Arpitha Maram Reddy

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.1 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT : AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT:

SMT. ARPITHA MARAM REDDY,

III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.

Thursday, on this the 16th day of April, 2026

S.C No. 365 of 2023

(On being committed by Smt. V. Usha Kranthi, Metropolitan

Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, by her order dated.18th

day of May, 2023 in PRC.No.21 of 2022 in Cr.No. 575 of 2022 of Police Station Pahadishareef)

Between:

The State through SHO, Pahadishareef. ... Prosecution

A N D

1. Ali Bin Mahmood Ali Jabri, S/o.Mohammed Bin Ali Jabri, Age:38 yrs, occ:Real Estate, R/o.H.No.18-13-121/1, Near M.M.Medical Shop, Ismail Nagar, Bandlaguda, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad.

2. Shaik Arbaz, S/o.Late Shaik Mohammed Saleem, Age:19 yrs, Occ:Business, R/o.Back side of RK Function hall, Ismail Nagar, Bandlaguda, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad, N/o.H.No.18-2-421/A/102, Aman nagar, Talab Katta, Hyderabad.

(Accused No.2 died and case against Accused No.2 abated as per docket proceedings dated.23.10.2025)

3. Mohammed Khaja Pasha, S/o.Mohammed Faqeed Pasha, Age:39 yrs, Occ:Electrician, R/o.H.No.18-13-8/N/8/14, Noori Nagar, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.

4. Shaik Majeed, S/o.Ahmed, Age:35 yrs, Occ:Business, R/o.H.No.17-69/3, Minar Colony, Shaheen Nagar,

Balapur Mandal, R.R.Dist. ....Accused

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.2 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

State through Sub Inspector of Police, Name of the Complainant Pahadishareef.

Name of the Accused1. Ali Bin Mahmood Ali Jabri, S/o.Mohammed Bin Ali Jabri, Age:38 yrs, occ:Real Estate, R/o.H.No.18-13-121/1, Near M.M.Medical Shop, Ismail Nagar, Bandlaguda, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad.

2. Shaik Arbaz, S/o.Late Shaik Mohammed Saleem, Age:19 yrs, Occ:Business, R/o.Back side of RK Function hall, Ismail Nagar, Bandlaguda, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad,N/o.H.No.18-2-421/A/102, Aman nagar, Talab Katta, Hyderabad. (Accused No.2 died)

3. Mohammed Khaja Pasha, S/o. Mohammed Faqeed Pasha, Age:39 yrs, Occ:Electrician, R/o.H.No.18-13-8/N/8/14, Noori Nagar, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.

4. Shaik Majeed, S/o.Ahmed, Age:35 yrs, Occ:Business, R/o.H.No.17-69/3, Minar Colony, Shaheen Nagar, Balapur Mandal, R.R.Dist.

Offence alleged against Under Section 307 R/w. Section 34 of the Accused.Indian Penal Code against the Accused No.1, 3 and 4.

Plea of the AccusedPleaded not guilty

Finding of the CourtFound not Guilty

Order of Sentence In the result, the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 are found not guilty and acquitted under Section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offence under Section 307 R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The bail bonds of the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 shall stand discharged after expiry of appeal time under Section 437-A of Cr.P.C. MO.1 is the DVD and MO.2 is the

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.3 of 12 Date:16-04-2026 broken pieces of beer bottle and the same shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period, MO.3 is the Vivo touch phone, MO.4 is the Nokia keypad phone,MO.5 is the Oppo touch phone and the same shall be returned to its owner on proof of ownership after expiry of appeal time.

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.L.K.Sharma, Counsel for the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 and case against Accused No.2 abated and after perusing the case records, upon hearing the arguments on both sides and having stood over for consideration till this date, this court has delivered the following:

::J U D G M E N T::

01.The Accused No.1, 3 and 4 are prosecuted for the offence under

Section 307 R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The case of the Prosecution in brief is that:

(i) A1 had some plot issues with LW1/Mohd Ismail and A1 planned to settled the issues and discussed with his friends A2 to A4 and called them to settle the issue with LW1/Mohd Ismail. On 04.09.2022 at about 23.00 hours when LW1/Mohd. Ismail along with his friends LW2/Shaik

Salman, LW3/Sajid Khan, LW4/Mohd. Mazar, LW5/Mohd. Naib,

LW6/Mohd. Salman @ Syed.Salman were present at Sri Tulja Bhavani

Bar and Restaurant Jalpally, A1 to A4 gone there and A1 demanded

LW1/Mohd. Ismail to give him money regarding land issues, but

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.4 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

LW1/Mohd. Ismail refused to give money and quarrel arose between them and A1 with an intention to kill LW1/Mohd. Ismail and LW2/Shaik

Salman with broken beer bottle handed over to him by A2 and A3 and

A4 also joined the quarrel and beat LW1/Mohd. Ismail and LW2/Shaik

Salman causing them injuries. LW1/Mohd. Ismail gave complaint and requested to take necessary action and on receipt of same

LW15/V.Jayamma, SI of Police Chandrayangutta P.S., registered Zero FIR

No.02/2022 U/sec.307 R/w. Section 34 of IPC forwarded FIR and complaint to PS Pahadishareef for re registration and on 05.09.2022 at 08.00 hours LW16/C.Venkateshwarlu registered Cr.No.575/2022

U/sec.307 R/w. 34 of IPC and entrusted the investigation to

LW17/K.Madhusudhan who took up investigation.

(ii) During his course of investigation LW17/K.Madhusudhan visited scene of offence by securing the presence of LW9/Y.Abhilash Reddy and

LW10/Anoj Kumar and drawn rough sketch of scene and conducted enquiries and examined other witnesses LW7.Manoj Dalai and

LW8/Jitender Kumar Yadav, LW17/K.Madhusudhan also examined

LW3/Sajid Khan, LW4/Mohd. Mazar, LW5/Mohd. Naib, LW6/Mohd Salman @ Syed Salman. While investigation in progress on credible information from reliable sources LW17/K.Madhusudhan apprehended A2 at his mobile shop and brought to police station and on interrogation, he

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.5 of 12 Date:16-04-2026 confessed guilt of offence and while ready to confess,

LW17/K.MadhusudhansecuredLW11/SameerKhanand

LW12/Mohammed Hussain and in their presence recorded confession of

Accused. LW17 seized one vivo touch phone from A2,

LW17/K.Madhusudhan arrested A2 by issuing memo against him and produced before the court and was remanded to judicial custody.

(iii) On 13.09.2022 LW17/K.Madhusudhan along with ID parties rushed to Chandrayangutta bus stop apprehended the A1, A3 and A4 brought them to police station and on interrogation A1, A3 and A4 ready to confess LW17/K.Madhusudhan secured LW11/Sameer Khan and

LW12/Mohammed Hussain and recorded the confession of accused persons and seized one Nokia Touch phone from possession of A1 and

Nokia Key pad phone from A3 and oppo touch phone from A4 under the cover of panchanama and affected the arrest of A1, A3 and A4 by issuing arrest memo and produced them before the court for judicial custody. At request of LW17, LW13/P.Mallesh collected CCTV footages from scene of offence and copied in the DVD and issued a 65-B certificate.

LW14/M.Saleem treated injured persons LW1/Mohd. Ismail and

LW2/Shaik Salman and issued Medical certificate and opined LW1/Mohd.

Ismail sustained grievous injuries, LW2/Shaik Salman sustained simple injuries.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.6 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

3.The Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at

L.B.Nagar took cognizance of the offence under Section 307 R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against the Accused No.1 to 4 and by following committal procedure and committed the Accused No.1 to 4 in the

Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Court along with case records under vide

PRC.No.21 of 2023. Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Court, Ranga Reddy

District at L.B.Nagar took cognizance of the Accused No.1 to 4 and made over the case to this court according to the law.

4.Accused No.2 died and police through learned Additional Public

Prosecutor filed death certificate of Accused No.2 and case against

Accused No.2 is abated as per docket proceedings dated. 23.10.2025.

5. Upon perusing both sides and perusing material, this court had framed the charge under Section 307 R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal

Code against the Accused No.1, 3 and 4. The contents of charge read over and explained to them in Vernacular language, for which they denied the charges and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.In order to prove its case the prosecution has examined PWs No.1 to 6 and exhibited Ex.P1 to P12 and MO.1 to 5 are marked.Learned

Additional Public Prosecutor had given up LW8/Jitender Kumar Yadav,

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.7 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

LW14/Dr.M.Saleem and LW16/C.Venkateshwarlu. LW3/Sajid Khan,

LW4/Mohd. Mazar, LW5/Mohd. Naib, LW6/Mohd. Salman/Syed Salman evidence closed, LW7/Manoj Dalai, LW10/Anoj Kumar, LW11/Sameer

Khan, LW12/Mohammed Hussain evidence closed.

7. After closure of prosecution side evidence, Accused No.1, 3 and 4 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C pertaining incriminating circumstances of prosecution evidence, they denied the same and reported no defense evidence.

8.Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the Accused persons.

9. Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution has established the guilt for the offence under section 307 R/w. Section 34 of

Indian Penal Code, against the Accused No.1, 3 and 4, beyond all reasonable doubt ?

10.P O I N T:

The case of the prosecution is that On 04.09.2022 at about 23.00 hours when LW1/Mohd. Ismail along with his friends

LW2/Shaik Salman, LW3/Sajid Khan, LW4/Mohd. Mazar, LW5/Mohd.

Naib, LW6/Mohd. Salman @ Syed.Salman were present at Sri Tulja

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.8 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

Bhavani Bar and Restaurant Jalpally, A1 to A4 gone there and A1 demanded LW1/Mohd. Ismail to give him money regarding land issues, but LW1/Mohd. Ismail refused to give money and quarrel arose between them and A1 with an intention to kill LW1/Mohd. Ismail and LW2/Shaik

Salman with broken beer bottle handed over to him by A2 and A3 and

A4 also joined the quarrel and beat LW1/Mohd. Ismail and LW2/Shaik

Salman causing them injuries.To unfold the case of the prosecution,

PW1 to PW6 examined, Ex.P1 to P12 and MOS.No.1 to 5 are marked.

The role of the prosecution witnesses are likewise, PW1 is the complainant and injured, PW2 is the eyewitness and injured, PW3 is the panch witness for CDF and PW4 is the police constable collected CCTV footages of scene and issued 65-B certificate, PW5 is the investigating officer issued Zero FIR, PW6 is the investigating officer filed charge sheet.

11.As per the testimonials of the PW1 that about 4 years back himself and LW2 went to Tulja Bhavani Bar at Jalpally around 10.00 PM, there they found some people were quarreling and when tried to intervene the matter he sustained injuries on head. He does not know how he sustained injury, and he does not know A1 to A3. In that regard police obtained his signatues on white papers. Police never examined and

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.9 of 12 Date:16-04-2026 recorded his statement. As per the testimony of the PW1 there is no incriminating evidence elicited to support the case of the prosecution and he turned hostile.

12.PW2 is the eyewitness and injured and he also deposed same as

PW1 that there was some people quarrelling and PW1 tried to intervene the matter and they both sustained injuries on head. He does know how he sustained injury and he does not know A1 to A3 and police never examined and recorded his statement. He too turned hostile.

13.PW3 too failed to support the case of the prosecution and testified that he does not know any facts of the case and about 4 years back police Pahadisharif called him to police station and obtained some signatures on some empty papers.

14. PW4 is the police constable and deposed about collection of CCTV footages at Sai Tulja Bhavani Bar and restaurant and copied into DVD and computer and DVD at scene of offence are working condition without any technical problems and he issued 65-B certificate in that regard.

PW5 and PW6 are the investigating officers while PW5 deposed about receiving complaint and issued zero FIR and transferred to Pahadishareef

P.S., on point of jurisdiction. PW6 deposed the lines of investigation in

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.10 of 12 Date:16-04-2026 chronological order of investigation, since reinception of FIR till filing of charge sheet.

15. On perusal of PW1 and PW2 testimony no incriminating evidence culled out from their evidence. In fact the PW1 is the injured cum complainant and PW2 being the eye witness and injured, PW3 being panch witness for CDF failed to state any sort of favourable statement in favour of the prosecution. Neither the complainant/Victim nor material witnesses of the prosecution support the case of the prosecution. Either material witnesses or circumstantial witness too failed to support the case of the prosecution. Thus, despite of examining PW1 to PW6 the prosecution failed to culled out any incriminating evidence in order to connect the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 to the charged offence. Thus despite of examining the PW1 to PW6 the prosecution failed to prove the charge offence against the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 beyond reasonable doubt.

Hence Accused No.1, 3 and 4 are entitled for acquittal.

16. In the result, the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 are found not guilty and acquitted under Section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offence under Section 307 R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The bail bonds of the Accused No.1, 3 and 4 shall stand discharged after expiry of appeal time under Section 437-A of Cr.P.C.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.11 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

MO.1 is the DVD and MO.2 is the broken pieces of beer bottle and the same shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period, MO.3 is the

Vivo touch phone, MO.4 is the Nokia keypad phone,MO.5 is the Oppo touch phone and the same shall be returned to its owner on proof of ownership after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 16 th day of April, 2026.

III Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution:

PW1/LW1Md. IsmailComplainant and injured, PW2/LW2Shaik Salman,Eye witness and injured, PW3/LW9Abhilash Reddy,Panch witness for CDF, PW4/LW13P.Mallesh,Collected CCTV footages of the scene and issued 65-B certificate. PW5/LW15Smt. V.Jayamma,Issued Zero FIR No.02/2022 of P.S., Chandrayangutta and got transfer the FIR to Pahadishaeef P.S., on the point of jurisdiction. PW6/LW17K.Madhusudhan,Investigating officer and filed charge sheet.

For Defense : NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED.

For Prosecution:

Ex.P1 Is the signature of PW1, Ex.P2 Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex.P3 Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2,

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 365 of 2023(F.C.) Page No.12 of 12 Date:16-04-2026

Ex.P4 Is the signature of PW3 on CDF, Ex.P5 Is the 65-B certificate, Ex.P6 Is the complaint given by PW1, Ex.P7 Is the Zero FIR of Chandrayangutta P.S., Ex.P8 Is the First Information Report, Ex.P9 Is the scene cum seizue panchanama, Ex.P10 Is the confession cum seizure panchanama of A2, Ex.P11 Is the confession cum seizure panchanama of A3 and A4, Ex.P12 Is the medical certificate.

For Defense:

- Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

MO.1: is the DVD,

MO.2: is the broken pieces of beer bottle,

MO.3: is the Vivo touch phone,

MO.4: is the Nokia keypad phone,

MO.5: is the Oppo touch phone.

III Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.1 of 11 Date:30-04-2026

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE :: RANGA REDDY DISTRICT : AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT: Smt. Arpitha Maram Reddy, III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.

Thursday, on this the 30th day of April, 2026

S.C No. 146 of 2024

Between:

The State through SHO, P.S. L.B.Nagar. ... Prosecution

A N D Palakurla Ramesh, S/o. Yadaiah, Age:47 years, Occ:Lorry Driver, R/o.H.No.12-1-645/89, Sy.No.58, Fathullaguda, Jaipuri Colony, Naogle, Medchal Malkajigiri District.

....Accused

Under sections 498(A), 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. Nature of offense

Plea Pleaded not guilty of Accused

Finding Found not guilty of the case

Sentence In the result, the Accused is found not guilty and or Order acquitted under section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offences Under sections 498(A), 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand discharged after expiry of appeal time under section 437-A of Cr.P.C. MO.1 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.2 of 11 Date:30-04-2026

This case has come before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri.M. Sudhakar, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, and Sri P.Vijay Ram, Counsel for the Accused , and upon perusing material papers on record and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, delivered the following;

J U D G M E N T

01.The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S. L.B.Nagar, filed a charge sheet in Crime No. 401 of 2023 for the offences punishable Under sections 498(A), 324, 307 of IPC against the Accused, alleging as follows.

(i) About 18 years back marriage of accused solemnized with

LW1/Palakurla Madhavi at her native place in the presence of elders.

During their wedlock they blessed with three daughters, 1. Shivani, 2.Bavya Sri, 3. Moksha, later accused addicted to alcohol and used to come home in drunken state and harassing LW1/Palakurla Madhavi both physically and mentally, later the matter placed before elders and panchayath was held about her husband and LW1/Palakurla Madhavi is having 3 acres of land at her native place and her husband is demanding her to get register the said land on his name, harassing her and threatening her frequently, vexed with attitude of accused LW1/Palakurla

Madhavi is living separately with her children in another house opposite to house of accused and since then, accused developed grudge against

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.3 of 11 Date:30-04-2026

LW1/Palakurla Madhavi and intended to tell her, and waiting for opportunity.

(ii) Accused do not like his wife LW1/Palakurla Madhavi with

LW2/Gunji Dhanalaxmi. On 09.03.2023 at about 0700 hrs while

LW1/Palakurla Madhavi cleaning the floor in front of her home and talking to LW2/Palakurla Madhavi, accused went to LW2/Gunji

Dhanalaxmi and questioned her so as to why does she talk to his wife and pierced on her left hand and waist with fork spoon, which brought by him and caused injuries. When, LW1/Palakurla Madhavi, LW3/Panjala

Alivelu and other neighbors questioned the same, accused got angry, abused LW1/Palakurla Madhavi stating that “Lanjadana Nuvvu Ametho

Enduku Matladuchunnav” developed grudge on her and attempted to kill her and cut her neck with a knife by caught holding her hair with animosity caused bleeding injuries to her, LW3/Panjala Alivelu came in rescue of LW1/Palakurla Madhavi, accused beat LW3/Panjala Alivelu with hands pushed her aside and escaped from there.

(iii) As per statement of LW1/Palakurla Madhavi, LW14/D.Rambabu registered case in Cr.No.401/2023 and entrusted investigation to

LW15/S.Nagaraju, during his course of investigation, LW15/S.Nagaraju visited Naveena Hospital, re-examined and recorded statement of

LW1/Palakurla Madhavi in detail and proceeded with staff to scene of

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.4 of 11 Date:30-04-2026 offence by securing the presence of LW7/Gadaguti Mallesh and

LW8/Dubba Sai Kumar, conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch and in the presence of mediators examined the

LW2/Gunji Dhanalaxmi and LW3/Panjala Alivelu, recorded their detailed statements and recorded statements of LW4/Godiga Lingam,

LW5/Babburi Jyothi, LW6/Kadimela Mouinika. On credible information

LW15/S.Nagaraju along with staff proceeded to accused house and interrogated him thoroughly and accused voluntarily confessed guilt,

LW15/S.Nagaraju secured the presence of LW9/Ravula Ranjith Goud and

LW10/Manikonda Venkataramana and recorded the confessional panchanama of accused.

(iv) Later LW15/S.Nagaraju seized steel knife used to kill

LW1/Palakurla Madhavi and later LW15/S.Nagaraju and his staff brought the accused to P.S. at 8.00 hours affected the arrest of accused on 10.03.2023 at 8.30 hours by issuing arrest memos informing the grounds of his arrest intimation to his brother and after arrest, accused remanded to judicial custody. Later collected Medical Certificate of injured LW1/Palakurla Madhavi in which Dr.Ramesh Medical officer opined that she sustained laceration over posterior aspect of neck and blunt injury on chest which is simple in nature. LW15/S.Nagaraju also

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.5 of 11 Date:30-04-2026 collected Medical Certificate of injured/LW2/Gunji Dhanalaxmi from

Dr.Sairam, medical officer

02.This case was taken on cognizance by the II Additional

Metropolitan Magistrate, at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, for the offenses Under sections 498-A, 324, 307 of IPC against the Accused, and registered as P.R.C. No.43 of 2023.

03.On the appearance of the Accused before that court, the copies of the case papers were furnished to the Accused in compliance of

Section 207 of Cr.P.C. The PRC against the Accused was committed to the Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad as it is triable by court of session, and thereafter, the Hon'ble Metropolitan Sessions Court taken on file and on assigning the session case number, and made over to this court for trial.

04.On the appearance of the Accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State and the learned counsel appearing for the consideration of all the material placed by the prosecution, this court framed the charges for the offenses Under

Sections 498(A), 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code against the Accused,

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.6 of 11 Date:30-04-2026 and the said charges were read over and explained to the Accused, and having understood the same, he denied the offence, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

05.To unfold the case of the prosecution, it has examined PW1 to

PW8 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P13, and MO 1. Learned

Public prosecutor given up LW11/Dr.Ramesh, LW12/Dr.Sairam,

LW13/B.Dayakar Reddy, LW14/D.Rambabu and LW7/Gadaguti Mallesh,

LW8/Dubba Sai Kumar, LW9/Ravula Ranjith Goud evidences are closed.

06.After closure of evidence of prosecution, the Accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. by explaining the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, for which he denied the same and stated that he did not commit any offence and reported no defense evidence and accordingly defense evidence was closed.

07.Heard arguments on either side.

08.The point that arises for consideration is whether the

prosecution has established the guilt for the offence

Under sections 498(A), 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code

against the Accused, beyond all reasonable doubt ?

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.7 of 11 Date:30-04-2026

09. P O I N T:

Whether the Accused harassed LW1/Smt. Palakurla Madhavi physically and mentally and pierced on her left hand and waist with fork spoon which brought by accused and caused injuries and when

LW1/Smt. Palakurla Madhavi and LW3/Smt. Panjala Alivelu and other neighbors questioned the accused and by boring grudge on LW1/Smt.

Palakurla Madhavi, accused attempted to kill LW1/Smt.Palakurla

Madhavi and cut her neck with a knife by caught holding her hair with animosity and caused bleeding injuries to her and when

LW3/Smt.Panjala Alivelu went to rescue of LW1/Smt.Palakurla Madhavi, accused also bet LW3/Smt.Panjala Alivelu ?

(i)To Unfold the case of the prosecution it has examined PW1 to PW8 and exhibited Ex.P1 to P13, and MO1 is marked, wherein

PW1/complainant and injured, PW2/Eye witness/mother of LW1,

PW3/Eye witness and victim, PW4/sister of LW1 and circumstantial witness, PW5/Sister of LW1 and circumstantial witness, PW6/Cousin of

LW1 and circumstantial witness, PW7/Panch witness for confessional panchanama of the accused and seizure report, PW8/Investigating officer.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.8 of 11 Date:30-04-2026

10.On careful scrutiny of PW1 to PW8, ocular evidence it is evident that except PW8 who is the official police witness, none of the other witnesses has supported the case of the prosecution.

11.According to the evidence of PW1, he deposed that he does not know any facts of the case, in the year of 2023 police obtained her signatures on white papers without disclosing any facts. Witness identified her signature on the complaint and police never examined her.

(i) PW2 and PW3 both stated in one voice that they do not know any facts of the case police never examined them and no incriminating evidence elicited in their evidence and they were turned hostile witnesses.

(ii) PW4 and PW5 too both stated in one voice that PW1 is their sister and they do not know any facts of the case and police never examined them and no incriminating evidence elicited in their evidence and they both turned hostile.

(iii) PW6 deposed that he does not know PW1 and accused.

He does not know any thing about this case. Police never examined him nor recorded his statement and thus he turned hostile witness. PW7 deposed that he does not know LW9, and does not know any facts of the

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.9 of 11 Date:30-04-2026 case. That about 3 years back when PW7 visited to P.S., L.B.Nagar. At the instance of police, he had appended his signature on white paper.

Witness identified his signature who turned hostile. On perusal of PW1 to

PW7 evidence no incriminating evidence culled out to support the case of the prosecution and all the prosecution witnesses turned hostile.

12.Except the PW8 ocular evidence there is no other testimony which connect the Accused by charge offence. There is no rule of prudence that police testimony cannot be considered. But in the case in hand, being the complainant and injured and eye witness (PW1 and

PW2) consistently failed to identify the Accused and moreover despite of examining the PW1 and PW2 no sort of incriminating circumstances elicited in order to connect the Accused with the charge offence.

Moreover, PW3 to PW7 too did not supported the case of the prosecution. In such circumstances solely basing on police testimony/PW8, it is not safe and suffice to conclude the case in favour of the prosecution. Thus despite of examining the PW1 to PW8 the prosecution failed to prove the charge offence against the Accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence Accused is entitled for acquittal.

13. In the result, the Accused is found not guilty and acquitted under section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offences Under

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.10 of 11 Date:30-04-2026 sections 498(A), 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand discharged after expiry of appeal time under section 437-A of Cr.P.C. MO.1 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period.

Typed to my dictation by the Steno, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 30 th day of April, 2026.

III Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution:

PW1: P.Madhavi, Complainant/Injured,

PW2 : P.Alivelu, Eye witness/mother of LW1,

PW3 : G.Dhanalakshmi, Eye witness/Victim,

PW4: B.Jyothi, Sister of LW1 & Circumstantial witness,

PW5: K.Mounika, Sister of LW1 & Circumstantial witness,

PW6: G.Lingam, Cousin of LW1 & Circumstantial witness,

PW7:M.Venkataramana, Panch witness for confessional panchanama of the accused and seizure report.

PW8:S.Nagaraju, Investigating officer.

For Accused :

- None -

DOCUMENTS MARKED.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 146 of 2024(F.C.) Page No.11 of 11 Date:30-04-2026

For Prosecution:

Ex.P1 is the Signature of PW1 on complaint,

Ex.P2 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1,

Ex.P3 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2,

Ex.P4 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3,

Ex.P5 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW4,

Ex.P6 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW5,

Ex.P7 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW6,

Ex.P8 is the signature of PW7,

Ex.P9 is the First Information Report,

Ex.P10 is the Confession panchanama,

Ex.P11 is the confession cum seizure panchanama,

Ex.P12 is the medical certificate of injured,

Ex.P13 is the medical certificate of LW2.

For Accused:

- Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

MO.1: one steel Knife with black coloured handle.

III Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

III Addl. CJM, RR Dist, at LB Nagar.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.1 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT : AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT:

SMT. ARPITHA MARAM REDDY,

III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.

Thursday, on this the 14th day of May, 2026

S.C No. 297 of 2024

(On being committed by Ms. Shraddha Sehgal, VI Addl. Metropolitan

Magistrate, at L.B.Nagar, R.R.District by her order dated.27th day of

February, 2024 in PRC.No.2 of 2023 in Cr.No. 1189 of 2022 of Police Station Meerpet)

Between:

The State through SHO, P.S. Meerpet. ... Prosecution

A N D

1. Nenavath. Ramesh, S/o.N.Dasya, Age:28 yrs, Occ:Driver, R/o.H.No.5-83/C, Road No.4, Teachers Colony, Balapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, N/o.Venkat Naik Thanda, Chatriyal (V), Chandampet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

2. Nenavath Dvaraji, W/o.Dasya, D/o.Thapiri, Age:50 years, OccL Agriculture Labour, R/o.H.No.3-15, Venkatigani Thanda Chitriyala, Chandampet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

3. Nenavath. Mallesh, S/o.Dasya, Age:26 years, Occ:Agriculture Labour, R/o.H.No.3-15, Venkatigani thanda Chitriyala, Chandampet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

....Accused

State through Sub Inspector of Police, Name of the Complainant Meerpet

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.2 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

Name of the Accused1. Nenavath. Ramesh, S/o.N.Dasya, Age:28 yrs, Occ:Driver, R/o.H.No.5-83/C, Road No.4, Teachers Colony, Balapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, N/o.Venkat Naik Thanda, Chatriyal (V), Chandampet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

2.NenavathDvaraji,W/o.Dasya, D/o.Thapiri, Age:50 years, OccL Agriculture Labour, R/o.H.No.3-15, Venkatigani Thanda Chitriyala, Chandampet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

3. Nenavath. Mallesh, S/o.Dasya, Age:26 years, Occ:Agriculture Labour, R/o.H.No.3- 15, Venkatigani thanda Chitriyala, Chandampet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

Offence alleged againstUnder Section 306, 498-A R/w. Section 34 the Accused.of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act.

Plea of the AccusedPleaded not guilty

Finding of the CourtFound not guilty

Order of Sentence In the result, the Accused No.1 to 3 are found not guilty and acquitted under Section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offence under Section 306, 498-A R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act. The bail bonds of the Accused No.1 to 3 shall stand discharged after expiry of appeal time under Section 437-A of Cr.P.C. MO.1 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period.

This case is coming before me for fnal hearing in the presence of Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.M.Ramesh, Counsel for the Accused No.1 to 3 and after perusing the case records, upon hearing the arguments on both sides and having stood

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.3 of 11 Date:14.05.2026 over for consideration till this date, this court has delivered the following:

::J U D G M E N T::

01.The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Meerpet has fled charge sheet against the Accused No.1 to 3 for the offence under Section 306 498-A R/ w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act.

2. The brief allegations of the prosecution in the charge sheet are as follows:

(i) That on 22.05.2014 the complainant/Mudavath Hasya fled complaint against Accused No.1 to 3 that the deceased got married with

A1 and during their wed lock blessed with two girl child. Accused No.1 to 3 started harassing deceased physically and mentally for not begotting the male child and in that regard complaint was also lodged and the same was compromised in the presence of elders. On 19.09.2022 at 03.00 hours, Accused No.1 called the complainant and abused him. On 26.09.2022 at 10.30 hours, deceased made video call to the complainant and informed that Accused No.1 physically and mentally harassing her to register the land and physically abused, as such she lost her conscious.

Accused No.2 and 3 supported the Accused No.1 and also on 27.09.2022 at 02.45 hours, complainant came to know through phone that the deceased committed suicide by hanging. Hence the complaint.

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.4 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

(ii) Basing on the complaint SI/E.Satyanarayana/PW8 registered FIR in Cr.No.1189/2022 under Section 306, 498-A R/w. Section 34 of IPC and

Section 3 and 4 of DP Act. Investigating ofcer had examined the witnesses, conducted the scene cum seizure panchanama and inquest panchanama by securing the panchas at Osmania General Hospital

Morturay. On 27.09.2022 at 20.30 hours he apprehended the accused

No.1 at his residence and produced before the court for judicial custody.

On 28.09.2022 A2 and A3 obtained anticipatory bail under vide

Crl.Mp.No.10415/2022 by the Hon’ble High court for the State of

Telangana. As such, 41(A) CRPC notice was issued to the Accused No.1 to

3. After completion of the investigation and on receipt of PME charge sheet was laid.

3.The Learned VI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at

L.B.Nagar, R.R.District took cognizance of the offence under Section 306, 498-A R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act against the Accused No.1 to 3 and by following committal procedure and committed the Accused No.1 to 3 in the Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions

Court along with case records under vide PRC.No. 2 of 2023. Hon’ble

Metropolitan Sessions Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar took cognizance of the Accused No.1 to 3 and made over the case to this court according to the law.

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.5 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

4. Upon perusing both sides and perusing material, this court had framed the charge under Section 306, 498(A) R/w. Section 34 of

Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act against the Accused

No.1 to 3. The contents of charge read over and explained to them in

Vernacular language, for which they denied the charge and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In order to prove its case the prosecution has examined PWs

No.1 to 8 and exhibited Ex.P1 to P14 and MO1 are marked. Learned

additional public prosecutor given up LW8/K.Sharada, LW9/Dr.kranthi

Kiran.

6. After closure of prosecution side evidence, Accused No.1 to 3 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C pertaining incriminating circumstances of prosecution evidence, they denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides, perused the record.

8. Now the point for determination is

(i) Whether the deceased committed suicide?

(ii) Whether the Accused No.1 to 3 abated the deceased to commit suicide?

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.6 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

(iii) Whether the prosecution bring home of the guilt of Accused No.1 to 3 under Section 306, 498(A) of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act ?

09. P O I N T:

The case of the prosecution is that, Accused No.1 to 3 physically and mentally harassed the deceased for not begotting the male child. Due to which the deceased committed suicide by hanging.

10.To unfold the case of the prosecution it has examined PW1 to PW8, exhibited Ex.P1 to P14, and MO.1 are marked. The role of the prosecution witnesses are likewise; PW1 is the complainant/Mother of the victim, PW2 to PW5 are the eye witnesses to the incident and PW6 and PW7 are inquest panchas, PW8 is the investigating ofcer.

11.On scrutiny of entire evidence on record there is no direct evidence to the incident as such the court has to rely upon circumstantial evidence and close scrutiny is necessiate and more particularly PW1 being the mother of the deceased and her oculary evidence is crucial to prove the charged offence irrespective of the family members of the deceased.

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.7 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

12. In order to prove the charge offence, initially it is a burden cast upon the prosecution to prove the following ingredients:

(a) That the deceased committed suicide,

(b) That it is the Accused No.1 to 3 abated the deceased to commit suicide by hanging himself to fan.

The prime fact need to be proved by the prosecution is whether the deceased committed suicide.

13. As per PW1 chief examination on 04.02.2026, she categorically stated that for not begotting the male child accused used to harass the deceased and also harassed to marry the deceased sister by name Radhika. Further the accused also harassed to transfer the property in the name of the deceased which constrained her to commit suicide and in that regard complaint was lodged. But coming to her further cross examination dated. 18.03.2026 she deposed that on the demise of her deceased daughter, deposed evidence against the Accused No.1 to 3. The entire contents of her chief afdavit and

Ex.P1 are incorrect as the same were given in a panic, grief state on demise of her daughter.

14.In fact PW1 is unaware of the exact reason for the death of the deceased and Accused No.1 to 3 are no way concerned to the said

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.8 of 11 Date:14.05.2026 offence. Thus PW1 initially reported incriminating evidence against the Accused No.1 to 3 and later retracted in her further cross examination which itself shows the learned defense counsel has successfully disown the testimony of the PW1 who is the material witness cum complainant. Apart from PW1, PW2 to PW7 too failed to support the case of the prosecution and only to the extent of the death of the deceased which is coupled by PW8 oral evidence and

PME was established.

15.Admittedly the PW8 who is the investigating ofcer and the court can tilt upon their testimony. But being mother of the deceased herself retracted from her statements and gave contradictory evidence against the Accused No.1 to 3 itself inspires this court to pose less credence on their testimony. On the other hand it also inspires this court to extend the reasonable beneft of doubt against the Accused No.1 to 3 as it is well proposition of law that whenever there are two favourable statements the statement which is favourable to the accused should be considered.

16.In the case in hand as the material witnesses has turned hostile and deposed favourable statement in favour of the Accused

No.1 to 3 which itself inspire this court that it is a ft case to extend

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.9 of 11 Date:14.05.2026 the beneft of doubt. Thus the evidence let in by the prosecution is not safe and sufce to conclude the case in their favour. Hence the

Accused persons are entitled for beneft of doubt and acquittal.

17.In the result, the Accused No.1 to 3 are found not guilty and acquitted under Section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offence under Section 306, 498-A R/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act. The bail bonds of the Accused No.1 to 3 shall stand discharged after expiry of appeal time under Section 437-A of

Cr.P.C. MO.1 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period.

Typed to my dictation by stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 14th day of May, 2026.

III Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution:

PW1/LW1Smt. M. HasyaComplainant, cum mother of the deceased, PW2/LW2M.Tikku NaikCircumstantial witness/Father of the deceased, PW3/LW3M.RadhikaCircumstantialwitnessand younger sister of the deceased, PW4/LW4M.RajeshCircumstantial witness and brother of the deceased, PW5/LW5Ninavath DevjiEye witness and House owner of the deceased, PW6/LW6K.RamkotiPanch witness for scene of offence and inquest,

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.10 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

PW7/LW7N.KhubyaPanch witness for scene of offence and inquest, PW8/LW10B.Satyanarayana,Investigating ofcer.

For Defense : NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED.

For Prosecution:

ExhibitDescription of ExhibitsProved No.by/Attested by

Ex.P1Is the complaint,PW1

Ex.P2Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1,PW1

Ex.P3Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2,PW2

Ex.P4Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3,PW3

Ex.P5Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW4,PW4

Ex.P6Is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW5,PW5

Ex.P7Is the signature of PW6 on scene of offencePW6 panchanama,

Ex.P8Is the signature of PW6 on inquestPW6 panchanama,

Ex.P9Is the signature of PW7 on scene of offencePW7 panchanama,

Ex.P10Is the signature of PW7 on inquestPW7 panchanama,

Ex.P11Is the First Information Report,PW8

Ex.P12Is the Scene cum seizure panchanama,PW8

Ex.P13 Is the Inquest panchanama,PW8

Ex.P14 Is the PME report.PW8

For Defense:

- Nil -

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

S.C No. 297 of 2024 (F.C.) Page No.11 of 11 Date:14.05.2026

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

Material Object No.Description of theProved by/Attested by Exhibit 1One SareePW8

III Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

III ADDL. CJM, R.R.District.

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 1 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

RANGAREDDY AT L.B. NAGAR.

Present: Smt. Arpitha Maram Reddy,

III Additional Senior Civil Judge,

FAC IV Additional Senior Civil Judge,

Rangareddy at L.B. Nagar.

Tuesday, on this the 31st day of March, 2026

O.S.No. 35 of 2026

Between:-

1. Kommineni Sai Vishnu Priya, W/o. late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Aged about: 33 Years, Occ: Housewife R/o. H.No.2-13/3, Ananthavaram, Yeddanapudi, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh 523 301.

2. Yalavarthy Padmavathi, W/o. Sambasiva Rao, Aged about: 69 Years, Occ: Housewife R/o. Annam Botla Vari Palem, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh 523 171.

3. Yalavarthy Lakshmi Padmavathi, D/o. late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Aged about: 10 Years, Occ: Student R/o. H.No.4-66, Annam Botla Vari Palem, Garnepudi, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh - 523 171.

4. Yalavarthy Meena Padmavathi, D/o. late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Aged about: 9 Years, Occ: Student R/o. H.No.4-66, Annam Botla Vari Palem, Garnepudi, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh - 523 171.

5. Yalavarthy Keerthi Padmavathi, D/o. late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Aged about: 7 Years, Occ: Student R/o. H.No.4-66, Annam Botla Vari Palem, Garnepudi, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh - 523 171.

Plaintiff No.3 to 5 being minors, her Natural Mother representing on behalf of their Natural Mother Kommineni Sai Vishnu Priya

...Plaintiffs

A N D

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 2 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

1. The Tahasildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dist.

2. The Tahasildar, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dist.

3. All Concerned ...Defendants

This suit is came before me for hearing in the presence of Sri A. Ram Mohan, Counsel for the Plaintiffs and Ld. GP Sri B. Thirumal Reddy filed Memo of Appearance on behalf of Defendant No.1 and 2 and Defendants No.3 was set exparte, upon hearing the counsels and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to declare Plaintiffs No.1 to 5 as legal heirs and successors of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy in respect of suit schedule A to D properties.

2. The brief averments of the plaint in are as follows;

(i)The Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife, Plaintiff No.2 is the mother and

Plaintiff No.3 to 5 are the daughters of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, who died on 19.09.2024, leaving behind the plaintiffs no.1 to 5 as his legal heirs.

(ii) That Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, is the absolute owner and possessor of the property, during his lifetime he purchased Plot Nos.

229,230,231 and 232, total admeasuring 776 Sq. Yards equivalent to 648.81 Sq.Mtrs., in Survey Nos. 18,19,20,21,22,25, 26,28,29,46,47,48,52 and 53 situated at Guntapally Village, Hayathnagar

Rev. Mandal, Under Majeedpur Grampanchayat, Ranga Reddy District, through a Sale Deed bearing registered document No.4327 of 2004, dated

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 3 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

19-04-2004, from M/s. Abhinandana Housing Private Limited-Hyderabad represented by its Chairmen and Managing Director D.V. Nageswar Rao (Hereinafter called as Suit Schedule A Property, SSP A), Plot No.23 total admeasuring 440 Sq. Yards equivalent to 367.8 Sq.Mtrs., in Survey Nos.

790,791 and 792. Situated at Koheda Village and Grampanchayat,

Hayathnagar Rev. Mandal, ranga reddy district, under registration sub- district, Pedda Amberpet, through a sale deed dated 22-04-2004 bearing registered document no.4458 of 2004 from Dr. Samala Srinivas Reddy (Hereinafter called as Suit Schedule B Property, SSP B), Plot No.14 total admeasuring 444 Sq. Yards equivalent to 371.2 Sq. Mtrs., in Survey

Nos.790,791 and 792. Situated at Koheda Village and Grampanchayat,

Hayathnagar Rev. Mandal, ranga reddy district, under registration sub- district, Pedda Amberpet, through a sale deed dated 22-04-2004 bearing registered document no.4457 of 2004 from Dr. Samala Srinivas Reddy (Hereinafter called as Suit Schedule C Property, SSP C), and Plot No.147 admeasuring 200 Sq. Yards, and Plot No.148 to 334.44 Sq.Mtrs., in survey no.67 situated at adibhatla village, irabhimpatnam revenue mandal, under adhibatla grampanchayat, ranga reddy district, registration sub-district, s.r.o, Ibrahimpatnam, through a sale deed dated 29-08-2003 bearing registered document no.3728 of 2003 from Smt. Palle Yashoda and others their GPA Holder Dr. A. Upendra Rao (Hereinafter called as Suit Schedule

D Property, SSP D).

(iii) That the plaintiffs after the death of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 4 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

Swamy intended to alienate the Suit Schedule Property to third parties who demanded a legal heir certificate and as such the plaintiffs on 08.12.2025, the plaintiffs approached the Tahasildar, Abdullapurmet

Mandal and Ibrahimpatnam Mandal who are Defendants No.1 and 2 herein, who denied to issue the same and advised the plaintiffs to approach competent civil court for declaration of Legal heirs in respect of suit schedule property. Hence the suit.

3. Ld.GP Sri B. Thirumal Reddy has filed Memo of Appearance on behalf of Defendant No.1 and 2 on 27.02.2026 and reported no written statement on 17.03.2026. Paper publication was given to whom so ever concerned in which neither any claims nor objections put forth on behalf of plaintiffs, as such defendant No.3was set exparte on 27.02.2026.

4. To substantiate the claim of the plaintiffs, Plaintiff No.1 examined herself as PW1 and exhibited the documents Ex.A1 to A19.

5. Heard the counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.

6. Now the point for determination is:

“ Whether the plaintiffs can be declared as legal heirs of the deceased Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy his suit schedule A to D properties as pleaded in the plaint ? ”

7. P O I N T:

That the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 5 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

Swamy, on his demise, the plaintiffs intended to alienate the Suit Schedule

Properties to third parties, as such they intended to obtain Legal Heir

Certificate. In that regard the plaintiffs approached the defendants No.1 and 2 who in turn advised the plaintiffs that the Civil Court is empowered to issue legal heir certificate to obtain a decree from a competent court.

Hence the suit.

8. To substantiate the claim of the plaintiffs, Plaintiff no.1 has examined herself as PW1 by filing affidavit in lieu of her chief examination and through him Ex.A1 to A19 are marked.

9. PW1 chief examination reiterated the contents of the plaint as such the same is not repeated to avoid repetition. It is eminent to look in to

Ex.A1 to A19 exhibited by the PW1. Ex.A1 is the C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.4327/2004 Schedule A property dt 19.04.2004 shows that is was executed in favor of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy S/o.

Samasiva Rao, Ex.A2 is the C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.4458/2004 Schedule B property dt. 22.04.2004 shows that is was executed in favor of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Ex.A3 is the C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.4457/2004 Schedule C property dt.

22.04.2004 shows that is was executed in favor of Late Yalavarthy

Venugopal Swamy, Ex.A4 is the C.C of Registered sale deed vide FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 6 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

doc.No.3728/2003 Schedule D property dt.29.08.2003 shows that is was executed in favor of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Ex.A5 Original

Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule A Property) dt.23.12.2025, Ex.A6

Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule B Property) dt 22.12.2025,

Ex.A7 Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule C Property) dt 22.12.2025, Ex.A8 Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule D

Property) dt 23.12.2025, Ex.A9 is the Original Death certificate of Late

Y.Venugopal Swamy dt 19.09.2024 shows that he died on respective date and his father name is mentiond as Yalavarthy Sambasiva Rao and it also whispers that the plaintiff no.1 is the wife of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal

Swamy, Ex.A10 is Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.1 dt 28.10.2011 shows that she is the wife of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Ex.A11 is

Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.2 dt 2012.2020 shows that she is the wife of Sambasiva Rao, as per Ex-A1 who is father of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal

Swamy as such it is evident that Plaintiff No.2 is the mother of Late

Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Ex.A12 is the Original Aadhard of plaintiff

No.3 dt 12.02.2022 shows that she is the daughter of Late Yalavarthy

Venugopal Swamy, Ex.A13 is the Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.4 dt 14.02.2022 shows that she is the daughter of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal

Swamy, Ex.A14 is the Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.5 dt 14.02.2022 shows that she is the daughter of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy, Ex.

A15 is the Original Market value certificate of schedule A property dt 23.12.2025, Ex.A16 is the Original Market value certificate of schedule B

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 7 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

property dt 22.12.2025, Ex.A17 is the Original Market value certificate of schedule C property dt 22.12.2025, Ex. A18 is the Original Market value certificate of schedule D property dt 23.12.2025,Ex.A19 is the Original

Family member certificate dt 09.10.2024 shows that Plaintiff No.1, Plaintiff

No.3 to 5 are wife and daughters of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy.

10. Asseen from Ex.A9 it shows that Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy demised on 19.09.2024. The relationship of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal

Swamy with Plaintiff No.1 is established from Ex-A9, Ex-A10, Ex-A19 and his relationship with Plaintiffs No.2 is established through Ex-A1 to Ex-A4,

Ex-A9, Ex-A12 where the name of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy is mentioned as Yalavarthy Sambasiva Rao and in Ex-A12 the name of husband of plaintiff no.2 is also mentioned as Yalavarthy Sambasiva Rao, which is one and same and it says that Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy is son of Late Sambasiva Rao and Plaintiff No.2. The relationship of Late

Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy with Plaintiffs No.3 to 5 is established from

Ex-A13, Ex-A14 and Ex-A19 Thus, basing on PW1 oral evidence coupled with Ex.A1 to A9 categorically shows that Late Reniguntala Johnson Ritty

Eshcol is husband of Plaintiff No.1 and father of Plaintiffs No. 2 and 3.

Though Defendant No.1 filed memo of appearance, but reported no written statement and Defendant no. 2 was set exparte. Thus the claim of the plaintiffs is unchallenged and unimpeached until contrary evidence is let in by the defendants. The oral and documentary evidence let in by the

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 8 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

plaintiffs is positive and cogent to conclude that Plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy . Henceforth, for the reasons as stated above the point is answered in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants.

13. In the result, the suit is decreed without costs declaring that

Plaintiffs no.1 to 5 are legal heirs of Late Yalavarthy Venugopal Swamy in respect of suit schedule A to D properties.

Typed to my dictation by steno, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this 31 st day of March, 2026.

FAC IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF:FOR DEFENDANT: PW1 Kommineni Sai Vishnu Priya - NONE -

Exhibits marked on behalf of the plaintiffs

Ex.A1 C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.4327/2004 Schedule A property dt 19.04.2004 Ex.A2 C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.4458/2004 Schedule B property dt; 22.04.2004 Ex.A3 C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.4457/2004 Schedule C property dt. 22.04.2004

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 35 of 2026 (F.C) Page No. 9 of 9 Dt: 31.03.2026

Ex.A4 C.C of Registered sale deed vide doc.No.3728/2003 Schedule D property dt.29.08.2003 Ex.A5 Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule A Property) dt.23.12.2025 Ex.A6 Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule B Property) dt 22.12.2025 Ex.A7 Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule C Property) dt 22.12.2025 Ex.A8 Original Encumbrance certificate of (Schedule D Property) dt 23.12.2025 Ex.A9 Original Death certificate of late Y.Venugopal Swamy dt 19.09.2024 Ex.A10 Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.1 dt 28.10.2011 Ex.A11 Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.2 dt 2012.2020 Ex.A12 Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.3 dt 12.02.2022 Ex.A13 Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.4 dt 14.02.2022 Ex.A14 Original Aadhard of plaintiff No.5 dt 14.02.2022 Ex.A15 Original Market value certificate of schedule A property dt 23.12.2025 Ex.A16 Original Market value certificate of schedule B property dt 22.12.2025 Ex.A17 Original Market value certificate of schedule C property dt 22.12.2025 Ex.A18 Original Market value certificate of schedule D property dt 23.12.2025 Ex.A19 Original Family member certificate dt 09.10.2024

Exhibits marked on behalf of the defendants -NIL-

FAC IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

FAC IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 1 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

COURT : RANGAREDDY AT L.B. NAGAR.

Present: Smt. Arpitha Maram Reddy,

III Additional Senior Civil Judge,

FAC II Additional Senior Civil Judge,

Rangareddy at L.B. Nagar.

Friday, on this the 20th day of February, 2026

O.S.No. 566 of 2024

Between:-

1. Reddy Ram Mohan Reddy, S/o. Pratap Reddy, Aged about 79 years, Occ: Agriculture,

2. Smt. R. Damayanthi Reddy, W/o. R. Rammohan Reddy, Aged about 69 years, Occ: Housewife,

3. R. Ashwin Reddy, S/o. R. Rammohan Reddy, Aged about 50 years, Occ: Pvt. Employee,

All are resident of: H.No.3-7-436/1, Cosmopolitan Co-op. Housing Society Colony, Mansoorabad, L. B. Nagar, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State-500068.

...Plaintiffs

A N D

1) The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, L.B. Nagar circle-3, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District.

2) All concerned ...Defendants

This suit is came before me for hearing in the presence of Sri E. Srinivasulu, Counsel for the Plaintiffs and Defendants No.1 and 2 are set exparte, upon hearing the counsels and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following: FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 2 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

J U D G M E N T

1. This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to declare Plaintiffs No.1 to 3 as legal heirs and successors of Late R. Vijaysimha Reddy in respect of suit schedule property.

2. The brief averments of the plaint in are as follows;

(i) The Plaintiff No. 1 is the father, Plaintiff No.2 is the mother and

Plaintiff No.3 is the younger brother of Late R. Vijaysimha Reddy, who died on 21.07.2024 leaving behind the plaintiffs no.1 to 3 as his legal heirs.

Prior to the death of Late R. Vijaysimha Reddy, he was divorced from his wife Smt M. Nagalakshmi vide orders in O.P.No. 232 of 2010, dated 08.10.2010 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, Ranga Reddy District, at L

B Nagar.

(ii) That Late R. Vijaysimha Reddy, is the absolute owner and possessor of the property, during his lifetime he purchased House property bearing H.No.3-7-435/4, on Plot No.131/2, in Survey No. 16, admeasuring 198 Sq. Yards or 165.52 Sq. Mtrs., with Ground Plus Three Floors, having plinth area of 1250 Sq. Feets, each in total 5000 Sq. Feets, situated at

Cosmopolitan Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Mansoorabad, L. B. Nagar,

Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Under L. B. Nagar Circle-3 of

G. H. M. C., vide eregistered sale deed document no. 10564 of 2014 dated 24.12.2024 (Herein after call on Suit Schedule property, SSP).

(iii) In order to mutate their names in municipal records as legal heirs,

FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 3 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

on 30.08.2024, Plaintiff No.3 have approached the Deputy commissioner,

GHMC, Saroornagar Mandal, who is defendant no.1 who advised the plaintiff to approach concerned Mandal Ravenue Office, Saroornagar on 18.09.2024 and requested them to issue Legal heir certificate who in turn advised the plaintiffs to approach competent civil court for declaration of

Legal heirs in respect of suit schedule property.

3. Though the summons were served Defendant No.1 did not chose to appear before the court and hence defendant no.1 is set exparte on 18.12.2024. Paper publication was given to whom so ever concerned in which neither any claims nor objections put forth on behalf of plaintiffs, as such defendant No.2 was also set exparte on 18.12.2024.

4. To substantiate the claim of the plaintiffs, Plaintiff No.3 examined herself as PW1 and exhibited the documents Ex.A1 to A10.

5. Heard the counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.

6. Now the point for determination is:

“ Whether the plaintiffs can be declared as legal heirs of the deceased Late R. Vijaysimha Reddy his suit schedule property as pleaded in the plaint ? ”

7. P O I N T:

That the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Late R. Vijaysimha Reddy, on his demise, the plaintiffs intended to mutate their names in GHMC records and obtain legal heir certificate. In that regard the plaintiffs approached the defendant No.1 who in turn advised the plaintiffs to approached

FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 4 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

Mandal Revenue Office, Saroornagar who in-turn advised the plaintiffs that the Civil Court is empowered to issue legal heir certificate to obtain a decree from a competent court. Hence the suit.

8. To substantiate the claim of the plaintiffs, Plaintiff no.3 has examined himself as PW1 by filing affidavit in lieu of his chief examination and through him Ex.A1 to A10 are marked.

9. PW1 chief examination reiterated the contents of the plaint as such the same is not repeated to avoid repetition. It is eminent to look in to

Ex.A1 to A10 exhibited by the PW1. Ex-A1 is the Death certificate of R.

Vijayasimha Reddy, dated 21.07.2024 shows that he died on respective date and the names of Plaintiff No.1 and 2 are reflected as his parents,

Ex-A2 is the CC of regd. Sale Deed, vide Doc.No.10564/2014 dated 24.12.2014 shows that it was executed in favor of Late R. Vijayasimha

Reddy, Ex-A3 is the CC of order dated 08.10.2010, in O.P.No.232/2010 on the file of Family Court, R.R.District shows the order of mutual consent between Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy and his wife Smt M. Nagalakshmi, Ex-

A4 is the EC for the period from 01.05.1995 to 22.09.2024 dated 23.09.2024, Ex-A5 is the Market Value Assitance, dated 24.09.2024, Ex-

A6 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 bearing no. 6064 6103 2147, Ex-A7 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.2 bearing no. 9079 7491 8651 shows that she is the wife of R. Rammohan Reddy,

Ex-A8 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.3 bearing ro. 5726 1476 0772 FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 5 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

shows that he is the son of R. Rammohan Reddy, Ex-A9 is certified copy of petition in FCCP No 232/2010 on the file of Hon'ble Family court

R.R.District shows that Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy and his wife Smt M.

Nagalakshmi are the petitioners in the case, Ex.A10 is certified copy of chief examination of petitioner No.2 in FCOP 232/2010 on the file of

Hon'ble Family court R.R.District shows that the wife of Late R.

Vijayasimha Reddy has deposed that there were no issues out of wedlock to them and they both agreed for mutual consent divorce.

10. As seen from Ex.A1 it shows that Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy, demised on 21.07.2024. It is evident from Ex-A1, that Plaintiff No.1 and 2 are the parents of Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy. The relationship of Late R.

Vijayasimha Reddy with Plaintiff No.1 and 2 is established from Ex-A1, Ex-

A3, Ex-A6 and Ex-A7 which reflects that Plaintiff No.1 is the father and

Plaintiff.No.2 is the mother of Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy. Ex-A8 shows that Plaintiff No.3 is the son of Plaintiff No.1 and Plaintiff No.2 and it hence shows that Plaintiff No.3 is the brother of Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy.

During the lifetime of Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy he used to reside in SSP along with Plaintiffs No.1 to 3. The relationship of Late R. Vijayasimha

Reddy with Plaintiff No.1 to 3 is established from Ex-A1, Ex-A2,Ex-A6 to

Ex-A8. It is evident from Ex-A3, Ex-A9 and Ex-A10 that Late R.

Vijayasimha Reddy got legally separated from his wife Smt M.

Nagalakshmi through a Mutual consent divorce. Thus, basing on PW1 oral

FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 6 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

evidence coupled with Ex.A1 to A10 categorically shows that Plaintiff No.1 is the father, Plaintiffs No. 2 is the mother and Plaintiff No.3 is the brother of Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy. Defendant No.1 and 2 were set exparte.

Thus the claim of the plaintiffs is unchallenged and unimpeached until contrary evidence is let in by the defendants. The oral and documentary evidence let in by the plaintiffs is positive and cogent to conclude that

Plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy.

Henceforth, for the reasons as stated above the point is answered in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants.

13. In the result, the suit is decreed without costs declaring that

Plaintiffs no.1 to 3 are legal heirs of Late R. Vijayasimha Reddy in respect of suit schedule property.

Typed to my dictation by steno, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this 20 th day of February, 2026.

FAC II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF:FOR DEFENDANT:.

PW1: R. Ashwin Reddy - NONE -

Exhibits marked on behalf of the plaintiffs

FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District

OS.No. 566 of 2024 (F.C) Page No. 7 of 7 Dt: 20.02.2026

Ex-A1 : Death certificate of R. Vijayasimha Reddy, dated 21.07.2024 Ex-A2 : CC of regd. Sale Deed, vide Doc.No.10564/2014 dated 24.12.2014 Ex-A3 : CC of order dated 08.10.2010, in O.P.No.232/2010 on the file of Family Court, R.R.District Ex-A4 : EC for the period from 01.05.1995 to 22.09.2024, Dt23.09.2024 Ex-A5 : Market Value Assitance, dated 24.09.2024 Ex-A6 : Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 bearing no. 6064 6103 2147 Ex-A7 : Aadhar card of plaintiff no.2 bearing no. 9079 7491 8651 Ex-A8 : Aadhar card of plaintiff no.3 bearing ro. 5726 1476 0772 Ex-A9 : Certified copy of petition in FCCP No 232/2010 on the file of

Hon'ble Family court R.R.District

Ex.A10: Certified copy of chief examination of petitioner No.2 in FCOP 232/2010 on the file of Hon'ble Family court R.R.District.

Exhibits marked on behalf of the defendants -NIL-

FAC II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

FAC II Addl. Senior Civil Judge Ranga Reddy District