fisher beer 650 Ml each. from the accused no.1.1 brought them to police station and lodged complaint and handed over seized property and accused to Lw6.

During the course of his cross examination, he admitted that he do not know whether Lw6 has filed the search permission he have not filed the GO showing the ban of liquor on the said day he have handed over the GO to Lw6.

He have not mentioned about the door number of the said place. He have not mentioned about the particulars of Pw1, PW2 in ExP4 nave not mentioned the batch number of seized bottles in ExP4 It is not true to suggest that he have not visited any place and he have not conduced any ExP3 and accused never confessed before him.

13.PW4/ M.Anil Kumar / Sub Inspector of police deposed that On 25.3.2024 at 2000 hours he received report complainant along with seizure panchanama and accused from Pw3 basing on which he registered FIR in Cr.

No. 323/2024 u/s. 188 IPC Sec. 34-A of Excise Act and took up the case for investigation. During the course of investigation he examined and recorded the statement of Pw3, Lw2, Lw3. issued 41A Cr.P.C. notice and accused complied with the same. He deposited the property and obtained property for safe custody from this court. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against accused.

7

CC No.747 of 2024

During his cross examination, he admitted that he have not send the liquor bottle to FSL, he have not mentioned liquor bottles batch number, he have not mentioned about the door number of the house, he have not examined owner of the house he have not filed any G.O to show that particular liquor is prohibited for sale.He have not examined purchasers.

14. The prosecution has got examined PWs 1 to 4. PWs 1 and 2 who are panch witness for seizure, confession panchanama turned hostile. As it could be seen from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the prosecution in order to prove the seizure of the ID liquor relied on the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 and also further relied on panchanama. The independent panch witnesses i.e. PWs 1 and 2 did not support the version of the prosecution. In view of the denial of seizure of case properties, a cloud created over the case of the prosecution with regard to seizure of contraband in this case.

15.As seen from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, there are many lacunaes in the investigation, for which the prosecution did not assign any particular reason. More particularly except the evidence of official witness, no other independent witness is found to conclude with regard to seizure of ID liquor. The panch witnesses could have been crucial witnesses to prove this case, but they turned hostile and did not support the contention of the prosecution. Hence, solely relying on the evidence of official witness 8

CC No.747 of 2024

without any corroborative evidence, it may not be safe to convict the accused.

Therefore it can be said that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubts. Hence, the accused is entitled for Acquittal on the benefit of doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered.

16.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence under

Section 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted for the said offence under Section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. Bail bonds of accused shall be in force for further period of six months from the date of judgment as per Section 437-A of Cr.P.C and thereafter shall stand canceled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer grade-III, corrected and

pronounced by me in the Open Court this the 27 th day of November , 2025.

Sd/-

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

For Prosecution

Pw.1 : S. Puttakarna Reddy Pw.2 : Manukar Reddy PW3 : B.Anil Kumar PW4 : M.Anil Kumar

For Defence - None -

9

CC No.747 of 2024

Exhibits Marked for Prosecution

Ex.P1 is signature of PW1 on confession cum seizure cum scene of offence panchanama Ex.P2 is signature of PW2 on confession cum seizure cum scene of offence panchanama Ex.P3 is confession cum seizure panchanama Ex.P4 is report lodged by PW3 Ex.P5 is First Information Report.

Exhibits Marked for Defence

Nil

Material Objects marked

Nil

[

Sd/-

X Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Medchal.