B.V. Vijay Laxmi

1

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

District of West Godavari

Calendar of cases tried by the Judicial Magistrate of I Class:Palakol

Date of offence Report of Complaint Apprehension of accused Released on bail (1) (2) (3) (4) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12-07-2016 12-07-2016 08-08-2016 41-A Cr.P.C.notice to the accused. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commencement of trial close of trial Sentence of order Explanation for delay (5) (6) (7) (8) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29-05-2017 15-10-2018 20-11-2018 NIL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgment of Calendar Case No.309/2016 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I class: Palakol

Complainant:-State: Sub Inspector of Police, Achanta Station. (Cr.No.70/2016 of Achanta Police Station)

Name of the Accused Father Name Age Caste/Religion Calling Village 1.Bolla Satyanarayana, S/o Bapi Raju, aged 60 years, Caste: Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

2. Bolla Siva Kumar, S/o Satyanarayana, aged 28 years, Caste:Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

3. Bolla Nagamani @ Mani, W/o Satyanarayana, aged 55 years, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal. …. A.1 to A.3. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFENCE : Punishable under sections 324 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

Finding:Found not guilty.

RESULT : Accused No.1 to 3 are found guilty for the offence punishable under Secs.324& 506 r/w 34 of IPC and accused are convicted for the same under Sec.248 (2) of Cr.P.C. Accused No.1 sentenced to undergo Rigorous

Imprisonment for a period of One year for the offence punishable U/Sec.324 of IPC and pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) for the offence punishable U/sec.506 IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple Imprisonment for a period of Three months, the accused No.2 sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of

One year for the offence punishable U/Secs.324 of IPC and undergo

Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Six months for the offence punishable U/Sec.506 of IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. Both the sentences shall 2 run concurrently. The A.3 is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two

Thousand only) for the offence punishable under Sec.506 IPC under Sec.248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo Simple imprisonment for a period of Three months. The Police issued 41-A Cr.P.C.

notice to the accused No.1 to 3 and the accused are complied the same.

Hence, no set off U/Sec. 428 Cr.P.C. is applicable in this case. The M.Os.1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

Copy Submitted to:

1. The 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge, W.G.Eluru.

2. The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, Eluru, through A.P.P., Palakol.

3

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS :: PALAKOL

Present : - Smt B.V.Vijay Laxmi

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol

Monday, the 19th day of November, 2018

C.C.No.309/2016

Between:

State: The Sub-Inspector of Police, Achanta Police Station. …. Complainant AND 1.Bolla Satyanarayana, S/o Bapi Raju, aged 60 years, Caste: Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

2. Bolla Siva Kumar, S/o Satyanarayana, aged 28 years, Caste:Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

3. Bolla Nagamani @ Mani, W/o Satyanarayana, aged 55 years, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal. …. A.1 to A.3.

This case is coming on 15-10-2018 hearing before me in the presence of Learned APP for the prosecution and Sri C.V.N.Kishore Advocate

for the Accused No.1 to 3 and upon hearing and having stood over the

matter for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Achanta P.S filed a charge sheet against the Accused for the offence punishable under sections 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC in Cr. No.70/2016.

2. The brief averments of the Charge-Sheet are

The L.W.1-Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao is resident of A.Vemavaram

Village, Achanta Mandal. He is a weaver. The accused is his southern side neighbour. The A.2 used to throw stones into the house of L.W.1- Veera

Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao unnecessarily and abusing L.W.3-Veera

Dhaneswari in filthy language. Previously L.W.1- Veera Veerabhadra

Koteswara Rao reported the matter to the 100 call and the police came and admonished the A.2. As the matter stood thus on 12-07-2016 at about 7-00

A.M. the A.2 started throwing stones into the house of L.W.1- Veera 4

Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao. Then L.W.1- Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao reported the matter to his father i.e., A.1 but the A.1 supported his son i.e.,

A.2 and picked up a stick, beat the L.Ws. 1,2 and 4- Veera Veerabhadra

Koteswara Rao, Veera Gangamma and Veera Subbalakshmi with a stick and caused injuries. The A.2 beat L.W.3-Veera Dhaneswari with a stone at her colar bone and caused injury. The A.1 to A.3 threatened L.Ws. 1 to 4 with dire consequences. Basing on the report of L.W.1- Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara

Rao the L.W.13-P.Peddi Raju, A.S.I. 1259, Achanta P.S. registered the same as a case in Cr.No.70/2016, U/secs.324, 506 (2) r/w 34 of IPC. During the course of investigation he visited the scene of offence and examined the witnesses and recorded their statements, after completion of investigation the L.W.14-

A.G.S. Murthy, S.I. of police, Achanta P.S. filed charge sheet.

3. This case was taken cognizance against the accused for the offence under Sections 324 and 506 r/w 34 IPC against the accused.

4. After appearance of the accused case copies are furnished to accused as required u/s 207 of Cr.P.C accused are examined u/sec. 239 Cr.P.C explaining accusation under Sections 324 and 506 r/w 34 IPC to the accused, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-11 and M.Os. 1 to 3 are marked.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused is examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. He reported no defence evidence.

7.Thereafter heard the arguments of Learned APP and counsel for the accused.

8. The point for Consideration is :

“Whether the Prosecution has established the guilt of Accused

for the offence punishable under sections 324 and 506 r/w 34

IPC beyond all reasonable doubts”?

9. The accused are tried for the charges of 324 and 506 R/W 34 of IPC.

5

The charges framed against accused are as follows:

FIRSTLY:

That the accused A1 and A2 of you on 12-7-2016 at 7-00 A.M at Achant

Vemavaram village of Achanta Mandalam voluntarily caused hurt to L.W 1,L.W 2and L.W 4 by means of stick and stone in which A1 of you beat L.W1:

Veera Veerabhadra Koteswararao,L.W 2:Veera Gangamma and L.W 4: Veera

Subbalakshmi with stick and A2 of you beat L.W:3 Veera Dhaneswari with stone and thereby accused of you committed an offence punishable under section 324 of Indian Penal Code.

SECONDLY AND LASTLY:

That the accused A1 to A3 of you at the same time and at the same date which was mentioned in Charge No.1 committed criminal intimidation by threatening the L.W.1/P.Posamma with dire consequences and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 506 R/W 34 of Indian Penal

Code.

10. The P.W.1 stated in his chief examination that the house of the accused is situated near to his house. Prior to the case on hand, the A2 hurled the stones in his house. The A2 also abused L.W 3 while she was decoraing with lime stone in front of the house. Immediately she informed the same to the police by dialing 100. Police came and admonished the A2 and went away. On 12-07-2016 at about 7-00 A.M. while he was present in his house with L.Ws. 2 to 4 and his son, the A.2 hurled stones into his house, he went to the house of the accused with a view to inform about the high handed act of A.2 and informed the same to A.1. A.1 supported the A.2 but he did not care of him. Later he came to his house. Later the A1 and A2 came to his house, A1 beat him with a stick on his head, due to that he sustained bleeding injury. Later the A.1 also beat him with stick on his left side chest and the A.1 also beat him with stick on his left hand. He sustained bleeding injury on his left hand. The L.W.2 witnessed the incident and came 6 for his rescue. The A.1 beat L.W.2 with stick on her right hand and caused injuries on index and middle finger, due to that L.W.2 sustained bleeding injuries. The A.2 beat L.W.3 with brick on her chest. The L.W.4 witnessed the incident and came to his rescue, the A.1 beat L.W.4 with stick on her back.

The A.2 threatened them with dire consequences and stated that he will kill them by backing with a knife today itself. The A.3 threatened them as to why they are residing at the residence of Kamma Community. In case they will not leave their premises their fate is that much. A.1 also threatened them that he will see their end. The L.W.5 and neighbours of their house witnessed the incident later with the help of L.W.5 himself, L.W.2 to L.W.4 went to Achanta

Police station, in turn the police send them to the Government Hospital,

Palakol for treatment. Police came there and recorded his statement. Ex.P.1 is the statement, later the doctors of the Government hospital, Palakol referred him to the G.G.H, Kakinada for better treatment. He can identify the stick, brick and brick pieces. M.O.1 is stick, M.O.2 is brick piece two in number.

M.O.3 is brick, due to injuries caused by accused on his head his vision is not up to the mark.

11. The P.W.2 stated in his chief examination that on 12-07-2016 at about 7-00 A.M. herself, P.W.1, L.W.2, L.W.3 and her son were present in her house, the A.2 hurled stones into her house. P.W.1 informed the same to A.1 about the high handed act of A.2 and informed the same to A.1. A.1 supported the

A.2 but he did not care of P.W.1. Later A.1 and A.2 came to her house, A.1 beat P.W.1 with a stick on his head due to that he sustained bleeding injury and A.1 also beat P.W.1 with stick on his left side of his chest and left hand.

Due to that P.W.1 sustained bleeding injury on his left hand. The L.W.2 witnessed the same and rescued the P.W.1 on that A.1 beat L.W.2 with a stick on her right hand and caused injuries on her index and middle finger. Due to which she sustained bleeding injury. She also went to the rescue of P.W.1 and

L.W.2 the A.1 beat with stick on her back. The A.2 also beat L.W.3 with brick 7 on above her chest. The A.2 threatened them that he will kill them with a knife. The A.3 threatened them as to why you are residing at the residence of

Kamma Community and demanded and threatened them to vacate the house. On that they also vacated the said house and went away. The A.1 also threatened them he will see their end. L.W.5 neighbour of their house witnessed the incident, later with the help of L.W.5, himself, P.W.1, L.W.2 and

L.W.3 went to Achanta police station. Police referred them to the Government

Hospital, Achanta for treatment. The doctors of the Government Hospital referred the P.W.1 to G.G.H, Kakinada for better treatment. she can identify the stick, brick pieces and brick. M.O.1 is stick, M.O.2 is brick pieces two in number and M.O.3 is brick. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

12. The P.W.3 stated in her chief examination that the prior to 10 months of filing of this case, A.2 used to abusing them and used to hurled stones into his house. The A.2 also abused L.W.3 when she was decoring in front of their house with lime stone. At about ten months back at 7-00 A.M. A.1 and A.2 came to her house, A.1 beat P.W.1 with stick on his head, due to that P.W.1 sustained bleeding injury. A.1 also beat her with a stick on her right hand index and middle fingers due to that she sustained bleeding injury. A.1 also beat the P.W.2 with stick on her back. A.2 beat the L.W.3 with a brick on the chest of the L.W.3. Later herself, P.W.1, P.W.2 and L.W.3 went to the Achanta

Police Station. Police referred them to the Government hospital, Palakol for treatment. Police examined her and recorded her statement. The doctors of the Palakol Government Hospital referred the P.W.1 to G.G.H. Kakinada for better treatment. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

13. The P.W.4 stated in her chief examination that on 12-07-2016 at about 7-00 A.M. she was present in her house along with her mother, her father and her brother, her grandmother. A.2 hurled stones into their house, the

P.W.1 asked the A.1 and informed him that A.2 hurling stones into their house despite admonishing A.2, A.1 supported A.2. The A.1 and A.2 came to their 8 house, A.1 beat with a stick P.W.1 on his head, due to that P.W.1 sustained bleeding injury, A.1 also beat P.W.1 with stick on his left side of chest and also beat P.W.1 with stick on his left hand fingers. The P.W.2 witnessed the incident and went away to the rescue of P.W.1 the A.1 beat P.W.2 with a stick on her back. He also went away to the rescue of her mother, A.2 beat her with a brick on her chest, A.1 also beat P.W.3 with a stick on her right hand index and middle fingers. A.2 threatened them he will kill them with a knife,

A.1 threatened them he will see their end. A.3 abused and threatened them that as to why they are residing in the locality of Kamma community and demanded them to vacate their house. With the help of L.W.5 herself and

P.Ws. 1 to 3 went to Achanta police station, police referred her P.Ws. 1 to 3 to the Government Hospital, Palakol for treatment. The doctor of the

Government Hospital, Palakol referred the P.W.1 to G.G.H. Kakinada for better treatment. She can identify the stick, brick pieces in two number and brick which are marked as M.Os 1 to 3. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

14.The evidence of P.W 1 P.W 2 P.W3 and P.W 4 are corroborative to each other.

15.The evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W.4 is supported by the evidence of P.W 11 about the registration of case. He P.W.11 stated in his chief examination that that on 12-7-2016 at 7-00 am when he was present at the police station. the P.Ws. 1 to 5 came to the police station out of them

P.W.1 to 4 are with injuries. He recorded the statement of P.W.1 and the P.Ws.

1 to 4 to the Government hospital, Palakol for treatment. Basing on the statement of P.W.1 he registered the case in Crime No.70/2015 for the offence under section 324, 506 (2) r/w. 34 of IPC, he issued FIR. Ex.P.10 is the original FIR.

9

16.The P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 and the P.W.11 stated about the referring of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 to the hospital. The evidence of P.W 10 corroborating the evidence of the P.W.1 P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W 4 and P.W 11.

17.The P.W.10 who is doctor and who examinedP.W.1 P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W.4 stated in his chief examination that that on 12-7-2016 at 10-00 A.M he examined P.W.1 and found the following injuries. (1) A lacerated wound of size 6x1x1 cm over scalp. (2) A lacerated wound of size 1 x 1/2 cm over the left hand. He referred the P.W.1 to GGH Kakinada for better treatment. They have taken the X-ray bearing No. 21948 and found no bone injury. His opinion that the above injuries are simple in nature. He issued wound certificate. Ex.P6 is the wound certificate of P.W.1. On the same day he examined the P.W.2 and found no external injuries. He issued wound certificate of P.W.2. Ex.P.7 is the wound certificate of P.W.2. On the same day he examined P.W.3 and found the following injuries: (1) A lacerated wound of size 1 x 1 x 1/4 cm over right middle finger, (2) An abrasion of the size 1/2 x 1/2 cm over right index finger, his opinion that the above injuries are simple in nature, he issued wound certificate of P.W.2, Ex.P.8 is the wound certificate of P.W.2. On the same day he examined P.W.4 and found the following injuries (1) An abrasion of size 8 x 1 cm over chest and neck region and his opinion that the injury is simple in nature. He issued wound certificate of P.W.4,

Ex.P.9 is the wound certificate of P.W.4.

18.The P.W.10 stated in his cross examination that it is true that injuries mentioned in Exs P.6 to P.9 may be within the range of self infliction. But, going through the case, in this case three persons are injured out of whom the P.W.1 was severely injured. This court is of the opinion that the person cannot be self inflicted such type of injuries. At once three persons cannot inflict injuries to themselves to file false case against the accused.

10

19.The L.W.13 is examined as P.W.11 stated in his chief examination the he visited to the scene of offence which is situated at Karnibattulavariveedhi.

The scene of offence place is situated at Vigilavarivleedhi (Karnibattulavariveedhi) on the road in-front of the house of P.W 1 and the accused. He observed the scene of offence in the presence of P.W.9 and

L.W.11, he seized M.Os. 1 to 3 under the cover of scene observation report.

Ex.P.5 is the scene observation report. He also prepared rough sketch.

Ex.P.11 is the rough sketch. He also secured the presence of witnesses P.W.6,

P.W.7, L.W.8 and L.W.9 he examined them and recorded their statements.

P.W.5 , P.W.6, P.W.7, P.W.8 stated to him as in Exs.P-2 to P4. Further investigation done by L.W.14.

20.The P.W.9 stated in his chief examination that on 12-07-2016 at about 11-00 P.M. himself and L.W.11 accompanied with L.W.13 with Achanta police they all went to the scene of offence which is situated at the road of P.W.1 at

Vegulavariveedhi of Achanta Vemavaram Village. He observed the scene of offence and police observed the scene of offence in their presence and the police seized two brick pieces, one brick bat and stick from the scene of offence place. He drafted the scene observation report which is marked as

Ex.P.5. He can identify the stick and two brick pieces and one brick bat basing on the identity slips attached to the seized property. He can identify the stick, two brick pieces and one brick bat M.O.1 is the stick, M.O.2 is the two brick pieces, M.O.3 is the brick bat. He also mentioned in Ex.P.5 about the boundary details of the scene of offence place.

21.The independent eye witness P.W.6 to P.W.9 turned hostile in this case and hostality of P.W.6 to P.W.9 is not fatal to the case of prosecution because the evidence of P.W.1 is substantiated by the oral testimony of P.Ws.2,P.W.3 and P.W.4 and the medical evidence of P.W.10. Though the P.W.2,P.W.3 and

P.W.4 are relatives of P.W.1, it will not brush aside their evidence only on that 11 reason. The presence of P.W.2,P.W.3 and P.W.4 at the time of incident is also established by the evidence.

22.The evidence of P.W.11 and P.W.12 are Investigation Officers and their evidence disclosed about the registration of this case, conducting investigation and filing charge sheet.

23.The learned counsel at the time of the argument argued about the place of incident and stated that the place of incident was not mentioned by the P.W.1.But on perusal of record the P.W 1 stated in his cross examination that the incident took place on road in-front of his house portion. The evidence of P.W 1 is corroborated by P.W 11 who is a investigation officer in this case. The P.W 11 stated in his chief examination that the scene of offence place is situated Vegilavarivleedhi ( Karnibattulavari veedhi) on the road in-front of the house of P.W.1 and the accused.

24. The P.W.12 stated in his chief examination that on 15-07-2016 he took up investigation in this case. He verified the investigation done by P.W.11 and he found the same in correct lines.. On the same day he went to the scene of offence which is located at complainant's house at Achanta

Vemavaram Village. On 08-08-2016 he issued 41-A Cr.P.C. notice to the accused and the accused complied the same. On 02-09-2016 he received wound certificate of P.Ws. 1 to 4. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

25. In the above foregoing discussion, the prosecution prove the guilt of the accused No.1 to 3 beyond all reasonable doubt.

26.RESULT: Accused No.1 to 3 are found guilty for the offence punishable under Secs.324 & 506 r/w 34 of IPC and accused are convicted for the same under Sec.248 (2) of Cr.P.C.

12

Dictated to the Jr. Assistant, directly on the computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, this the 20th day of November, 2018.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

REGARDING QUANTUM OF SENTENCE when asked the accused

No.1 to 3 reported that “they have to look after their family” taking into consideration of pleas raised by accused, considering the same, I am of opinion to take a lenient view in imposing the sentence for the accused

No.1 to 3 hence and the accused No.1 sentenced to undergo Rigorous

Imprisonment for a period of One year for the offence punishable U/Sec.324 of IPC and pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) for the offence punishable U/sec.506 IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple Imprisonment for a period of Three months, the accused No.2 sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of

One year for the offence punishable U/Secs.324 of IPC and undergo

Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Six months for the offence punishable U/Sec. 506 of IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. The A.3 is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two

Thousand only) for the offence punishable under Sec.506 IPC under Sec.248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo Simple imprisonment for a period of Three months. The Police issued 41-A Cr.P.C.

notice to the accused No.1 to 3 and the accused are complied the same.

Hence, no set off U/Sec. 428 Cr.P.C. is applicable in this case. The M.Os.1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, this the 20th day of December, 2016.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1 : Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao -None- P.W.2 : Veera Subba Lakshmi P.W.3 : Veera Gangamma P.W.4 : Veera Dharaneswari P.W.5 : Talla Kumaraswamy P.W.6 : Arumilli Veera Venkata Subbarao P.W.7 : Talluri Ramu P.W.8 : Yedlapalli Satyanarayana 13

P.W.9 : Akula Gopalakrishna P.W.10 : KYN Varma P.W.11 : P.Peediraju P.W.12 : A.G.S.Murthy.

DOCUMENTS MARKED:

FOR PROSECUTION: Ex.P-1 : Statement of P.W.1 Ex.P-2 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.6 Ex.P-3 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.7 Ex.P-4 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.8 Ex.P-5 : Scene Observation Report Ex.P-6 : Wound Certificate of P.W.1 Ex.P-7 : Wound Certificate of P.W.2 Ex.P-8 : Wound Certificate of P.W.3 Ex.P-9 : Wound Certificate of P.W.4 Ex.P-10: Original F.I.R. Ex.P-11: Rough Sketch.

FOR DEFENCE : NIL

MATERIAL OBJECTS :-

M.O.1: Stick M.O.2: Brick Pieces-2 M.O.3: Brick.

J.F.C.M

PALAKOL.

1

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

District of West Godavari

Calendar of cases tried by the Judicial Magistrate of I Class:Palakol

Date of offence Report of Complaint Apprehension of accused Released on bail (1) (2) (3) (4) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12-07-2016 12-07-2016 08-08-2016 41-A Cr.P.C.notice to the accused. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commencement of trial close of trial Sentence of order Explanation for delay (5) (6) (7) (8) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29-05-2017 15-10-2018 20-11-2018 NIL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgment of Calendar Case No.309/2016 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I class: Palakol

Complainant:-State: Sub Inspector of Police, Achanta Station. (Cr.No.70/2016 of Achanta Police Station)

Name of the Accused Father Name Age Caste/Religion Calling Village 1.Bolla Satyanarayana, S/o Bapi Raju, aged 60 years, Caste: Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

2. Bolla Siva Kumar, S/o Satyanarayana, aged 28 years, Caste:Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

3. Bolla Nagamani @ Mani, W/o Satyanarayana, aged 55 years, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal. …. A.1 to A.3. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFENCE : Punishable under sections 324 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

Finding:Found not guilty.

RESULT : Accused No.1 to 3 are found guilty for the offence punishable under Secs.324& 506 r/w 34 of IPC and accused are convicted for the same under Sec.248 (2) of Cr.P.C. Accused No.1 sentenced to undergo Rigorous

Imprisonment for a period of One year for the offence punishable U/Sec.324 of IPC and pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) for the offence punishable U/sec.506 IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple Imprisonment for a period of Three months, the accused No.2 sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of

One year for the offence punishable U/Secs.324 of IPC and undergo

Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Six months for the offence punishable U/Sec.506 of IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. Both the sentences shall 2 run concurrently. The A.3 is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two

Thousand only) for the offence punishable under Sec.506 IPC under Sec.248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo Simple imprisonment for a period of Three months. The Police issued 41-A Cr.P.C.

notice to the accused No.1 to 3 and the accused are complied the same.

Hence, no set off U/Sec. 428 Cr.P.C. is applicable in this case. The M.Os.1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

Copy Submitted to:

1. The 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge, W.G.Eluru.

2. The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, Eluru, through A.P.P., Palakol.

3

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS :: PALAKOL

Present : - Smt B.V.Vijay Laxmi

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol

Monday, the 19th day of November, 2018

C.C.No.309/2016

Between:

State: The Sub-Inspector of Police, Achanta Police Station. …. Complainant AND 1.Bolla Satyanarayana, S/o Bapi Raju, aged 60 years, Caste: Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

2. Bolla Siva Kumar, S/o Satyanarayana, aged 28 years, Caste:Kamma, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal.

3. Bolla Nagamani @ Mani, W/o Satyanarayana, aged 55 years, R/o Achanta Vemavaram Village, Achanta Mandal. …. A.1 to A.3.

This case is coming on 15-10-2018 hearing before me in the presence of Learned APP for the prosecution and Sri C.V.N.Kishore Advocate

for the Accused No.1 to 3 and upon hearing and having stood over the

matter for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Achanta P.S filed a charge sheet against the Accused for the offence punishable under sections 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC in Cr. No.70/2016.

2. The brief averments of the Charge-Sheet are

The L.W.1-Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao is resident of A.Vemavaram

Village, Achanta Mandal. He is a weaver. The accused is his southern side neighbour. The A.2 used to throw stones into the house of L.W.1- Veera

Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao unnecessarily and abusing L.W.3-Veera

Dhaneswari in filthy language. Previously L.W.1- Veera Veerabhadra

Koteswara Rao reported the matter to the 100 call and the police came and admonished the A.2. As the matter stood thus on 12-07-2016 at about 7-00

A.M. the A.2 started throwing stones into the house of L.W.1- Veera 4

Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao. Then L.W.1- Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao reported the matter to his father i.e., A.1 but the A.1 supported his son i.e.,

A.2 and picked up a stick, beat the L.Ws. 1,2 and 4- Veera Veerabhadra

Koteswara Rao, Veera Gangamma and Veera Subbalakshmi with a stick and caused injuries. The A.2 beat L.W.3-Veera Dhaneswari with a stone at her colar bone and caused injury. The A.1 to A.3 threatened L.Ws. 1 to 4 with dire consequences. Basing on the report of L.W.1- Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara

Rao the L.W.13-P.Peddi Raju, A.S.I. 1259, Achanta P.S. registered the same as a case in Cr.No.70/2016, U/secs.324, 506 (2) r/w 34 of IPC. During the course of investigation he visited the scene of offence and examined the witnesses and recorded their statements, after completion of investigation the L.W.14-

A.G.S. Murthy, S.I. of police, Achanta P.S. filed charge sheet.

3. This case was taken cognizance against the accused for the offence under Sections 324 and 506 r/w 34 IPC against the accused.

4. After appearance of the accused case copies are furnished to accused as required u/s 207 of Cr.P.C accused are examined u/sec. 239 Cr.P.C explaining accusation under Sections 324 and 506 r/w 34 IPC to the accused, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-11 and M.Os. 1 to 3 are marked.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused is examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. He reported no defence evidence.

7.Thereafter heard the arguments of Learned APP and counsel for the accused.

8. The point for Consideration is :

“Whether the Prosecution has established the guilt of Accused

for the offence punishable under sections 324 and 506 r/w 34

IPC beyond all reasonable doubts”?

9. The accused are tried for the charges of 324 and 506 R/W 34 of IPC.

5

The charges framed against accused are as follows:

FIRSTLY:

That the accused A1 and A2 of you on 12-7-2016 at 7-00 A.M at Achant

Vemavaram village of Achanta Mandalam voluntarily caused hurt to L.W 1,L.W 2and L.W 4 by means of stick and stone in which A1 of you beat L.W1:

Veera Veerabhadra Koteswararao,L.W 2:Veera Gangamma and L.W 4: Veera

Subbalakshmi with stick and A2 of you beat L.W:3 Veera Dhaneswari with stone and thereby accused of you committed an offence punishable under section 324 of Indian Penal Code.

SECONDLY AND LASTLY:

That the accused A1 to A3 of you at the same time and at the same date which was mentioned in Charge No.1 committed criminal intimidation by threatening the L.W.1/P.Posamma with dire consequences and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 506 R/W 34 of Indian Penal

Code.

10. The P.W.1 stated in his chief examination that the house of the accused is situated near to his house. Prior to the case on hand, the A2 hurled the stones in his house. The A2 also abused L.W 3 while she was decoraing with lime stone in front of the house. Immediately she informed the same to the police by dialing 100. Police came and admonished the A2 and went away. On 12-07-2016 at about 7-00 A.M. while he was present in his house with L.Ws. 2 to 4 and his son, the A.2 hurled stones into his house, he went to the house of the accused with a view to inform about the high handed act of A.2 and informed the same to A.1. A.1 supported the A.2 but he did not care of him. Later he came to his house. Later the A1 and A2 came to his house, A1 beat him with a stick on his head, due to that he sustained bleeding injury. Later the A.1 also beat him with stick on his left side chest and the A.1 also beat him with stick on his left hand. He sustained bleeding injury on his left hand. The L.W.2 witnessed the incident and came 6 for his rescue. The A.1 beat L.W.2 with stick on her right hand and caused injuries on index and middle finger, due to that L.W.2 sustained bleeding injuries. The A.2 beat L.W.3 with brick on her chest. The L.W.4 witnessed the incident and came to his rescue, the A.1 beat L.W.4 with stick on her back.

The A.2 threatened them with dire consequences and stated that he will kill them by backing with a knife today itself. The A.3 threatened them as to why they are residing at the residence of Kamma Community. In case they will not leave their premises their fate is that much. A.1 also threatened them that he will see their end. The L.W.5 and neighbours of their house witnessed the incident later with the help of L.W.5 himself, L.W.2 to L.W.4 went to Achanta

Police station, in turn the police send them to the Government Hospital,

Palakol for treatment. Police came there and recorded his statement. Ex.P.1 is the statement, later the doctors of the Government hospital, Palakol referred him to the G.G.H, Kakinada for better treatment. He can identify the stick, brick and brick pieces. M.O.1 is stick, M.O.2 is brick piece two in number.

M.O.3 is brick, due to injuries caused by accused on his head his vision is not up to the mark.

11. The P.W.2 stated in his chief examination that on 12-07-2016 at about 7-00 A.M. herself, P.W.1, L.W.2, L.W.3 and her son were present in her house, the A.2 hurled stones into her house. P.W.1 informed the same to A.1 about the high handed act of A.2 and informed the same to A.1. A.1 supported the

A.2 but he did not care of P.W.1. Later A.1 and A.2 came to her house, A.1 beat P.W.1 with a stick on his head due to that he sustained bleeding injury and A.1 also beat P.W.1 with stick on his left side of his chest and left hand.

Due to that P.W.1 sustained bleeding injury on his left hand. The L.W.2 witnessed the same and rescued the P.W.1 on that A.1 beat L.W.2 with a stick on her right hand and caused injuries on her index and middle finger. Due to which she sustained bleeding injury. She also went to the rescue of P.W.1 and

L.W.2 the A.1 beat with stick on her back. The A.2 also beat L.W.3 with brick 7 on above her chest. The A.2 threatened them that he will kill them with a knife. The A.3 threatened them as to why you are residing at the residence of

Kamma Community and demanded and threatened them to vacate the house. On that they also vacated the said house and went away. The A.1 also threatened them he will see their end. L.W.5 neighbour of their house witnessed the incident, later with the help of L.W.5, himself, P.W.1, L.W.2 and

L.W.3 went to Achanta police station. Police referred them to the Government

Hospital, Achanta for treatment. The doctors of the Government Hospital referred the P.W.1 to G.G.H, Kakinada for better treatment. she can identify the stick, brick pieces and brick. M.O.1 is stick, M.O.2 is brick pieces two in number and M.O.3 is brick. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

12. The P.W.3 stated in her chief examination that the prior to 10 months of filing of this case, A.2 used to abusing them and used to hurled stones into his house. The A.2 also abused L.W.3 when she was decoring in front of their house with lime stone. At about ten months back at 7-00 A.M. A.1 and A.2 came to her house, A.1 beat P.W.1 with stick on his head, due to that P.W.1 sustained bleeding injury. A.1 also beat her with a stick on her right hand index and middle fingers due to that she sustained bleeding injury. A.1 also beat the P.W.2 with stick on her back. A.2 beat the L.W.3 with a brick on the chest of the L.W.3. Later herself, P.W.1, P.W.2 and L.W.3 went to the Achanta

Police Station. Police referred them to the Government hospital, Palakol for treatment. Police examined her and recorded her statement. The doctors of the Palakol Government Hospital referred the P.W.1 to G.G.H. Kakinada for better treatment. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

13. The P.W.4 stated in her chief examination that on 12-07-2016 at about 7-00 A.M. she was present in her house along with her mother, her father and her brother, her grandmother. A.2 hurled stones into their house, the

P.W.1 asked the A.1 and informed him that A.2 hurling stones into their house despite admonishing A.2, A.1 supported A.2. The A.1 and A.2 came to their 8 house, A.1 beat with a stick P.W.1 on his head, due to that P.W.1 sustained bleeding injury, A.1 also beat P.W.1 with stick on his left side of chest and also beat P.W.1 with stick on his left hand fingers. The P.W.2 witnessed the incident and went away to the rescue of P.W.1 the A.1 beat P.W.2 with a stick on her back. He also went away to the rescue of her mother, A.2 beat her with a brick on her chest, A.1 also beat P.W.3 with a stick on her right hand index and middle fingers. A.2 threatened them he will kill them with a knife,

A.1 threatened them he will see their end. A.3 abused and threatened them that as to why they are residing in the locality of Kamma community and demanded them to vacate their house. With the help of L.W.5 herself and

P.Ws. 1 to 3 went to Achanta police station, police referred her P.Ws. 1 to 3 to the Government Hospital, Palakol for treatment. The doctor of the

Government Hospital, Palakol referred the P.W.1 to G.G.H. Kakinada for better treatment. She can identify the stick, brick pieces in two number and brick which are marked as M.Os 1 to 3. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

14.The evidence of P.W 1 P.W 2 P.W3 and P.W 4 are corroborative to each other.

15.The evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W.4 is supported by the evidence of P.W 11 about the registration of case. He P.W.11 stated in his chief examination that that on 12-7-2016 at 7-00 am when he was present at the police station. the P.Ws. 1 to 5 came to the police station out of them

P.W.1 to 4 are with injuries. He recorded the statement of P.W.1 and the P.Ws.

1 to 4 to the Government hospital, Palakol for treatment. Basing on the statement of P.W.1 he registered the case in Crime No.70/2015 for the offence under section 324, 506 (2) r/w. 34 of IPC, he issued FIR. Ex.P.10 is the original FIR.

9

16.The P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 and the P.W.11 stated about the referring of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 to the hospital. The evidence of P.W 10 corroborating the evidence of the P.W.1 P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W 4 and P.W 11.

17.The P.W.10 who is doctor and who examinedP.W.1 P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W.4 stated in his chief examination that that on 12-7-2016 at 10-00 A.M he examined P.W.1 and found the following injuries. (1) A lacerated wound of size 6x1x1 cm over scalp. (2) A lacerated wound of size 1 x 1/2 cm over the left hand. He referred the P.W.1 to GGH Kakinada for better treatment. They have taken the X-ray bearing No. 21948 and found no bone injury. His opinion that the above injuries are simple in nature. He issued wound certificate. Ex.P6 is the wound certificate of P.W.1. On the same day he examined the P.W.2 and found no external injuries. He issued wound certificate of P.W.2. Ex.P.7 is the wound certificate of P.W.2. On the same day he examined P.W.3 and found the following injuries: (1) A lacerated wound of size 1 x 1 x 1/4 cm over right middle finger, (2) An abrasion of the size 1/2 x 1/2 cm over right index finger, his opinion that the above injuries are simple in nature, he issued wound certificate of P.W.2, Ex.P.8 is the wound certificate of P.W.2. On the same day he examined P.W.4 and found the following injuries (1) An abrasion of size 8 x 1 cm over chest and neck region and his opinion that the injury is simple in nature. He issued wound certificate of P.W.4,

Ex.P.9 is the wound certificate of P.W.4.

18.The P.W.10 stated in his cross examination that it is true that injuries mentioned in Exs P.6 to P.9 may be within the range of self infliction. But, going through the case, in this case three persons are injured out of whom the P.W.1 was severely injured. This court is of the opinion that the person cannot be self inflicted such type of injuries. At once three persons cannot inflict injuries to themselves to file false case against the accused.

10

19.The L.W.13 is examined as P.W.11 stated in his chief examination the he visited to the scene of offence which is situated at Karnibattulavariveedhi.

The scene of offence place is situated at Vigilavarivleedhi (Karnibattulavariveedhi) on the road in-front of the house of P.W 1 and the accused. He observed the scene of offence in the presence of P.W.9 and

L.W.11, he seized M.Os. 1 to 3 under the cover of scene observation report.

Ex.P.5 is the scene observation report. He also prepared rough sketch.

Ex.P.11 is the rough sketch. He also secured the presence of witnesses P.W.6,

P.W.7, L.W.8 and L.W.9 he examined them and recorded their statements.

P.W.5 , P.W.6, P.W.7, P.W.8 stated to him as in Exs.P-2 to P4. Further investigation done by L.W.14.

20.The P.W.9 stated in his chief examination that on 12-07-2016 at about 11-00 P.M. himself and L.W.11 accompanied with L.W.13 with Achanta police they all went to the scene of offence which is situated at the road of P.W.1 at

Vegulavariveedhi of Achanta Vemavaram Village. He observed the scene of offence and police observed the scene of offence in their presence and the police seized two brick pieces, one brick bat and stick from the scene of offence place. He drafted the scene observation report which is marked as

Ex.P.5. He can identify the stick and two brick pieces and one brick bat basing on the identity slips attached to the seized property. He can identify the stick, two brick pieces and one brick bat M.O.1 is the stick, M.O.2 is the two brick pieces, M.O.3 is the brick bat. He also mentioned in Ex.P.5 about the boundary details of the scene of offence place.

21.The independent eye witness P.W.6 to P.W.9 turned hostile in this case and hostality of P.W.6 to P.W.9 is not fatal to the case of prosecution because the evidence of P.W.1 is substantiated by the oral testimony of P.Ws.2,P.W.3 and P.W.4 and the medical evidence of P.W.10. Though the P.W.2,P.W.3 and

P.W.4 are relatives of P.W.1, it will not brush aside their evidence only on that 11 reason. The presence of P.W.2,P.W.3 and P.W.4 at the time of incident is also established by the evidence.

22.The evidence of P.W.11 and P.W.12 are Investigation Officers and their evidence disclosed about the registration of this case, conducting investigation and filing charge sheet.

23.The learned counsel at the time of the argument argued about the place of incident and stated that the place of incident was not mentioned by the P.W.1.But on perusal of record the P.W 1 stated in his cross examination that the incident took place on road in-front of his house portion. The evidence of P.W 1 is corroborated by P.W 11 who is a investigation officer in this case. The P.W 11 stated in his chief examination that the scene of offence place is situated Vegilavarivleedhi ( Karnibattulavari veedhi) on the road in-front of the house of P.W.1 and the accused.

24. The P.W.12 stated in his chief examination that on 15-07-2016 he took up investigation in this case. He verified the investigation done by P.W.11 and he found the same in correct lines.. On the same day he went to the scene of offence which is located at complainant's house at Achanta

Vemavaram Village. On 08-08-2016 he issued 41-A Cr.P.C. notice to the accused and the accused complied the same. On 02-09-2016 he received wound certificate of P.Ws. 1 to 4. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

25. In the above foregoing discussion, the prosecution prove the guilt of the accused No.1 to 3 beyond all reasonable doubt.

26.RESULT: Accused No.1 to 3 are found guilty for the offence punishable under Secs.324 & 506 r/w 34 of IPC and accused are convicted for the same under Sec.248 (2) of Cr.P.C.

12

Dictated to the Jr. Assistant, directly on the computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, this the 20th day of November, 2018.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

REGARDING QUANTUM OF SENTENCE when asked the accused

No.1 to 3 reported that “they have to look after their family” taking into consideration of pleas raised by accused, considering the same, I am of opinion to take a lenient view in imposing the sentence for the accused

No.1 to 3 hence and the accused No.1 sentenced to undergo Rigorous

Imprisonment for a period of One year for the offence punishable U/Sec.324 of IPC and pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) for the offence punishable U/sec.506 IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple Imprisonment for a period of Three months, the accused No.2 sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of

One year for the offence punishable U/Secs.324 of IPC and undergo

Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Six months for the offence punishable U/Sec. 506 of IPC U/sec 248 (2) Cr.P.C. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. The A.3 is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two

Thousand only) for the offence punishable under Sec.506 IPC under Sec.248 (2) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo Simple imprisonment for a period of Three months. The Police issued 41-A Cr.P.C.

notice to the accused No.1 to 3 and the accused are complied the same.

Hence, no set off U/Sec. 428 Cr.P.C. is applicable in this case. The M.Os.1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, this the 20th day of December, 2016.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1 : Veera Veerabhadra Koteswara Rao -None- P.W.2 : Veera Subba Lakshmi P.W.3 : Veera Gangamma P.W.4 : Veera Dharaneswari P.W.5 : Talla Kumaraswamy P.W.6 : Arumilli Veera Venkata Subbarao P.W.7 : Talluri Ramu P.W.8 : Yedlapalli Satyanarayana 13

P.W.9 : Akula Gopalakrishna P.W.10 : KYN Varma P.W.11 : P.Peediraju P.W.12 : A.G.S.Murthy.

DOCUMENTS MARKED:

FOR PROSECUTION: Ex.P-1 : Statement of P.W.1 Ex.P-2 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.6 Ex.P-3 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.7 Ex.P-4 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.8 Ex.P-5 : Scene Observation Report Ex.P-6 : Wound Certificate of P.W.1 Ex.P-7 : Wound Certificate of P.W.2 Ex.P-8 : Wound Certificate of P.W.3 Ex.P-9 : Wound Certificate of P.W.4 Ex.P-10: Original F.I.R. Ex.P-11: Rough Sketch.

FOR DEFENCE : NIL

MATERIAL OBJECTS :-

M.O.1: Stick M.O.2: Brick Pieces-2 M.O.3: Brick.

J.F.C.M

PALAKOL.

1

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

District of West Godavari Calendar of cases tried by the Judicial Magistrate of I Class: Palakol Date of offence Report of Complaint Apprehension of accused Released on bail (1) (2) (3) (4) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18-12-2017 20-12-2017 22-12-2017 22-12-2017 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commencement of trial close of trial Sentence of order for delay (5) (6) (7) (8) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27-03-2018 02-03-2020 11-03-2020 NIL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgment of Calendar Case No.455/2017 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I class: Palakol. Complainant:-State: Sub-Inspector of Police, Palakol Rural Police Station. (Cr.No.174/2017 of Palakol Rural Police Station) Name of the Accused Father Name Age Caste/Religion Calling Village

Bandaru Suresh, S/o Peda Anjaneyulu, aged 45 years, Caste:Kapu, R/o Digamarru Village, Palakol Mandal. …Accused ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFENCE : Punishable under section 435 of IPC.

Finding:Found not guilty.

IN THE RESULT, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under

Secs. 435 of IPC and he is acquitted for the same under Sec.248 (1) of

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of Judgment. As there are no material object. Hence, no material object order is passed.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

Copy Submitted to:

1. The 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge, W.G.Eluru.

2. The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, Eluru, through A.P.P., Palakol.

2

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS :: PALAKOL

Present : - Smt B.V.Vijay Laxmi

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol

Wednesday, the 11th day of March, 2020.

C.C.No.455/2017

Between:

State: Sub-Inspector of Police, Palakol Rural Police Station. …Complainant AND Bandaru Suresh, S/o Peda Anjaneyulu, aged 45 years, Caste:Kapu, R/o Digamarru Village, Palakol Mandal. …Accused This case is having come on 03-03-2020 for final hearing before me in the presence of Learned APP for the prosecution and Sri R.N.karunakar, Advocate for the accused, and having stood over this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Palakol Rural P.S filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under section 435 of IPC in Cr.No.174/2017, of Palakol Rural Police station.

2. The brief averments of the Charge-Sheet are :

The L.W.1-Donga Chanti who is resident of Digamarru Village, Palakol Mandal, he is doing coolie works. The L.W.1- Donga Chanti’s husband Venkanna has been suffering from Mental disorder then the L.W.1- Donga Chanti and her husband are living separately. Some house boundary disputes are pending among the L.W.1- Donga Chanti and accused since a long time. Since 4 years back the L.W.1- Donga Chanti was purchased the empty site and the L.W.1-

Donga Chanti build a house which is dr.No.1-5 since 4 years. When the L.W.1-

Donga Chanti purchased empty site and build house the accused criminal eye put on her, if the L.W.1- Donga Chanti did not purchased empty site, the accused obtained a less amount from the concerned the L.W.1 site and it is beside of the accused site. By keeping the disputes, in the mine of the accused, the accused frequently quarrel up on the L.W.1 - Donga Chanti without any cause and abused her in filthy language. The accused demanded the L.W.1- Donga Chanti to vacate her house. The matter studs thus, on 18- 12-2017 morning the L.W.1- Donga Chanti went to Coolie works and the

L.W.3-Kadali Devi was present house of L.W.1- Donga Chanti. After that at about 2-00 P.M. on 18-12-2017 the accused went to the L.W.1- Donga Chanti house and obtained the clothes from the creeper (wire) and intentionally and criminal mind, the accused fire it, on seeing the same the L.W.3-Kadali Devi rise alaram then the L.Ws.4 to 6- Bavisetty Satyanarayana, Bavisetty

Lakshmi and Kankatala Anantha Lakshmi and L.Ws.8 and 9-Manne Sankaram and Anisetty Venuka Rani @ Renuka Rani immediately rushed to the spot, the accused fired clothes were dropped through southern side kitchen window of the L.W.1-Donga Chanti house and it were fell on the plastic chair 3 and burnt. The Gas stove and Gas cylinder also kept besides the burnt chair and if the fire clothes fell on the above gas stove and gas cylinder, the RCC building of the L.W.1 will be burst. The accused Bandaru Suresh also announced that, “Illu kali chesi Vellakapothe Inka Yedena Chestanu” (I will do anything, not vacate house) and the accused left the place. The neighbours the L.Ws. 3 to 6-Kadali Devi, Bavisetty Lakshmi and Kankatala Anatha

Lakshmi and L.Ws. 8 and 9 were observed the incident and they seen the occurrence. Then, the L.W.3 went to coolie place of the L.W.1 and informed the same to the L.W.1. the L.W.1 came to the spot and observed the same and went to the L.W.7 who is Sarpanch of the Digamarru village and informed the same to him. The L.W.7 advised to the L.W.1 to call the accused but the accused did not come. Basing on the report of L.W.1-Donga Chanti, the L.W.12-B.Adi Prasad,Sub Inspector of Police, Palakol Rural P.S. registered a case in Cr.No.174/2017, U/sec. 435 of IPC. During the course of investigation he arrested the accused on 22-12-2017 and after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

3. This case was taken cognizance against the accused for the offence under Section 435 of IPC.

4. After appearance of the accused case copies are furnished to accused as required u/s 207 of Cr.P.C accused is examined u/sec. 239 Cr.P.C explaining accusation under Section 435 of IPC and he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 11 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-9.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused is examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. He reported no defence evidence.

7.Thereafter heard the arguments of Learned APP and counsel for the accused.

8. The point for Consideration is :

“Whether the Prosecution has established the guilt of Accused

for the offence under Sections 435 of IPC beyond all reasonable

doubts”?

9.The P.W.1 in her chief examination stated that previous to the incident there are property disputes in between her and the accused. Due to 4 which the accused used to abuse her in filthy language. 3 ½ years ago one day when she went for doing work in fields. Her elder sister, daughter by name Devi/L.w.3 made a phone call to her and stated that the accused lit fire in her house. Due to which the clothes and books which were inside her house was burnt. L.W.3 fortunately able to bring the Gas cylinder out of her house. The L.W.3 raised hues and cries then the neighbours rushed to her house and poured water on the fire. After getting information she immediately rushed to her house and informed matter to their village president. On the advice of the village elders she gave report to the police.

Ex.P.1 is her report.Police examined her and recorded her statement.

10.The evidence of P.W.1 is substantiated by the evidence of P.W.2/L.W.3.

The L.W.3/P.W 2 stated in her chief examination that on 18-12-2017 at about 2.00 p.m when she was present in the house of P.W.1. The accused came and lit fire to the house of P.W.1. She noticed the fire. By seeing the same she brought the gas cylinder out of the house of P.W.1 . The clothes and books which were lying inside the house of P.W.1 were burnt. She raised hues and cries. Neighbours by hearing her hues and cries rushed to the incident.

Herself and the neighbours by pouring the water stopped the fire. She made phone call to the P.W.1 and informed the matter to her. After getting information the P.W.1 rushed to the place of incident. She also informed the matter to the L.W.2. Later P.W.1 gave report to the police. Police examined her and recorded her statement.

11.The P.W.1 and P.W.2stated in there chief examination that the accused lit fire to the house. The P.W2 in her cross examination stated that the accused lit fire at first to the clothes which are lying outside of the house on a wire. The P.W.3 in his chief examination stated that on 18th of 2017 at about 2 p.m when he was present at his house he noticed that the A.1 came in a drunken condition to the house of P.W.1 and set fire to the dry leaves and thrown inside the house of P.W1 due to which fire caught to the clothes which was lying inside the house of P.W.1. P.w2. by observing the same brought the 5 gas cylinder which was inside the house to out of the house. The P.W.2 raised hues and cries and also called him. He went to the house of P.W.1 and helps the P.W.2 to stop the fire. The P.W.5 in his chief examination stated that on 18-12-2017 during day time when he was at Palakol he received a phone call from P.W.1 that the accused lit fire in the clothes which are outside of the house of P.W.1 with the help of dry leaves and thrown the clothes and dry leaves with fire inside the house of P.W.1 through window. Due to which the clothes, cooking utensils, plastic chairs were burnt. He immediately rushed to the house of P.W.1. Himself, P.W.1 and P.W.2 came to the police station and gave report to the police. Police examined him and recorded his statement.

12.The P.W.10 stated that on on 18-12-2017 at after noon hours when he was present at his house he heard hues and cries of P.W.2 from the house of

P.W.1. Himself and his neighbors immediately rushed to the house of P.W.1.

She noticed that the accused took the clothes of P.W.1 and lit the fire to the clothes of the P.W.1 and through the same inside the house of P.W.1 through the window due to which a plastic chair which was lying inside the house of

P.W.1 was burnt. The accused also abused the P.W.1 with filthy language. The

P.W.2 brought out the Gas cylinder from the house of the P.W.1. The P.W.1 placed the matter before elders but the issue was not settled. The P.W.1 gave report to the police.

13.The evidence of P.W 1 P.W 2 P.W 3 P.W5 and P.W 10 are not corroborative to each other. The P.W1 and P.W 2 stated that the accused lit fire to the house of P.W 1. The P.W 2 in her cross examination that the P.W2 in her cross examination that the accused lit fire at first to the clothes which are lying outside of the house on a wire. The P.W.3 in his chief examination stated that on 18th of 2017 at about 2 p.m when he was present at his house he noticed that the A.1 came in a drunken condition to the house of P.W.1 and set fire to the dry leaves and thrown inside the house of P.W1 due to which fire caught to the clothes which was lying inside the house of P.W.1.

The P.W 10 stated that she noticed that the accused took the clothes of P.W.1 6 and lit the fire to the clothes of the P.W.1 and thrown the same inside the house of P.W.1 through the window due to which a plastic chair which was lying inside the house of P.W.1 was burnt.

14. The P.W.1 stated that L.W.3/P.W 2 informed her over phone about the incident. After getting information she immediately rushed to her house. The

P.W.2 in her chief examination stated that she made phone call to P.W.1 and informed the matter to her. After getting information the P.W.1 rushed to the place of incident. The P.W.2 in her cross examination stated that after the incident she made phone call to L.W.2 and P.W.1. The P.W.1 came back to the house at 2.00 p.m. But the P.W 1 in her cross examination stated in cross examination that L.W 3 made phone call to one Bavisetti Satyanaryana and he informed her about the incident when she was present in the fields of

Bavisetti Satyanaryana. The P.W 2/L.W 3 stated that she do not know to whose fields the P.w 1 went to do the work. The evidence of P.W 1 and P.w 2 creates doubt in the prosecution evidence. The P.W 1 stated that the P.W 2 made phone call to one Bavisetti Satyanaryana but the P.W 2/L.W3 stated in her cross examination that she do not know to whose fields the P.w 1 went to do the work. If the P.W 2 did not know to whose fields the P.W 1 went to do work then how the P.W 2 made phone call Bavisetti Satyanaryana. The evidence of P.W 1 and P.w 2 are not corroborative to each other.

15.The P.W.2 in her chief examination stated that herself and her neighbours by pouring water stopped the fire. But the P.W 1 in her cross examination that the L.W 3 put wet gunny bag on the fire and stopped the fire. The evidence of P.W 1 and P.W 2 are not corroborative to each other.

16.The P.W.1 stated in her chief examination that on the advice of village elders she gave report to the police. Ex.P.1 is her report. The P.W 1 in her cross examination thatshe gave report after three days. The P.W 2 in her cross examination that P.W.1 gave report to the police on the same day. The

PW 5 in his chief examination that immediately he rushed to the house of the P.w1. The P.W 5 in his cross examination stated that he went to the 7 house of P.W 1 at 3.00 P.M. They gave report to the police at 9.00 P.M. The

P.W 1 made a phone call through her mobile phone. The P.W 1 was in the fields at the time of incident. The P.W 2 stated that she made phone call to

L.W 2/ P.W 5.The P.W.11 in his chief examination stated that on 20-12-2017 at about 2.00 p.m when he was present at police station being SHO the P.W.1 along with P.W.5 came to the police station and gave report/Ex.P.1. Basing on

Ex.P.1/report he registered a case crime No.174/2017, for the offence u/sec.435 of IPC. He issued original FIR. Ex.P.7 is the Original FIR. He examined the P.W.1 and P.W.5 at the police station and recorded the 161

Cr.P.C statement of P.W.1 and P.W.5. The evidence of P.W 1 P.W 2 P.W 5 and

P.W 11 are not corroborative to each other. Moreover the P.W.1 admitted that they are previous property disputes in between her and the accused.

17.The P.w.11 stated in his chief examination that on the same day he visited to the scene of offence which is situated at D.No. 1-5 Sivalayam

Street Digamarru village of Palakol Mandal. He observed the scene of offence and prepared rough sketch at the scene of offence. Ex.P.8 is the rough sketch. He secured the P.W.9 and L.W.11 at the scene of offence who are VRO and VRA of Digamarru village. The P.W.9 and L.W.11 prepared scene observation report/Ex.P.6.

18.The P.W.9 in his chief examination stated that on 20-12-2017 at about 3-00 P.M. Palakol Rural, the Sub Inspector of Police/L.W.12 came to V.R.O.

Office at Digamarru Village, himself, L.W.11, L.W.12 and the police constables went to the scene of offence at Digamarru Village at Sivalayam street by way of walking. They noticed the house of the P.W.1 at the scene of offence. They noticed one burnt plastic chair near the house of the P.W.1 and also noticed that the southern side window of the house of P.W.1 with burnt marks. By noticing the same he drafted the scene observation report. Ex.P.6 is the scene observation report. Himself, L.W.11 and L.W.12 signed on the

Ex.P.6/Scene observation report.

8

19.The P.W 9 in his cross examination that no property was seized in this case in his presence. He has not mentioned in the scene observation report/Ex p 6 that himself,L.w 11 and L.w 12 went to the scene of offence. He has not mentioned in the scene observation report/Ex p6 that the scene of offence is at a walkable distance from Digamarru VRO office.

The L.W 12/S.I of police took him to thhe house of accused. The incident took place on 19.12.2017.

20.The P.W 9 stated that L.W 12 came to the VRO office. But the L.W 12/P.W 11 stated that he secured the P.W 9 and L.W 11 at the scene of offence. The evidence of P.W 11 and p.w 9 are contrary to each other. The

P.w 11 stated that he arrested the accused under the cover of mediator report drafted by P.W 9 and L.W 11. The P.w 11 in his cross examination stated that it is true that the mediator report and scene observation report does not contain the signature of the accused.

21. In the above foregoing discussion, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

22. IN THE RESULT, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under Secs. 435 of IPC and he is acquitted for the same under Sec.248 (1) of

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of Judgment. As there are no material object. Hence, no material object order is passed.

Dictated to the Jr. Assistant, directly on the computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, this the 11th day of March, 2020.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1 : Donga Chanti -None- P.W.2 : Kadali Devi P.W.3 : Bavisetty Naga Venkata Satyanarayana P.W.4 : Kankatala Anantha Lakshmi P.W.5 : Gubbala Subba Rao P.W.6 : Anisetti Renuka Rani 9

P.W.7 : Manne Sankarudu P.W.8 : Pechetti Narasimha Swamy P.W.9 : Balla Raju P.W.10 : Bavisetti Lakshmi P.W.11 : B.Adi Prasad.

DOCUMENTS MARKED:

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P-1 : Report of P.W.1. Ex.P-2 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.4 Ex.P-3 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.6 Ex.P-4 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.7 Ex.P-5 : 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.8 Ex.P-6 : Scene Observation Report Ex.P-7 : Original F.I.R. Ex.P-8 : Rough Sketch Ex.P-9 : Mediator report.

FOR DEFENCE : NIL.

MATERIAL OBJECTS :- Nil.

J.F.C.M

PALAKOL.

1

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

District of West Godavari

Calendar of cases tried by the Judicial Magistrate of I class, Palakol Date of offence Report of Complaint Apprehension of accused Released on Bail (1) (2) (3) (4) 23-11-2019 23-11-2019 23-11-2019 23-11-2019 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commencement of trial close of trial Sentence of order Explanation for delay Witnesses (5) (6) (7) (8) 04-03-2020 18-03-2020 18-03-2020 Nil Judgment of Calendar Case No: 103/2020 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I class, Palakol. Complainant:- The State-Rep. By its Sub -Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise P.S. (Cr.No.86/2019)

Name of the Accused Father name Age Caste/Religion Calling Village Chinimilli Venkatapathi, S/o Narsimha Murthy, aged 69 years, Caste:Gowda, R/o Chintaparru Village, Palakol Mandal.

... Accused

OFFENCE: Punishable under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

FINDING: Found not guilty.

RESULT : In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act and accused is acquitted of the same under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of Judgment. M.O.1 is the one sample bottle of Original Choice Reserve Fine whisky 180 ML and M.O.2 is the one sample bottle of 999 Legend whisky 180 ML shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF THE I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

Copy Submitted to:

1.Copy submitted to the Hon’ble I ADJ, WG, Eluru for favour of information.

2. The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, Eluru.

2

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS ::

PALAKOL

Present : - Smt B.V.Vijay Laxmi

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol

Wednesday, the 18th day of March, 2020

C.C.No.103/2020

Between:

State: The State-Rep. By its Sub-Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise Police Station, Palakol.

... Complainant

AND

Chinimilli Venkatapathi, S/o Narsimha Murthy, aged 69 years, Caste:Gowda, R/o Chintaparru Village, Palakol Mandal.

... Accused

This case is coming on 18-03-2020 for final hearing before me in the presence of Learned APP for the prosecution and Sri V.Ananda Raju,

Advocate for accused, and having stood over this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The State-rep. by its Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise

P.S. filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of A.P Excise Act in Cr.No.86/2019.

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case is that:

On 23-11-2019 at about 05-00 P.M.,L.W.1: S.Ram Babu, Prohibition &

Excise Sub Inspector,ESTF, Bhimavaram as per the instructions of

Prohibition and Excise Inspector he accompanied with staff conducted raid over illegal possession of Twenty (20) Iml bottles in the bag i.e., (1)

Originla Choice Reserve Whisky (14) bottles and 2.999 Legend Whisky (6) bottles Total 20 bottles and by drawing samples under the cover of Special report. Basing on special report registered a case in Cr.No.86/2019 u/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act 1968 and sent the samples for chemical analysis report, after completion of investigation he filed the charge sheet.

3.This case was taken cognizance against the accused for the offence under Section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act against the accused.

3

4. After appearance of the accused case copies are furnished to accused as required u/s 207 of Cr.P.C accused is examined u/s 239 Cr.P.C explaining accusation u/s. 34 (a) of AP Excise Act to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.5 and M.Os.1 and 2. After closure of the prosecution side the accused is examined U/sec. 313 Cr.P.C he reported no defence evidence.

6.Thereafter heard the arguments of Learned APP and counsel for the accused.

7.The point for Consideration is:

“Whether the Prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under sec. 34 (a) of AP Excise Act beyond all reasonable doubt?” 8.POINT:

9. The accused is tried for the charge under section 34 (a) of A.P Excise

Act.

10. According to the case of prosecution the accused is in possession of

Liquor bottles without any license and he is selling the said bottles for higher price.

11. The P.W.1 is the Head Constable of Police, Prohibition & Excise

Bhimavaram, P.W.2 is the Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise,

Palakol and P.W.3 is the Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise,

Bhimavaram.

12.According to the case of prosecution on 23-11-2019 at about 05-00

P.M. P.W.3 search and seizure was conducted at the Chintaparru Village,

Palakol Mandal and he arrested the accused.

13.The P.W.1 is the Head Constable of Police, Prohibition & Excise

Bhimavaram who deposed that on 23-11-2019 at about 5.00 pm, as per the instruction Proh & Excise Superintendent Bhimavaram he along with 4 L.W.1 and staff went to Chintaprarru village of Palakol Mandal near the tea shop of Chinamilli Venkatapathi and they noticed one unknown person with mica hand bag in his right hand. On seeing them the accused became confused and tried to escape from the scene of offence. HImself,

L.W.1, and their staff caught hold the said unknown person. The L.W.1 asked the accused about the reason for escape and also asked about the content of the bag. Then the accused revealed that the bag contains liquor bottles. The L.W.1 send him to the Chintaparru village to secure the mediators. Accordingly he went to the Chintaparru village but none came forward to act as mediator in this case and he informed the same to L.W.1.

Then the L.W.1 opened said bag in the presence of our staff and in his presence. The L.W.1 found 14 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L and 06 liquor bottles of 999 Legend whisky 180 M.L Total bottles are 20 in number.Then L.W.1 questioned the said unknown person about the identity particulars. He revealed his name as Chinamilli

Venkatapathi, S/o. Narasimha Murthy, aged about 69 years, Caste: Gowda, r/o Chintaparru village of Palakol Mandal. He can identify the said unknown person who is none other than the accused standing in the dock.

The accused also revealed that he purchased the liquor bottles from various unknown shops at Palakol Town and use to sell the said bottles for higher price. L.W.1 also enquired about the license. The accused stated that he has no license to sell the liquor bottle. Himself, L.w.1 and their staff arrested the accused stating the ground of arrest that possessing the liquor bottles without license is an offence. L.W.1 seized the 14 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L and 06 liquor bottles of 999 Legend whisky 180 M.L Total bottles are 20 in number and also drawn one bottle each as sample out of two brands under the cover of special report. Ex.P.1is the special report. L.W.1 drafted the special report/ Ex.P.1.Himself, accused and L.W.1 signed on the special 5 report/Ex.P.1. He can identify the sample bottle basing on the identity slips affixed on the sample bottle. Himself, accused, L.w.1 signed on the identity slips of the said sample bottle. M.O.1 is the one sample bottles of

Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.Land M.O.2is the one sample bottle of 999 Legend whisky 180 M.L. They brought the accused and the seized bottles to the Palakol Excise police station and handed over the seized property, accused, MO.1, MO.2 to the L.W.3.

14.The P.W.3 is the Excise Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise,

Bhimavaram P.S. who deposed that on 23-11-2019 at about 5.00 pm, as per the instruction Proh & Excise Superintendent Bhimavaram he along with P.W.1 and staff went to Chintaprarru village of Palakol Mandal near the tea shop of Chinamilli Venkatapathi and they noticed one unknown person with mica hand bag in his right hand. On seeing them the accused became confused and tried to escape from the scene of offence. Himself,

P.W.1 and their staff caught hold the said unknown person. Then he asked the accused about the reason for escape and also asked about the content of the bag. Then the accused revealed that the bag contains liquor bottles.

He send the P.W.1 to the Chintaparru village to secure the mediators.

Accordingly PW.1 went to the Chintaparru village but none came forward to act as mediator in this case and P.W.1 informed the same to him. Then he opened said bag in the presence of our staff and P.W.1. Then he found 14 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L and 06 999 Legend whisky 180 M.L Total bottles are 20 in number. Then he questioned the said unknown person about the identity particulars. He revealed his name as Chinimilli Venkatapathi, S/o. Narasimha Murthy, aged about 69 years, Caste: Gowda, R/o Chintaparru village of Palakol Mandal.

He can identify the said unknown person who is none other than the accused standing in the dock. The accused also revealed that he purchased the liquor bottles from various unknown shops at Palakol Town 6 and use to sell the said bottles for higher price. He also enquired about the license. The accused stated that he has no license to sell the liquor bottle. Himself, P.W.1 and their staff arrested the accused stating the ground of arrest that possessing the liquor bottles without license is an offence. He seized the 14 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L and 06 999 Legend whisky 180 M.L Total bottles are 20 in number and also drawn one bottle each as sample out of two brands under the cover of special report/Ex.P.1. He drafted the special report/

Ex.P.1. Himself, accused and P.W.1 signed on the special report/Ex.P.1. He can identify the sample bottle basing on the identity slips affixed on the sample bottle. Himself, accused, P.W.1 signed on the identity slips of the said sample bottle/MO.1 of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L and MO.2/ of one sample bottle of 999 Legend whisky 180 M.L. They brought the accused and the seized bottles to the Palakol Excise police station and handed over the seized property, accused, MO.1, MO.2 to the

P.W.2.

15.The P.W.2 is the Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise, Palakol who deposed that on 23-11-2019 at about 9.15 p.m P.W.1, L.W.1 came to the police station along with the accused and the seized 14 bottles of

Original Choice Reserve Whisky and 6 bottles of 999 legend whisky 180

M.L and handed over the special report/Ex.P.1. Basing on the Special report/Ex.P.1 he registered a case in Cr.No. 86/2019 for the offence under

Sec 34(a) of AP Excise Act. He issued original FIR. Ex.P.2 is the original

FIR. He issued 41-A Cr.P.C notice to the accused and he complied the same. He sent the sample bottle/MO.1 and MO.2 for chemical analysis to the chemical laboratory at Kakinada along with letter of advice. Ex.P.3 is the letter of advice. On 07-12-2019 he received laboratory analysis report from Chemical examiner Kakinada vide C.E No 2244/2019. Ex.P.4 is the chemical analysis report. He was present at the destruction of remaining 7 18 bottles under mediator report. Ex.P.5 is the attested photo state copy of the mediator report for destruction of 18 bottles in Cr. No. 86/2019. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

16.The P.W.1 and P.W.3 stated that they have not served any summons to the VRO and the secretary. The P.W.1 stated that by the time they reached to the tea shop to the accused near about 10 persons were present at the tea shop. They have not examined the 10 persons. It is true that scene of offence is situated in busy locality. They have drafted the special report in front of the shop of the accused in a road margin. They have taken signature of the accused on three identity slips. Himself, L.w.1 also singed on the identity slips. The P.w.3 stated that by the time he reached to the tea shop of the accused near about 3 person were present at the tea shop. They did not examined the said 3 persons as they went from the scene of offence. It is true that the scene of offence is situated in a busy locality. They have drafted the special report in front of the shop of accused in a road margin. They have taken signatures of the accused on 3 identity slips. Himself, P.W.1 also signed on the identity slips.

17.Both P.W 1 and P.W 3 admitted that the scene of offence is situated in a busy locality but in this case the excise police did not examine any of the local inhabitant.

18.The P.W.1 stated that by the time they reached to the tea shop to the accused near about 10 persons were present at the tea shop. But the

P.w 3 stated that by the time he reached to the tea shop of the accused near about 3 person were present at the tea shop. The evidence of P.W.1 and P.W 3 are not corroborative to each other which creates doubt in the prosecution case.

19.The Investigation Officer who is conducting search and seizure has to follow the procedure prescribed under section 100 of Cr.P.C. According to Section 100(4) of Cr.P.C the P.W.3 has to follow certain procedure while 8 conducting the search. The P.W.3 has to secure to local inhabitants

Chintaparru village limits and if the local inhabitants are not willing to act as mediators then the P.W.3 has to secure the persons from this locality.

But, in the present case the P.W.3 not followed the mandatory procedure prescribed under section 100 (4) of Cr.P.C.

20.Under these circumstances the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused.

21.According to Section 100 (7) of Cr.P.C. the P.W.3 has to prepare a list of seized articles and shall hand it over to the accused. But, in the present case, the P.W.3 has not followed that procedure, which is mandatory.

22. Under the aforesaid reasons this Court is of the opinion that the evidence of prosecution witnesses raising a reasonable doubt about the seizure of liquor bottles from the possession of accused.

23.In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act and accused is acquitted of the same under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of Judgment. M.O.1 is the one sample bottle of Original Choice Reserve Fine whisky 180 ML and

M.O.2 is the one sample bottle of 999 Legend whisky 180 ML shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to the Jr.Assistant by name B.Srinivasa Rao, directly on the

computer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 18th day of March, 2020.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF THE I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

APPENDIX OFEVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1 : K.V.V.Satyanarayana -None- P.W.2 : J.Ramprakash P.W.3 : S.Rambabu.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P-1 : Special Report Ex.P-2 : Original F.I.R.

9 Ex.P-3 : Letter of Advice. Ex.P-4 : Chemical Analysis Report Ex.P-5 : Attested Photo State copy of destruction special report.

FOR DEFENCE : NIL.

MATERIAL OBJECTS

M.O.1 is the one sample bottle of Original Choice Reserve Fine whisky 180 ML M.O.2 is the one sample bottle of 999 Legend whisky 180 ML.

JFCM Palakol.

1

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

District of West Godavari

Calendar of cases tried by the Judicial Magistrate of I class, Palakol Date of offence Report of Complaint Apprehension of accused Released on Bail (1) (2) (3) (4) 29-10-2019 29-10-2019 29-10-2019 29-10-2019 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commencement of trial close of trial Sentence of order Explanation for delay Witnesses (5) (6) (7) (8) 04-03-2020 18-03-2020 18-03-2020 Nil Judgment of Calendar Case No: 102/2020 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I class, Palakol. Complainant:- The State-Rep. By its Sub -Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise P.S. (Cr.No.74/2019)

Name of the Accused Father name Age Caste/Religion Calling Village Medicherla Naga Srinivas, S/o Satyanarayana, aged 30 years, Caste:Kummari, R/o Achanta Village, Achanta Mandal.

... Accused

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OFFENCE: Punishable under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

FINDING: Found not guilty.

RESULT : In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act and accused is acquitted of the same under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of Judgment. M.O.1 is the one sample bottle of Original Choice Reserve Fine whisky 180 ML shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF THE I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

Copy Submitted to:

1.Copy submitted to the Hon’ble I ADJ, WG, Eluru for favour of information.

2. The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, Eluru.

2

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS ::

PALAKOL

Present : - Smt B.V.Vijay Laxmi

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol

Wednesday, the 18th day of March, 2020

C.C.No.102/2020

Between:

State: The State-Rep. By its Sub-Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise Police Station, Palakol.

... Complainant

AND

Medicherla Naga Srinivas, S/o Satyanarayana, aged 30 years, Caste:Kummari, R/o Achanta Village, Achanta Mandal.

... Accused

This case is coming on 18-03-2020 for final hearing before me in the presence of Learned APP for the prosecution and Sri B.Narasimha Murthy,

Advocate for accused, and having stood over this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The State-rep. by its Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise

P.S. filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of A.P Excise Act in Cr.No.74/2019.

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case is that:

On 29-10-2019 at about 09-00 A.M.,L.W.1: S.Ram Babu, Prohibition &

Excise Sub Inspector, ESTF, Bhimavaram as per the instructions of

Prohibition and Excise Inspector he accompanied with staff conducted raid over illegal possession of Twelve (12) nips of Original Choice Reserve

Whisky 180 ml size bottles with company and seized the Twelve (12) nips of Original Choice Reserve Whisky 180 ml size bottles and by drawing samples under the cover of Special report. Basing on special report registered a case in Cr.No.74/2019 u/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act 1968 and sent the samples for chemical analysis report, after completion of investigation he filed the charge sheet.

3.This case was taken cognizance against the accused for the offence under Section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act against the accused.

3

4. After appearance of the accused case copies are furnished to accused as required u/s 207 of Cr.P.C accused is examined u/s 239 Cr.P.C explaining accusation u/s. 34 (a) of AP Excise Act to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.5 and M.O.1. After closure of the prosecution side the accused is examined U/sec. 313 Cr.P.C he reported no defence evidence.

6.Thereafter heard the arguments of Learned APP and counsel for the accused.

7.The point for Consideration is:

“Whether the Prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under sec. 34 (a) of AP Excise Act beyond all reasonable doubt?” 8.POINT:

9. The accused is tried for the charge under section 34 (a) of A.P Excise

Act.

10. According to the case of prosecution the accused is in possession of

Liquor bottles without any license and he is selling the said bottles for higher price.

11. The P.W.1 is the Head Constable of Police, Prohibition & Excise

Bhimavaram, P.W.2 is the Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise,

Palakol and P.W.3 is the Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise,

Bhimavaram.

12.According to the case of prosecution on 29-10-2019 at about 09-00

A.M. P.W.3 search and seizure was conducted at the Achanta Village,

Achanta Mandal and he arrested the accused.

13.The P.W.1 is the Head Constable of Police, Prohibition & Excise

Bhimavaram who deposed that on 29-10-2019 at about 09-00 am, he along with L.W.1 and staff went to Achanta village near panchayathi 4 shopping complex at Achanta Village of Achanta Mandal and noticed one unknown person with mica hand bag in his right hand. On seeing them the accused became confused and tried to escape from the scene of offence. Himself, L.W.1, and their staff caught hold the said unknown person. The L.W.1 asked the accused about the reason for escape and also asked about the content of the bag. Then the accused revealed that the bag contains liquor bottles. The L.W.1 send him to the Achanta village to secure the mediators. Accordingly he went to the Achanta village but none came forward to act as mediator in this case. Then the L.W.1 opened said bag in the presence of their staff and in his presence. The L.W.1 found 12 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L.

Then L.W.1 questioned the said unknown person about the identity particulars. He revealed his name as Madicherla Naga Srinivasa S/o.

Satyanarayana, aged about 30 years, Caste, Kummari, r/o Achanta village of Achanta Mandal. He can identify the said unknown person who is none other than the accused standing in the dock. The accused also revealed that he purchased the liquor bottles from various unknown shops at Achanta village and use to sell the said bottles for higher price. L.W.1 also enquired about the license. The accused stated that he has no license to sell the liquor bottle. Himself, L.W.1 and their staff arrested the accused stating the ground of arrest that possessing the liquor bottles without license is an offence. L.W.1 seized the 12 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L. and also drawn one bottle as sample out of 12 bottles under the cover of special report. Ex.P.1 is the special report.

L.W.1 drafted the special report/ Ex.P.1.Himself , accused and L.W.1 signed on the special report/Ex.P.1. He can identify the sample bottle basing on the identity slips affixed on the sample bottle. Himself, accused, L.w.1 signed on the identity slips of the said sample bottle. MO.1 is the one sample bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L. They 5 brought the accused and the seized bottles to the Palakol Excise police station and handed over the seized property, accused, MO.1 to the L.W.3.

14.The P.W.3 is the Excise Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise,

Bhimavaram P.S. who deposed that on 29-10-2019 at about 09-00 am, he along with P.W.1 and staff went to Achanta village near panchayathi shopping complex at Achanta Village of Achanta Mandal and noticed one unknown person with mica hand bag in his right hand. On seeing them the accused became confused and tried to escape from the scene of offence. Himself, P.W.1 and their staff caught hold the said unknown person. Then he asked the accused about the reason for escape and also asked about the content of the bag. Then the accused revealed that the bag contains liquor bottles. Then he send the P.W.1 to the Achanta village to secure the mediators. Accordingly he went to the Achanta village but none came forward to act as mediator in this case. Then he opened said bag in the presence of their staff and P.W.1. Then he found 12 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L. Then he questioned the said unknown person about the identity particulars. He revealed his name as Madicherla Naga Srinivasa S/o. Satyanarayana, aged about 30 years, Caste, Kummari, r/o Achanta village of Achatnta Mandal. He can identify the said unknown person who is none other than the accused standing in the dock. The accused also revealed that he purchased the liquor bottles from various un known shops at Achanta village and used to sell the said bottles for higher price. He also enquired about the license.

The accused stated that he has no license to sell the liquor bottle. Himself,

P.W.1 and their staff arrested the accused stating the ground of arrest that possessing the liquor bottles without license is an offence. He seized the 12 liquor bottles of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L. and also drawn one bottle as sample out of 12 bottles under the cover of special report/Ex.P.1. He drafted the special report/ Ex.P.1. Himself, accused and 6 P.W.1 signed on the special report/Ex.P.1. He can identify the sample bottle basing on the identity slips affixed on the sample bottle. Himself, accused, P.W.1 signed on the identity slips of the said sample bottle/MO.1 of Original choice reserve fine whisky 180 M.L. They brought the accused and the seized bottles to the Palakol Excise police station and handed over the seized the property, accused, MO.1 to the P.W.2.

15.The P.W.2 is the Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition & Excise, Palakol who deposed that on 29-10-2019 at about 9.00 a.m P.W.1, L.W.1 came to the police station along with the accused and seized 12 bottles of Original

Choice Reserve Whisky 180 M.L and handed over the special report/Ex.P.1.

Basing the Special report/Ex.P.1 he registered a case in Cr.No. 74/2019 for the offence under Sec 34(a) of AP Excise Act. He issued original FIR. Ex.P.2 is the original FIR. He issued 41- A Cr.P.C notice to the accused and he complied the same. He sent the sample bottle/MO.1 for chemical analysis to the chemical laboratory at Kakinada along with letter of advice. Ex.P.3 is the letter of advice. On 07-12-2019 he received laboratory analysis report from Chemical examiner Kakinada vide CE No 2244/2019. Ex.P.4 is the chemical analysis report. He was present at the destruction of remaining 11 bottles under mediator report. Ex.P.5 is the attested photo state copy of the mediator report for destruction of 11 bottles in Cr. No. 74/2019. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

16.The P.W.1 stated in his cross examination that the Achanta village is a major panchayath. There are 4 VRO s and one secretary to the said panchatyath. They have not issued any summons to the VROs and the secretary. The scene of offence is situated in a busy locality. They have tried to secured the local mediators but none come forwarded to act as mediator. He do not know the name of the local mediator to whom he tried secure as mediator. They have drafted the special report/Ex.P.1 at the shop of the accused. There is no documentary evidence to show the said shop is 7 that of accused. He cannot say towards which directions the accused tried to escape. The P.W.3 in his cross examination stated that Achanta village is a major panchatyat there are VRO and secretary to the said panchaythi.

He sent the P.W1. to secure the VRO and VRA and secretary but none were available. They have not issued any summons to the VRO and secretary as they were not available. The P.W.1 stated that they have not issued any summons to the VRO and secretary but the P.w.3 stated that he sent the

P.w 1 to secure the VRO and VRA and secretary but none were available.

They have not issued any summons to the VRO and secretary as they were not available. The staff of the Achanta Panchyath were not present when the P.W.1 went to the Achanta Panchyathi office. Shop owners gathered the scene of offence but none came forward to act as mediator. They have not mentioned the batch number and the date of manufacturing in the Ex.P.1.

It is true that the brand of MO.1 is available in any wine shop. They have not examined any local inhabitants.

17.The evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.3 are not corroborative to each other which creates doubt in the prosecution case.

18.The Investigation Officer who is conducting search and seizure has to follow the procedure prescribed under section 100 of Cr.P.C. According to Section 100(4) of Cr.P.C the P.W.3 has to follow certain procedure while conducting the search. The P.W.3 has to secure to local inhabitant of

Achanta village limits and if the local inhabitants are not willing to act as mediators then the P.W.3 has to secure the persons from this locality. But, in the present case the P.W.3 not followed the mandatory procedure prescribed under section 100 (4) of Cr.P.C.

19.Under these circumstances the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused.

8

20.According to Section 100 (7) of Cr.P.C. the P.W.3 has to prepare a list of seized articles and shall hand it over to the accused. But, in the present case, the P.W.3 has not followed that procedure, which is mandatory.

21. Under the aforesaid reasons this Court is of the opinion that the evidence of prosecution witnesses raising a reasonable doubt about the seizure of liquor bottles from the possession of accused.

22.In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act and accused is acquitted of the same under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of Judgment. M.O.1 is the one sample bottle of Original Choice Reserve Fine whisky 180 ML shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to the Jr.Assistant by name B.Srinivasa Rao, directly on the

computer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 18th day of March, 2020.

JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF THE I CLASS,

PALAKOL.

APPENDIX OFEVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1 : S.Gangadara Rao -None- P.W.2 : J.Ramprakash P.W.3 : S.Rambabu.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P-1 : Special Report Ex.P-2 : Original F.I.R. Ex.P-3 : Letter of Advice. Ex.P-4 : Chemical Analysis Report Ex.P-5 : Attested Photo State copy of destruction special report.

FOR DEFENCE : NIL.

MATERIAL OBJECTS

M.O.1 is the one sample bottle of Original Choice Reserve Fine whisky 180 ML.

JFCM Palakol.