Ms. Bhavishya Joginapally

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

:: AT KHANAPUR ::

Present:- J.Bhavishya, I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

Dated, this the 20 th day of June, 2025

CC.No. 436 of 2021

Between: The State of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur. … Complainant // AND //

1. Gummula Bhumanna, S/o. Rajanna, age: 30 years, Occ: Coolie

2. Chennaveni Rajanna, S/o. Bheemaiah, age: 50 years, Occ: Agriculture, Both R/o. Chityal (v) of Kadam (M). …Accused

This case is coming for final hearing before me on this day in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri M.Suresh, Advocate Counsel for accused persons and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

01.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur, laid charge sheet against accused No.1 and 2 in Cr.No.102 of 2017 for the offence under Section 354, 509 R/w 34 of IPC.

02. The brief facts of the charge-sheet are as follows:-

On 28.07.2017 at about 7.00 pm after disclosing grievance before the CI of

Police, Khanapur in connection with their land dispute while LW1 was coming through the road from the Govt. Hospital, Khanapur, in the meantime the accused

JFCM, Khanapur.

2/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur no.1 and 2 started abusing LW1 in most vulgar language for which she opposed them and asked that why they are abusing her by the same time the accused no.1 slapped

LW1, caught hold her hand, pulled her saree and insulted her modesty in public place by ignoring that LW1 is woman and uttered in unparlimentarily language.

Later LW1 went to police station and lodged a report against the accused no.1 and 2.

03.Based on the report of LW1, LW11/Investigation Officer registered a case in

Cr.No.102/2017 for the offence U/sec.354, 509 of IPC, issued an FIR, and took up investigation and subsequently, LW10 examined and recorded the statement of LW10 and LW11 visited the scene of offence situated near Govt. Hospital, Khanapur, examined and recorded the statements of LW2 to 6, secured the presence of LW7 and

LW8 and drew rough sketch and prepared CDF. Later on 13.09.2017, the LW1 was produced before the LW9/Hon’ble JFCM, Bhainsa and got recorded the statement

U/Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. later on 14.09.2017 at 9.30 hours the LW11 along with sufficient force rushed to Chityal (v) of Kadam (M) and apprehended the accused no.1 and accused no.2 and interrogated them thoroughly. On interrogation they voluntarily admitted their guilt of commission of this offence. Later the accused no.1 and 2 were produced before the Hon’ble Court for judicial custody.

04. This court took cognizance, on the police report, for the offence under section 354, 509 of IPC and issued summons to the accused.

05.On the appearance of the accused no.1 and 2 before the Court, copies of documents were furnished to them as required under section 207 Cr.P.C. They were

JFCM, Khanapur.

3/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C for the offence under section 354, 509 of IPC were read over, and explained to them in their vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

06.On behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW9 were examined and got marked

Ex.P1 to P6. The concerned authority filed the report of LW5 as the LW5 went abroad. Hence the evidence of LW5 is closed. Based on the evidence of PWs 1 to 9, the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of LW9.

07.After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused no.1 and 2 were given an opportunity of being heard by putting before them all the accusations alleged by the prosecution witnesses in the form of questions which have been recorded in the prescribed format in the manner as envisaged under section 313 of Cr.P.C. As aforesaid, the defence denied the allegations in toto and declined to adduce evidence.

08. Heard arguments of learned APP for the prosecution and the learned counsel

for the accused no.1 and 2.

09.Now, the point for determination is as follows:

“Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused no.1 and 2

for the offence punishable under section 354, 509 of IPC beyond reasonable

doubt”?

POINT:

10.In a nutshell, it is the prosecution’s case that, on 28.07.2017 at about 7.00 pm after disclosing grievance before the CI of Police, Khanapur in connection with their

JFCM, Khanapur.

4/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur land dispute while LW1 was coming through the road from the Govt. Hospital,

Khanapur, in the meantime the accused no.1 and 2 started abusing LW1 in most vulgar language for which she opposed them and asked that why they are abusing her, by the same time the accused no.1 slapped LW1, caught hold her hand, pulled her saree and insulted her modesty in public place by ignoring that LW1 is woman and uttered in unparlimentarily language. Therefore the accused no.1 and 2 are liable to be punished for the offence under section 354, 509of IPC.

11.PW1 who is the victim testified that, accused No.1 and her husband are real brothers and they have received equal shares in the ancestral property but accused no.1 refused to give her husband's respective share and they are having some land disputes and for that purpose PW1 went to Police Station and there, opposite the

Govt. Hospital, accused no.1 went there and started using abusive filthy language against PW1, thereafter accused no.2 went over there and started using abusive filthy language against PW1 by stating that "Lanja No yem chestavu chesuku Po" and slapped her on her face and dragged her Saree and used filthy language against her thereafter PW1 went to Police station for lodging complaint against accused no.1 and 2. PW1 further testified that police examined her and recorded her statement and the same incident was witnessed by LW2/Gummala Ramesh, LW4/D. Srinivas and

LW3/ Pallikonda Mallesh. The PW1 admitted that the PW1 is an accused in one of the criminal cases for the offence punishable under section 307 IPC in which the accused is a complainant and which was compromised between them. The PW1

JFCM, Khanapur.

5/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur admitted that there was a civil disputes between them and accused no.1, accused no.2. The PW1 admitted that, LW3, LW4, LW5 and LW7 came together to Court on the request of PW1. The PW1 deposed that on the same day of incident the PW1 went to police station and narrated about the incident upon which the police scribed the complaint. PW1 further admitted that there were at least 20 persons gathered at the spot of offence by hearing the hues and cries but no police officer came to the spot and also admitted that the police station is 20-30 meters away from the scene of offence. The PW1 admitted that when the accused no.2 tried to drag the saree some of the bangles were broken. The PW1 admitted that the specific abusive words mentioned in the chief was not mentioned in the 161 Cr.P.C statement or in complaint. The PW1 admitted that the police briefed before stepping into the witness box. The PW1 admitted that when they went to police station with regard to land disputes with accused no.1 and 2, 4-5 persons accompanied on behalf of both sides.

12.PW2 who is the eye witness testified that, about (06) years back on one day he went to hospital for medical checkup of his father in law, after returning from the hospital a Galata took place infront of the hospital between PW1 and accused no.1 and 2 meanwhile, he have observed that accused no.2 slapped on face of PW1 during the galata and used filthy language against PW1 by accused no.1 and 2 thereafter PW2 have asked PW1 why accused no.1 and 2 using abusive language against PW1 then PW1 replied that there is one property dispute between accused no.1 and 2 and PW1, thereafter PW2 left from there. PW2 further testified that,

JFCM, Khanapur.

6/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur police examined him and recorded his statement. The PW2 admitted that LW3, LW4,

LW5 and LW7 belongs to the same village and further admitted that there are 15-20 members gathered at the scene of offence. The PW2 admitted that after two days of the incident the police recorded the statement.

13. PW3 who is eye witness testified that, in the year 2017, LW5/V.Rajanna’s health was not good and at that time they took him to the Khanapur Government

Hospital, thereafter LW5 went inside the hospital and he along with PW2 was waiting outside the hospital premises and thereafter one galata started between PW1 and accused no.1 and 2 and accused no.1 and 2 both used abusive and filthy language to PW1 and accused no.1 dragged PW1 saree from the shoulder then PW3 asked PW1 that why accused no.1 and 2 were abusing PW1, then PW1 replied that due to one property dispute this galata took place. PW3 further testified that PW1 went to police station for lodging the complaint. Police did not examined him nor recorded his statement. The PW3 admitted that, LW2, LW3, LW5 and LW7 went to hospital for the treatment of LW5 at 6.30 pm and the LW5 was not admitted in the hospital. The PW3 further admitted that the working hours of the hospital is 10 am to 2 pm for out patients. The PW3 admitted that there were already 15 members gathered at the spot before the arrival of PW3 and there was medical shop, Kirana shop, general store, SBI Bank and also public over there.

14.PW4 who is the mediator for CDF testified that, on 30.07.2017 at about 10.30 am, when PW4 was coming outside from hospital, one police called him and

JFCM, Khanapur.

7/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur requested to become panch witness and further requested him to sign on panchanama i.e., scene of offence. PW4 further testified that, police conducted scene of offence panchanama in his presence regarding the galata took place between PW1 and A1 and A2 and thereafter PW4 signed on it. The PW4 admitted that the PW1 is the own sister of PW4 and the place of offence is a busy locality. The PW4 admitted that when the police called to put the signature they were already writing the panchanama. The

PW4 admitted that there is an urgent matter case pending against the husband of

PW5 and others and also admitted that PW4 is the own brother of PW1. The PW4 further admitted that there is a disputed property in the name of father of accused no.1 in assigned land.

15.PW5 who is the circumstantial witness testified that, previously her family and family of accused no.1 and 2 were having land disputes and earlier some panchayat was also held for solving the dispute regarding land issues. PW5 further testified that, on 28.07.2017 at evening hours when no settlement was done in the panchayat by the elders they went to police station for giving complaint to the police and while they were coming back for giving complaint meanwhile accused no.1 and 2 came there and started using abusive language to PW1/G.Amrutha and thereafter accused no.2 used filthy language against PW1 by using the words “Lanja Munda Donga

Munda Balupu Bagu unnadi” and accused no.1 slapped on PW1 face and dragged her saree by again using filthy language. PW5 further testified that, on the next day,

PW5 along with PW1 went to police station for lodging complaint. Police examined

JFCM, Khanapur.

8/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur her and recorded her statement. The PW5 admitted that there were about 30 members at the alleged incident.

16.PW6 who is the mediator for CDF testified that, on 30.07.2017 at afternoon hours, police conducted scene of offence and panchanama and drawn rough sketch map at Govt. Hospital, Khanapur regarding brawl happened between

PW1/G.Amrutha and accused no.1/Bhumanna and after completion of scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch map PW6 signed on it. PW6 admitted that the

PW6 did not witness the preparation of CDF and rough sketch map but at the instance of police signed on it.

17.PW7 who is women police constable and who recorded the statement of victim testified that, on 30.07.2017, she have recorded the statement of PW1/G.Amrutha.

PW7 further testified that there was a land dispute between G.Bhumanna and

C.Rajanna, PW1 came to the police station and given complaint to the CI and then returned back near Govt. Hospital, Khanapur and over there accused no.2 abused her in most filthy language, then she/PW1 questioned the act of accused no.2 then accused no.1/G.Bhumanna abused PW1 in most filthy language and slapped her on face and dragged her saree. PW7 further testified that, PW1 narrated the whole story to her and then PW7 have recorded the statement of PW1/G.Amrutha.

18.PW8 who is eye witness did not supported the case of prosecution and testified that, PW8 heard that there is some brawl took place between accused person and complainant/LW1/victim, but PW8 do not know the reason behind that brawl. PW8

JFCM, Khanapur.

9/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur further testified that, she do not know anything about the facts of the case and he did not witnessed any incident. Police neither examined him nor recorded his statement.

19.PW9 who is the investigating officer in this case testified that, on 30.07.2017 at 10.30 hours, PW1 came to the police station and given a written complaint in Telugu.

Basing on the report, PW9 registered the case in Cr.No. 102/2017, U/Sec. 354, 509 r/w 34 IPC and issued FIR and during the course of investigation, PW7 recorded the 164 Cr.P.C statement of PW1 and during the course of investigation PW9 visited the crime scene situated at Govt. Hospital Khanapur and over there examined and recorded the statement of PW2, PW3, LW5, PW5, PW8. Thereafter, securing the presence of two mediators i.e., PW4 and PW6, PW9 have drawn rough sketch and prepared CDF. Thereafter PW1 produced before LW9/Ch.Panchakshree the then

Hon'ble JFCM Bhainsa. PW9 further testified that, on 14.09.2017 at 09.30 hours

PW9 along with sufficient force went to the respective houses of accused and interrogated them thoroughly. On interrogation, the accused voluntarily admitted their guilt of commission of offence. After completion of all legal formalities PW9 have produced the accused before the Court for remand and later filed charge sheet for the offences U/Sec.354, 509 r/w 34 IPC. The PW9 admitted that on Ex.P3 the date on the top was mentioned as 30.07.2017 whereas at bottom dated as 28.07.2017. The

PW9 admitted that PW9 did not examined the people who were in the shops at the alleged scene of offence. The PW9 deposed that no bangle was broken at alleged time of incident and also further deposed that the PW1 in complaint as well as in 161

JFCM, Khanapur.

10/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

Cr.P.C statement never mentioned the specific acts of the outraging the modesty of the women. The PW9 admitted that there is two days delay in lodging a report. The

PW9 deposed that the PW1 came to police station with written complaint.

20.The PW1 who is the victim supported the case of prosecution but the PW1 stated in 161 Cr.P.C statement that the accused no.1 dragged her saree whereas in chief the PW1 deposed accused no.2 dragged the saree of PW1 and also used filthy language against the PW1. The PW1 also testified that, there were the civil disputes between the accused no.1 and 2 and PW1 and the PW1 further admitted that LW3, 4, 5 and 7 came together to Court on the request of PW1. The PW1 deposed that on the same day of incident the PW1 went to the police station and narrated the incident upon which the police scribed a complaint whereas PW9 deposed that after two days the PW1 came to police station along with a written complaint. The PW1 deposed that the accused no.2 caught hold the hand of the PW1 and pulled the saree upon which the bangles of PW1 were broken whereas PW9 deposed as no such bangles were broken, hence the bangles were not seized from the alleged scene of offence.

PW2 who is the eye witness supported the case of prosecution but no where deposed that PW2 witnessed the accused no.2 dragged the saree of PW1 but deposed that, accused no.2 slapped on the face of PW1 and used filthy language against PW1. The

PW3 who is the other eye witness testified that, the accused no.1 dragged the saree of

PW1 whereas the accused no.1 and 2 were abusing the PW1. As PW2 and PW3 they questioned the PW1 with regard to alleged offence upon which PW1 answered that

JFCM, Khanapur.

11/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur there is a civil dispute between them. PW4 is the own brother of PW1, admitted that the PW4 signed on the Ex.P3 which was already written by the police. The PW5 testified that, the accused no.1 slapped on the face of PW1 and dragged the saree by using the filthy language and also further admitted that there was panchayat with regard to land disputes. The PW1 to 5 admitted that the police station is 20-30 meters away from the alleged scene of offence and there is a galata took place there and no police came out and the complaint was not lodged on the same day.

The PW6 who is the mediator for CDF and PW8 who is the eye witness did not supported the case of prosecution.

PW7 who is the women police constable and PW9 who is the investigating officer supported the case of prosecution.

21.From the above discussion in Para No. 20 it is clear that, there is a land dispute between the accused no.1 and 2 and the complainant and there is an inconsistency between the statement of PW1 and there is no corroboration between the PW1 and PW3, PW5 who deposed that accused no.1 dragged the saree whereas

PW1 deposed that the accused no.2 dragged the saree and slapped her. Though the offence has taken place very near to the police station and it is a busy locality, it is strange the police did not come out of the police station, though this point is not considered, the PW1 failed to lodge a complaint immediately after the alleged offence and there is a delay in lodging a report. As there is an inconsistency between the 161

Cr.P.C statement and chief of PW1 this court cannot rely on the evidence of the PW1.

JFCM, Khanapur.

12/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

The PW2, PW3, PW4 and PW5 belongs to the same village and the PW4 is the own brother of PW1 which creates doubt to court whether they are planted witness or genuine witness as PW1 admitted the PW1 herself requested them to come to the

Court to depose the evidence against the accused no.1 and 2. There were also civil disputes between the accused no.1 and 2 and PW1 which was admitted by PW1 to

PW5. The PW7 and PW9 are official witnesses and the Court solely cannot rely on the evidence of PW7 and PW9 and there is inconsistency between the PW1 and PW2,

PW3, PW5, PW9. As the evidence of PW1 is not reliable the other evidence is not corroborated which creates the doubt to the Court whether the alleged offence has taken place or not. From the above discussion it is clear that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of accused no.1 and 2 beyond reasonable doubts. Hence the point is answered in the favour of accused no.1 and 2 and against the prosecution.

22. As a result, the accused no.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under sections 354, 509 of IPC and thus the accused no.1 and 2 are acquitted under Section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused no.1 and 2 if any, shall be in force for a period of six months as required under section 437-A

Cr.P.C. There is no case property to pass final orders.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20 th day of June, 2025).

Sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

JFCM, Khanapur.

13/13 CC No. 436 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW1: Gummula Amrutha -None- PW2: Gummula Ramesh PW3: D.Srinivas PW4: P.Rajanna PW5: G.Rajeshwari PW6: S.Laxmi PW7: Durgam Narsavva PW8: P.Mallesh PW9: K.Vinay

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P1 is the complaint given to the police. - Nil - Ex.P2 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2. Ex.P3 is the CDF. Ex.P4 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW8. Ex.P5 is the FIR. Ex.P6 is the 164 Cr.P.C statement of PW1.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- NIL -

Sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

JFCM, Khanapur.

Page No.1 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KHANAPUR

Present: J.BHAVISHYA

I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Nirmal

FAC: Junior Civil Judge, Khanapur

(Dated, this the 10 th day of April, 2026)

O.S.No. 06 of 2022

BETWEEN:

Saiful Hassan, S/o.Munurul Hassan, Aged about 28 years, Occ: Labour, R/o.Kadam village & Mandal, Dist: Nirmal.

... Plaintiff

AND

Smt. Rafiya Farheen, W/o. Saiful Hassan, D/o.Abdul Rab , Aged about 25 years, Occ: Household, R/o.Kadam village and Mandal, Dist: Nirmal, presently residing at H.No. 7-3-77/1, Bhagyanagar street of Nirmal Town, Dist Nirmal. …Defendant

The suit coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri D.Rajashekar, Sri.B.Shiva Kumar, Advocate counsel for plaintiff and Sri M.Suresh, Advocate, counsel for defendant and after having stood over for consideration today this court doth pronounce the following:

::JUDGMENT::

01.This suit is filed under Order VII Rule 1 R/W 26 of CPC seeking the defendant to join the company of the plaintiff.

02. Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

The plaintiff's case is that the defendant is legally wedded wife of the petitioner and their marriage was solemnized on 17.12.2019 at Masjid-E-Mahboobia, Venue IA

Function, Near Mini Tank Bund, Nirmal as per shariyath of Mohammedan Law. It is further submitted that, the proof of the marriage in between the plaintiff and defendant a marriage Booklet issued by the State Wakf Board of Telangana, Hyderabad, Booklet

No.65852, (Edition 2018-2019), herewith enclosed original copy along with its true translation copy from Urdu to English. It is further submitted that the plaintiff without

Page No.2 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur any sort of dowry performed marriage with the defendant and except Beds, Almara,

Cooler, presented by the parents of the defendant to the plaintiff, which are with the plaintiff, that the parents of the plaintiff presented 2 tulas gold in shape of necklace, ½ tula ear studs, 15 tulas silver chains to the defendant in the marriage. The defendant expended an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- for the reception of the defendant for good quality food, invited 4000 members in the reception by the plaintiff and defendant side.

It is further submitted that the defendant soon after the marriage joined with company of the plaintiff lead happy conjugal life for period of 1½ year at Kadam. The defendant gave a birth the child by name Mohammed Riyan at Chandana Hospital,

Nirmal, after discharge from the Hospital the parents of the defendant took her with them to her parents house street of Bhagyanagar till performed cordial ceremony function on 21.01.2020 at her parents house, on the same day of cordial ceremony took back her with the company of the plaintiff matrimonial company at Kadam.

It is further submitted that the plaintiff being the husband discharged his mandatory obligation duties take care well, provide basis needs, medical aid from the date of marriage to till take back by the parents of the defendant to the defendant.

It is further submitted that there were no disputes out of conjugal life with the defendant and lead happy peaceful conjugal life. The plaintiff further submitted that mother of the plaintiff got surgery operation on left eye at Hyderabad in the month of

October, 2021, after discharging from the Hospital the duty doctor advised to take bed rest and his mother followed the instructions meantime the parents of the defendant and her brother constantly forced the plaintiff to send defendant with them to their house, however the plaintiff asked them regarding of the reasons for the sending of the defendant, but they have not given any explanation despite of the plaintiff requested to them no body female member in the matrimonial house to render the service of his mother and a promise to send the defendant even after cure health of her mother. The brother of the defendant Abdul Layaq approached to the SHO reported orally by stating that the plaintiff is not sending the defendant to her parent's house on 03.11.2021, accordingly on his oral complaint the Sl of the Police Kadam

Page No.3 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur callethe plaintiff and his family members to the Police Station, where the SI of the

Police asked the plaintiff and his family members why they are not sending the defendant to her parent's house, then the plaintiff reiterated as above said facts, after considering the said facts the Sl of the Police Kadam has given an advice to plaintiff to sent the defendant with his brother Abdul Layaq and the Abdul Layaq gave assurance to the plaintiff to sent back the defendant after 2 days by believing the version the plaintiff and his family members considered and sent the defendant along with small kid with her brother, ever since the defendant not turned back, despite of the plaintiff made best efforts to take back the defendant and his kid, but resulted futile.

It is further submitted that the plaintiff noticed that at the instigation of the parents and brothers of the defendant, the defendant gave a complaint against the plaintiff and his family members by setting up false cooked up facts by taking legal advice without conducting family counseling state away issued FIR vide crime

No.461/2021 dated: 27.11.2021 against the plaintiff and his family members by alleging that the plaintiff and his family members used to harass with ill treatment to the defendant by making a demand of dowry an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to the defendant and other allegation utterly incorrect and false.

It is further submitted that the plaintiff intimated as above said facts to Masjid

Committee of Kadam with a request to resume conjugal life with the defendant, accordingly the Masjid Committee elders called the defendant and her family members for family counseling, but the defendant and her parents not turned up.

It is further submitted that on 03.11.2021 the brother of the defendant took the defendant with him by making a promise to the plaintiff to sent back after two days to his company, even since the defendant has been residing at her parents house without just reasonable cause along with kid. The plaintiff is having very much love and affection with the defendant and her kid at the same time and he is not interested to break marital status with defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant are being young couples at this stage the company of the defendant is very much necessity, required,

Page No.4 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur otherwise to the plaintiff due to absence of the defendant the plaintiff faced much mental agony.

It is further submitted that the plaintiff followed strict terms and conditions reduced in marriage booklet at the same time it is the duty of the defendant to follow the same. Hence the suit.

03.On receipt of the summons, defendant made his presence, and defendant filed written statement in which he denied the material allegations and stated that the plaintiff and defendant were legally married and solemnized on 17.12.2019 at

Masjeed-E-Mahboobia, I.A. Function hall, Near Mini Tank Bund, Nirmal as per

Shariyath of Mohammedan Law. It is further submitted that, the marriage between the plaintiff and defendant is recorded in the marriage booklet issued by the State Wakf

Board of Telangana, Hyderabad, Booklet No.65852 (Edition 2018-2019).

It is further submitted that, at the time of marriage, the plaintiff and his parents demanded dowry of amount Rs.5,00,000/- in cash and 11 tulas of gold including branded home appliances and furniture and the same were accordingly fulfilled by the defendant's father and brothers. Further upon performing the marriage as per the demands and preferences of the plaintiff and his family members, the defendant incurred expenditure of Rs. 10,00,000/- for the marriage expenses which were the hard-earned money of both defendant's father and brothers. Therefore, the averments made by the plaintiff that marriage was performed without any sort of dowry is false and hence denied. The defendant admitted that the defendant's parents presented bed,

Almara and Cooler at the time of marriage. Further, claiming that the plaintiff's parents presented 2 tulas of gold in shape of necklace, ½ tula ear studs, 15 tulas of silver chains to the defendant in the marriage is false and hence denied as the plaintiff's parents had not presented any jewelry items to the defendant at the time of marriage and the plaintiff has falsely exaggerated that an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was spent for the reception of the plaintiff and defendant for good quality food by

Page No.5 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur inviting 4000 members on both sides is practically not possible to accommodate such huge gathering within the budget of Rs.3,00,000/-.

It is further submitted that, the defendant joined the company of plaintiff to lead a happy conjugal life, but all her expectations had gone in vain wherein after 15 days of her marriage, the plaintiff and his family members started to behave rudely and degraded the defendant for getting low standard of Jahez articles. It is admitted that the defendant gave birth to a child by name Mohammed Riyan at Chandana Hospital,

Nirmal and at the time of discharge the plaintiff did not allow the defendant to go with her parents but had forcefully sent before the cordial ceremony function at her parents house and immediately took her back on the same day itself to Kadam.

It is further submitted that, the plaintiff made all false declarations upon fulfilling his mandatory obligation duties in his conjugal married life. The plaintiff had never taken proper care and indeed used to degrade the integrity of the defendant by being suspicious about she talking to anyone, used to raise arguments on silly issues and tagged the defendant as a characterless wife and daughter in law. The plaintiff falsely stated that there were no disputes out of conjugal life and lead a happy married life. The plaintiff along with his parents harassed and started to torture the defendant right after 15 days of marriage and treated her like a slave for all the household works and used to forcefully demand an additional dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- from the defendant's parents.

It is further submitted that, the plaintiff had falsely implicated the facts for the purpose of the case and using it as an excuse to hold the defendant. The the plaintiff had cooked up stories to hold back the defendant stating that his mother needs bed rest and needs assistance to render service to her and showcasing her as an irresponsible daughter in law which is not true. It is submitted that the plaintiff and his family members including his sister and brother-in-law were continuously harassing the defendant mentally and physically. It is submitted that against the said illegal acts of the plaintiff and his family members, the defendant's brother had already made a complaint to the SHO, Nirmal on 10.06.2021. Subsequently, the community elders and other relatives had intervened and requested to withdraw the

Page No.6 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur complaint assuring that no future harassment will be done by the plaintiff and his family members. But again within 1 month of time the plaintiff and his parents started to harass on the ground that the defendant had spoiled the reputation of the family and ruined their respect in the community. Since then they had again started harassing, the defendant had called her brother Moin to take her back but the plaintiff and his parents were reluctant to send her. As they were not sending, the defendant brother Layak gave a complaint, considering the said complaint the police came to the plaintiff house and even then, the plaintiff and his parents have not agreed to send the defendant with her brothers. On the intervention of the police finally agreed to send the defendant. Every day the plaintiff and her parents used to torture the defendant by saying "you came from a low family and why god is not taking you". Hence the contentions/allegations made by the plaintiff that the defendant did not turned back, despite of the plaintiff made best efforts to take back the defendant and his kid is false and hence denied.

It is further submitted that, the plaintiff had stated that at the instigation of the parents and brothers of the defendant the defendant gave a complaint against the plaintiff by stating false cooked up facts and upon the legal advice had filed an FIR vide Crime No.461/2021 dated 27.11.2021 against the plaintiff and his family members without conducting family counseling is false and hence denied. It is submitted that there were several counseling sessions held and despite conducting counseling sessions the plaintiff and his family members) failed to treat the defendant with love and affection rather harassed her and defamed the integrity of the defendant and further encouraged the plaintiff for second marriage as he is capable of getting better girl with beautiful looks and more dowry. The defendant had never considered the future well being of the plaintiff and the kid and the impact on the child. It is admitted that the defendant had filed an FIR vide Crime No.461/2021 dated 27.11.2021 against the plaintiff and his family members U/s 498-A of IPC subject to cruelty against woman and U/s 3 & 4 of DPA, 1961 for demanding additional dowry.

It is further submitted that, the averments made by the plaintiff that the defendants failed to attend the family counseling session arranged by the Masjid

Page No.7 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur

Committee of Kadam with a request to resume conjugal life with the plaintiff is absolutely false and hence denied. It is submitted that they never initiated any counseling sessions and always tried to cover up their illegal acts and ill intentions to make the defendant suffer in order to obtain additional dowry and made sure that their family reputation is not spoiled in community.

It is further submitted that, it is falsely stated that the brother of the defendant took the defendant by promising to send her back after 2 days along with the kid. It is submitted that due to the mental and physical harassment caused by the plaintiff, his parents, sister and brother in law the defendant had to call her brother to take her back with the help of police the defendant reached her parents house, itself shows the behavior of the plaintiff and her parents. It is further submitted that the averments made by the plaintiff that he is having very much love and affection with the defendant and her kid at the same time had got no interest to break marital status with defendant is false and the plaintiff is exaggerating of being very affectionate and act innocent to cover up his actions which caused mental agony to the defendant. It is submitted that the plaintiff and his parents every day used to torture the defendant by saying "you come from a low family and why god is not taking you". Further, the plaintiff's sister i.e., Shazia and her Husband Moiz used to influence the plaintiff for 2 nd marriage stating that the defendant is not a suitable wife and the plaintiff is capable of getting a better girl with good looks and huge dowry. The family members of the plaintiff always used to instigate the plaintiff to divorce the defendant and used to blackmail the defendant to either get additional dowry Rs.5,00,000/- amount or give divorce. It is submitted that the plaintiff never showed mercy towards the defendant neither to the child and was purely inclined with the influence of his family members demanding

additional dowry and had never gone to his Mechanic shed for work instead used to

drink alcohol daily and physically harass the defendant for not getting additional dowry despite several requests made by the defendant that her family is not in a situation to pay more dowry due to financial crisis.

Page No.8 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur

It is further submitted that, it is false that the plaintiff had stating that such responsibilities are vice-versa amount both of them. The defendant did abide to the terms and conditions by fulfilling her responsibilities as lawfully wedded wife, daughter-in-law and a mother for their kid whereas the plaintiff had been least interested to take care of the defendant and the child with love and affection.

Henceforth, it is submitted that the plaintiff had filed the above suit for restitution of conjugal rights as an escape remedy for being accused in the FIR vide crime

No.461/2021 dated 27.11.2021 and to avoid punishment for the crime committed U/s 498-A of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of DPA, 1961. It is submitted that the averments/contentions made in the complaint by the defendant before the SHO Nirmal may be taken into consideration as part and parcel of this counter affidavit. Hence, prayed to dismiss the suit.

04 .On hearing the both sides and considering the pleadings, the following issues were framed for trial:-

1) “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for restitution of conjugal rights as prayed for?

05.To substantiate his claim, the plaintiff was examined as PW1 and got marked

Ex.A1. On behalf of defendant, the defendant was examined as DW1 and one Abdul

Layaq was examined as DW2.

06.Heard, the counsel for plaintiff and defendant and perused the material on record.

07. ISSUES No. I :

The plaintiff examined as PW1 and defendant is examined as DW1 and the brother of defendant examined as DW2. Both the plaintiff and defendant admitted that

Page No.9 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur they were married and in support to it Ex.A1 is marked by the PW1. There is no dispute with regard to the marriage. The PW1 testified the defendant left the matrimonial society whereas defendant testified the plaintiff harassed the defendant and same was testified by the DW2 also and further DW1 and DW2 testified that the plaintiff is harassing the DW1 and the plaintiff want to desert the DW1 and also to give a divorce to DW1 and remarry again. The DW1 further testified that if DW1 joins the matrimonial society of PW1 the PW1 will harass the DW1 and also testified that

PW1 is harassing for additional dowry of Rs. 5,00,000/- and also further both DW1 and DW2 testified that at the time of marriage the parents of PW1 demanded dowry of

RS. 5,00,000/- and 5 tulas of gold including branded home appliances and furniture.

However from the evidence of both DW1 and DW2 it is clear that the DW1 left the matrimonial society of PW1. The marriage between the PW1 and DW1 is the admitted fact. Though the DW1 testified that there is an harassment and also admitted that

DW1 filed domestic violence case and 498-A case and in reverse the DW1 claimed that the PW1 himself deserted the DW1. As of now PW1 himself filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

From the evidence it is clear that the DW1 left the matrimonial society and both PW1 and DW1 were the legally married couple. Hence the petition is allowed.

The DW1 is directed to join with PW1 on or before 24.04.2026.

08. the result, In the petition is allowed without costs.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 06 th day of February, 2026).

Sd/-

I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Nirmal FAC: Junior Civil Judge, Khanapur

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE,

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANTS

PW.1: Saiful Hassan DW1: Rafiya Farheen

Page No.10 of 10 Order in OS No.06 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Khanapur

DW2: Abdul Layaq

::Exhibits marked on behalf of the plaintiff ::

Ex.A1 : Original Marriage booklet, its translation copy Urdu to English.

:: Exhibits marked on behalf of the defendants :: - NIL -

Sd/-

I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Nirmal FAC: Junior Civil Judge, Khanapur

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

:: AT KHANAPUR ::

Present:- J.Bhavishya, I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

Dated, this the 12 th day of December, 2025

CC.No. 184 of 2021

Between: The State of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur. … Prosecution // AND //

Rasamallu Sangeetha, W/o. Rajeshwar, age: 32 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. Indranagar, Khanapur.

…Accused person

This case is coming for final hearing before me on this day in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.M.Venkat Mahendra, Counsel

for accused person and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court deliv-

ered the following.

J U D G M E N T

01.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur, laid charge sheet against accused in Cr.No.168 of 2014 fo r the offence under Section 352, 324 of IPC.

02. The brief facts of the charge-sheet are as follows:-

On 21.09.2014 at about 08.00 hours, as per request of Bethapu Rajeshwar, the

LW1 went to his father in law house and told as who are your to keep sticks here, then the accused came there and quarreled with LW1 and assaulted LW1 by caught hold his collar, beat him with chappal. Later LW1 lodged a report in police station.

2/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

03.Based on the report of LW1, LW8/Investigation Officer has registered a case in

Cr.No.168/2014 for the offence U/sec. 352, 324 of IPC, issued FIR and took up investigation. Later the LW8 examined and recorded the statement of LW1 and referred

LW1 to government hospital, Khanapur for treatment and necessary certificate. Later

LW8 visited the scene of offence situated Indranagar, Khanapur and examined and recorded the statements of LW2 to LW4, secured the LW5 and LW6, prepared a CDF and drafted the rough sketch of the scene. Later LW8 issued 41-A Cr.P.C notice to accused with a direction to appear before the Court on receipt of summons. Later LW7 who treated the injured i.e., LW1 issued MC in which he opined that “no external injuries found” on his body. After completion of investigation, LW8 filed the charge- sheet against accused for the offence under sections 352, 324 of IPC.

04. This court took cognizance, on the police report, for the offence under sections 352, 324 of IPC and issued summons to the accused.

05.On the appearance of the accused person before the Court, copies of documents were furnished to him as required under section 207 Cr.P.C. He was examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C for the offence under sections 352, 324 of IPC were read over, and explained to him in his vernacular language for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

06.On behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW6 were examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 were marked on his behalf.

3/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

07.After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused was given an opportunity of being heard by putting before him all the accusations alleged by the prosecution witnesses in the form of questions which have been recorded in the prescribed format in the manner as envisaged under section 313 of Cr.P.C. As aforesaid, the defence denied the allegations in toto and declined to adduce evidence.

08. Heard arguments of learned APP for the prosecution and the learned counsel for the accused.

09.Now, the point for determination is as follows:

“Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused for the offence

punishable under section 352, 324 of IPC beyond reasonable doubt”?

POINT:

10.In a nutshell, it is the prosecution’s case that, on 21.09.2014 at 0800 hours, the accused quarreled with LW1 and assaulted her by caught hold his collar. Therefore the accused is liable to be punished for the offence under section 352, 324 of IPC.

11.PW1 who is the defacto-complainant testified that, one plot belongs to his maternal uncle (B.Rajeshwar) is situated at beside the house of the accused situated at

Indranagar, Khanapur. On 21.09.2014 at about 08.00 am, PW1 visited the plot belongs to his maternal uncle and where PW1 had seen some sticks were placed in the plot of his maternal uncle. Immediately PW1 questioned the accused as who placed the sticks in his uncle plot. Due to which the accused abused him in most filthy language as Lanja koduka and Lamdi koduka and caught hold his collar and beat him with her slipper over 4/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur his cheeks and back. PW1 further testified that, thereafter the accused kicked him over his back with her legs. The neighbours has witnessed the scene of offence. Immediately

PW1 went to the PS Khanapur and lodged the report against the accused and right after lodging the report, PW1 along with one ASI of PS Khanapur visited the scene of offence for the purpose of investigation, at that time accused also tried to beat him with stick.

Police examined him and recorded his statement. PW1 admitted that Ex.P1 is his report.

Police registered the case by issuing FIR after two months of the complaint given by him to the police. PW1 admitted that PW1 do not know how to read and write Telugu and one person named Srikanth scribed the Ex.P1 on the behalf of PW1. PW1 testified at morning 10-11 am alone went to the police station and also admitted there is a dispute between their side and accused. The PW1 admitted the PW1 went with PW3 to the alleged scene of offence but the same was not mentioned in Ex.P1 and 161 Cr.P.C statement. The PW1 admitted that PW1 has interest in the disputed plot in between the

PW1 and the accused. The PW1 admitted that the civil case is pending between the uncle of PW1 and accused with regard to the disputed plot. The PW1 admitted it was not specifically mentioned where the accused beat the PW1 and no specific abusive words were mentioned. The PW1 admitted that 10-15 members were present on alleged spot of offence but the names of eye witnesses were not mentioned in Ex.P1 and 161 Cr.P.C statements. The PW1 admitted that the alleged incident happened on 21.09.2014 and the complaint was lodged on 10.11.2014 with a delay of 45 days and the reason for delay was not mentioned.

5/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

12.PW2 who is the eye witness to the incident testified that, on 21.09.2014, at about 8.00 am, while PW2 was going to Indranagar, PW1 saw from his eyes that accused was beating PW1 with the chappal/slippers on the back and shoulder and on the upper part of the body and also kicked PW1 with her legs. PW2 further testified that, the incident occurred in the open place situated beside the house of the accused. PW2 came to know the reason for happening of galata that the accused put her sticks in the open land of maternal uncle of PW1. Police examined PW2 and recorded his statement. The PW2 admitted that it is not specifically mentioned that on which part of the body the alleged accused beat the PW1. The PW2 further testified approximately 30members gathered at the alleged place of offence and do not know who all are gathered. The PW2 further admitted that PW2 stayed only 10 minutes and do not know what happened and did not inquired the reason for galata.

13.PW3 who is the eye witness to the incident testified that, in the year 2014, PW3 came to Khanapur town market near bus stand on his personal work, at that time PW1 came over there and informed that some persons placed sticks at the land of PW1 situated at Subhash Nagar, Khanapur, then immediately, PW3 along with PW1 went to the land of PW1 in between 8.30 am - 9.00 am, and PW1 questioned nearby people about who placed the sticks in his land, meantime accused came there and beat PW1 with chappal/slipper on his face including cheeks. Thereafter, they left from there. Police examined PW3 and recorded his statement. The PW3 admitted that till date the PW3 is working as labour near PW1 and admitted 7-8 people gathered on spot at the time of incident. The PW3 testified the statement was recorded at police station.

6/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

14.PW4 who is the eye witness to the incident have not supported the case of prosecution and further testified that PW4 do not know anything about the facts of the case. PW4 further testified that, police did not conduct any panchanama in his presence.

PW4 further testified that the signature shown to him on CDF is not his.

15.PW5 who is the medical officer testified that, on 10.11 2014, PW5 received requisition from SHO PS Khanapur to examine and issue Medical Certificate of

Chintala Mallesh/PW1. Accordingly, PW5 examined the injured person and found no external injury. Accordingly, PW5 issued Medical Certificate of PW1.

16.PW6 who is the investigating officers testified that, on 10.11.2014 at 1630 hours the complainant lodged Ex.P1, on the basis of report PW6 registered a case in

Cr.No.168/2014 U/sec.352, 324 of IPC and issued FIR and sent to all concerned and took up the investigation. During the course of investigation PW6 examined and recorded the statements of PW1 and later referred PW1 to the government hospital

Khanapur for treatment. Later PW6 visited the scene of offence and enquired the eye witnesses PW2, PW3. LW4 and recorded the 161 Cr.P.C statements. Later PW6 secured the presence of LW5 and PW4 and prepared CDF and drafted a rough sketch of scene.

Later PW6 gave a notice to accused U/sec.41-A Cr.P.C and directed to appear before

Hon'ble Addl. JFCM Court, Nirmal after receipt of the summons from the court. The

PW5 who treated the PW1 issued Ex.P2. Later based on the facts and evidence collected

PW6 have filed a charge sheet before the Hon'ble court against the accused for the offence U/sec.352, 324 of IPC. There was a delay in lodging Ex.P1, Hence, there was a delay in treatment due to which no external injuries were found on PW1 as per Ex.P2.

7/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

The PW6 admitted that it was not mentioned on Ex.P1 who scribed the Ex.P1 and as per

Ex.P1 the PW1 alone went to the alleged scene of offence and also it was not mentioned in Ex.P1 who witnessed the alleged scene of offence and also specifically it was not mentioned where PW1 received the injuries. The PW6 further admitted in Ex.P1 it was not stated with which hand the accused beat the PW1 and further admitted nothing was mentioned in 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1 with regard to eye witness and a part of body where injuries were received and with whom the PW1 visited the alleged scene of offence and with which hand the accused beat the PW1. The PW6 admitted that there were two alterations in Ex.P1. The PW6 admitted the dangerous weapon/chappal was not recovered. The PW6 further admitted that the PW1, PW2 and PW3 belongs to the same caste and PW2 and PW3 does not belong to the area where the alleged scene of offence occurred. The PW6 admitted that in Ex.P4 with regard to the kind of hurt which was caused to PW1. The PW6 further admitted that the Ex.P4 is not detailed with regard to crime. The PW6 admitted accused never came to police station till issuing the notice whereas admitted that as per Ex.P1 the accused was present at police station while lodging Ex.P1 and PW6further admitted there was a delay of two months in lodging Ex.P1. The PW6 further admitted that PW6 did not inquire with regard to treatment underwent by PW1 and PW1 did not submit any prescription or medical certificate.

17.At the outset the report was lodged on 10.11.2014 with 45 days of delay and reasons for such delay was not mentioned. The PW1, PW2 and PW3 supported the case of prosecution and testified that accused beat the PW1 with her slipper her cheeks and 8/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur back and later kicked with legs and abused PW1. The PW1 testified that immediately after this the PW1 wen to the police station and the police came to the alleged scene of offence and at that instance the accused beat PW1 but the same was not mentioned in 161 Cr.P.C statement. PW1 testified that alone went to police station in between 10-11 am and also admitted as per 161 Cr.P.C statement the PW1 alone went to the alleged scene of offence whereas further admitted that PW1 went along with PW3 to the alleged scene of offence. The PW1 himself admitted that PW1 has interest in the disputed land between the uncle of PW1 and accused and further admitted there was a civil case pending between the uncle of PW1 and also the accused. The specific words of abuse were not mentioned in 161 Cr.P.C statement and PW1 testified 10-15 members were present on the alleged spot of offence. the PW2 supported the case of prosecution and testified that the accused beat the PW1 with the chappal and about 30 members were gathered at the alleged place of offence. The PW2 admitted that PW2 stayed only 10 minutes and do not know what happened and did not inquired the reason for galata. The

PW3 who is the eye witness supported the case of prosecution and also admitted that

PW3 is working as labour near PW1 and further admitted that PW3 went to the land to the alleged scene of offence along with PW1 but the same was not testified by the PW1.

This creates a doubt with regard to credibility of evidence of PW1 and PW3 and also there was a 45 days of delay in lodging report and the reason for such delay was no where mentioned and the PW1 himself admitted that there is a dispute between the accused and uncle of PW1 with regard to the plot which is a alleged scene of offence.

Though PW2 who is an independent eye witness supported the case of prosecution later in cross admitted that PW2 do not know what happened and stayed only upto 10 9/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur minutes. The PW3 also testified that 7-8 people gathered over there. The PW4 who is the eye witness did not support the case of prosecution. The PW5 who is the medical officer who issued Ex.P2 testified that no external injury was found and nothing was deposed with regard to any pain or any other injury suffered by PW1. The PW6 admitted that the

PW1 specifically did not mention who witnessed the alleged scene of offence and where the PW1 received the injuries. The PW6 further admitted that there were two alterations in Ex.P1 and did not recovered the chappal which is mentioned as dangerous weapon.

The PW6 further admitted that the PW1, PW2 and PW3 belongs to same caste and PW2 does not belong to area where the alleged scene occurred. The PW6 admitted Ex.P4 is not detailed with regard to crime. The PW6 further admitted that the accused never came to police station till the 41-A notice was issued but as per the Ex.P1 the accused was present at the police station while lodging a report. This statement creates a doubt whether the alleged incident has taken place or not. The PW6 admitted the PW6 did not inquired about the treatment undergone by PW1 and PW1 also did not submit any prescription of medical certificate. From the evidence of PW6 it clearly shows there is no proper investigation done by the PW6 and the PW1 and PW3 are related to each other and PW2 statement is inconsistent and there is no other independent witness and also no injury was found on PW1 as per the evidence of PW5 and nothing was filed

before the court with regard to injury by the PW6. The PW1 himself admitted with

regard to civil case pending between the uncle of PW1 and accused and also admitted that PW1 was interested in the disputed land. Though the PW1 to PW3 stated the many people gathered at the alleged scene of offence the prosecution failed to produce them as witnesses, this creates a doubt whether such alleged offence has taken place or not.

10/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

From the above discussion it is clear that the PW1 and PW3 are the interested witnesses and also there is inconsistency in the evidence of PW1 and PW3 and the prosecution did not produce any other witnesses the reasons must be best known to them. The evidence of PW5 is noway useful to the prosecution’s case as no injury was found on PW1. This court solely cannot rely on the evidence of PW6 when there is no other evidence against the accused. From the evidence of PW1 and PW3 this court finds the evidence of them is untrustworthy as there was a 45 days delay in filing report and also there is a dispute with regard to a plot and also a civil case was running between uncle of PW1 and the accused and there is an inconsistency in the evidence of PW1, PW2 and PW3 . Hence this court cannot rely on their evidence. From the above discussion it is clear that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Hence the point is answered in favour of accused and against the prosecution.

18. IN THE RESULT, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under sections 352, 324 of IPC and thus acquitted under Section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused, if any, shall be in force for a period of six months as required under section 437-A Cr.P.C. There is no case property to pass final orders.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 12 th day of December, 2025).

sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur 11/11 CC No. 184 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW1: C.Mallesh - None - PW2: D.Rajanna PW3: P. Linganna PW4: K.Venkatesh PW5: Dr. C.Venugopala Krishna PW6: B.Sunil Kumar

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P1 is the report of PW1. - Nil - Ex.P2 is the medical certificate of PW1. Ex.P3 is the FIR. Ex.P4 is the CDF along with rough sketch.

sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

:: AT KHANAPUR ::

Present:- J.Bhavishya, I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

Dated, this the 13 th day of June, 2025

CC.No. 84 of 2021

(Cr. No.44 of 2017 of Khanapur PS)

Between:

The State of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur. … Prosecution // AND //

1. Balagam Ravinder, S/o. Bhumanna, age: 32 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Maskapur vg of Khanapur mandal.

2. Balagam Bhumanna, S/o. Bheema Lingu, age: 69 years, R/o. Maskapur vg of Khanapur mandal. …Accused persons

This case is coming for final hearing before me on this day in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri V.V.Ramana Rao, Advocate Counsel for accused persons and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

01. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur, laid charge sheet in

Cr.No.44 of 2017 against accused persons for the offence under Section 324, 506 r/w 34

IPC.

2/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

02. The brief facts of the charge-sheet are as follows:-

On 08.04.2017 at about 09.30 pm, while LW1 was proceeding to the backside of the Hanuman temple for doing pit for drain in the meantime the accused no.1 intentionally drove his motorcycle in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the

LW1’s motorcycle as a result the LW1 fell down in the drainage, later beat with stone on his left side of the forehead and caused blood injury, then accused no.2 intervened into the matter and abused the LW1. Later LW1 went to the police station and lodged the report.

03.Based on the report of LW1, LW7/Investigation Officer registered a case in

Cr.No.44/2017 for the offence U/sec. 337, 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC, issued FIR and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, LW7 examined and recorded the statements of LW1 and referred him to Govt. Hospital, Khanapur for treatment and necessary certificates. Later on 09.04.2017, LW7 visited to the scene of offence situated at Maskapur village, examined and recorded the statements of LW2 and LW3, secured the presence of LW4 an LW5, observed the scene minutely, drafted CDF and with rough sketch of the scene and searched for crime weapon but was not traced out. Later on 18.04.2017 the accused no.1 and 2 went to PS and surrendered before LW7 and subjected them to interrogation, on interrogation, they voluntarily confessed to have committed this offence. LW9 served the notice U/Sec. 41-A Cr.P.C to the accused no.1 and 2 with an instruction to appear before the Hon’ble Court on receipt of summons.

Later LW7 collected medical certificates of LW1 from LW6 in which he opined that the

LW1 sustained injury is simple in nature. LW7 sent a requisition to SDPO, Nirmal for 3/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur deletion of section 337 IPC from the charge sheet as the accused no.1 intentionally dashed the LW1 with his motorcycle from backside as such section 337 does not attract.

Accordingly, SDPO, Nirmal issued permission for deletion of Section 337 IPC. After completion of investigation, LW8 filed the charge-sheet for the offence under Section 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC against accused No.1 and accused no.2.

04. This Court has taken the cognizance for the offence U/sec. 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC against accused no.1 and accused no.2.

05.On the appearance of the accused persons before the Court, copies of documents were furnished to them as required under section 207 Cr.P.C. The accused No.1 and 2 were examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C for the offence under section 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC were read over, and explained to them in their vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

06. On behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW7 were examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P8 were marked on their behalf. The Learned APP has given up the evidence of LW5.

07. After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused no.1 and 2 were given an opportunity of being heard by putting before them all the accusations alleged by the prosecution witnesses in the form of questions which have been recorded in the prescribed format in the manner as envisaged under section 313 of Cr.P.C. As aforesaid, the defence denied the allegations in toto and declined to adduce evidence.

08. Heard arguments of learned APP for the prosecution and the learned counsel for the accused no.1 and 2.

4/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

09.Now, the point for determination is as follows:

“Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused no.1 and 2 for

the offence punishable under section 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC beyond

reasonable doubt”?

POINT:

10.In a nutshell, it is the prosecution’s case that, on 07.04.2017 at about 21.30 hours, the accused no.1 intentionally drove his motorcycle in rash and negligent manner and dashed the LW1 as a result LW1 fell in the drainage and also the accused no.1 beat the LW1 with stone on his left side of the forehead and caused bleeding injury and the accused no.2 also intervened in the issue. Therefore the accused no.1 and 2 are liable to be punished for the offence under section 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC.

11.PW1 who is the defacto-complainant/injured testified that about 6 or 7 years back, on one day, at about 9.30 p.m., while PW1 was going to Maskapur village from

Khanapur village, when PW1 reached Hanuman Temple situated at Maskapur village, on seeing LW3, PW1 stopped his motorcycle and while he was chit chatting with LW3, at that time, accused no.1 came on his motorcycle and hit PW1 due to which PW1 fell down in the drainage. Immediately, accused no.1 came to PW1 and beat him with a brick on his left side of forehead due to which PW1 received bleeding injury. PW1 further testified that, LW3 rescued PW1 from accused no.1. Later, their villagers shifted

PW1 to Govt. Hospital, Khanapur for treatment and the doctors in Govt. Hospital,

Khanapur advised him to get CT scan of his head at Nirmal and as per their advice,

PW1 went to Nirmal and took treatment in private Hospital. The reasons for this incident was that there were previous disputes regarding money lending issue. PW1 5/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur further testified that, prior to this incident also, accused no.1 beat/attacked PW1 when he asked accused no.1 for repayment of money. But PW1 compromised in that matter on the advice of their village elders. After the occurrence of present incident, on the next day morning, PW1 went to police station and lodged a complaint in police station.

Police examined him and recorded his statement. PW1 admitted that it was not mentioned in 161 Cr.P.C statement that the PW1 was proceeding from Maskapur to

Khanapur and stopped near the Hanuman temple on seeing LW3 and chit chatted with him. PW1 further admitted the PW1 did not mention about the bike which hit him. The

PW1 further admitted that it was not mentioned in 161 Cr.P.C statement that the doctor never advised me to go to CT Scan of his head. PW1 further admitted that PW1 was accused in CC 331 of 2021 in which the accused is the complainant and the PW1 admitted and pleaded guilty of claim before the Hon’ble Court. The PW1 denied that

PW1 never submitted a CT Scan copies to the police and admitted that medical documents pertaining to treatment were not submitted to the police.

12.PW2 who is the eye witness did not support the case of prosecution and further testified that about 6 or 7 years ago, while PW2 was proceeding from Maskapur on his motorcycle and when he reached Hanuman temple of their village in between 7.30 pm to 8.00 pm, he found accused no.1 and PW1 talking with each other. PW2 further testified that in the next day morning, PW2 came to know that accused no.1 and PW1 quarreled with each other. Except this, PW2 do not know anything about the case. He was not examined by the police.

6/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

13.PW3 who is the eye witness testified that in the year 2017, in between 9 to 9.30 pm, when PW3 was present at Hanuman temple of Maskapur village, at that time accused No.1 was coming on motorcycle towards temple and slightly dashed to PW1 while he was walking. As a result, PW1 fell in the sewerage lane and immediately accused No.1 beat the PW1 with mud brick. Immediately PW3 separated both of them and shifted PW1 to the hospital. PW3 further testified that, accused No.1 beat PW1 regarding financial disputes. Police examined him and recorded his statement. The PW3 admitted that the police never examined the PW3.

14.PW4 who is the mediator for CDF did not support the case of prosecution and further testified that in the year 2017, while PW4 was proceeding towards his house and when PW4 reached the scene of offence, police scribed something over paper and took his signature.

15.PW5 who is the 2 nd investigating officer testified that after receiving the CD file from the LW7 and verifying the record and verifying the investigation done by him and finding on correct lines, PW5 examined LW1 to LW3 but did not record their statement because they reiterated the said as they have said before LW7. PW5 further testified that, after finding all the records correct PW5 filed charge sheet before this Court.

16.PW6 who is the Medical officer and who treated the PW1 testified that, after receiving requisition on 07.04.2017 from SHO PS Khanapur for treatment of PW1/Burra

Prakash Goud and PW1 was admitted on 07.04.2017 at 09.50 pm and discharged on 08.04.2017 at 06.00 pm and medical certificate was issued on 26.04.2017. PW6 treated 7/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

PW1/Burra Prakash Goud and found following injuries: 1. Laceration of size 4 x 1 x 0.5 centimeter over left eyebrow. PW6 further testified that, in his opinion the above injury

No.1 is simple in nature. The PW6 admitted that on Ex.P7 there is a column of serial number which was kept has blank and the Column of person who escorted the PW1 was mentioned as self. The PW6 admitted that there is an overwriting on the date and time on which PW1 was admitted in the hospital without any initial. The PW6 further admitted that the injuries mentioned in Ex.P7 may be caused if a person falls on any surface all of sudden. The PW6 admitted that without giving treatment to PW1 issued

Ex.P7.

17.PW7 who is the 1 st investigating officer testified that on 08.04.2017 at 15.30 hours

Complainant/LW1/B. Prakash Goud, came to the Police Station and given a written complaint in Telugu. Basing on the report, PW7 registered the case in Cr.No.44/2017,

U/Sec.337, 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC and issued FIR and during the course of investigation

PW7 recorded the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1 and sent him to Govt. Hospital

Khanapur for medical treatment. During the course of investigation PW7 visited the crime scene situated at Maskapur village and over there examined and recorded the statement of PW2 and PW3 and after securing the presence of PW4 and LW5 prepared

CDF and drawn rough sketch and searched for crime weapon but could not trace out.

Thereafter, on 18.04.2017 at 10.00 hours, accused no.1 and accused no.2 came to the PS and surrendered before PW7 by admitting their guilt, thereafter, PW7 served 41-A notice to accused no.1 and accused no.2. Thereafter, PW7 collected MC of PW1 from

Medical officer, who opined injuries were simple in nature. Thereafter, PW7 have 8/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur handed over the CD file to PW5 who ultimately filed charge sheet against accused no.1 and accused no.2. The PW7 admitted that the name of accused is mentioned as Jangam

Ravinder as per 161 Cr.P.C statements of all the witnesses and also admitted the vehicle number of accused was not mentioned in the complaint nor in the 161 Cr.P.C statements/PW1. The PW7 further admitted that on Ex.P5 it is not mentioned about the alleged two wheeler vehicle and further admitted that person mentioned on Ex.P5 was not examined. The PW7 admitted that the FIR was registered on 08.04.2017 where as the requisition given to the medical officer was on 07.04.2017.

18.PW1 who is the defacto-complainant and injured testified that at about 6-7 years back while PW1 is chit chatting with PW2, the accused no.1 came on motorcycle and hit the PW1 due to which PW1 fell down in the drainage and the accused no.1 beat the PW1 with a brick on the left side of forehead due to which the PW1 received bleeding injuries.

The PW1 further testified that there were previous disputes between the PW1 and the accused no.1 and the PW1 admitted that the PW1 was the accused in the CC 331 of 2021 in which the accused is a complainant. The PW1 did not testify anything about accused no.2. The PW2 who is the eye witness did not support the case of prosecution and testified that the PW2 only knows that the galata was happened near the Hanuman temple between PW1 and accused no.1 on the next day. The PW3 who is the eye witness and also the brother of PW1 who is a related witness supported the case of prosecution and testified that accused no.1 hit the PW1 with motorcycle and beat the PW1 with a mud brick but here the PW3 admitted that police never examined the PW3. PW4 who is the mediator for CDF did not supported the case of prosecution.

9/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

PW6 who is the medical officer supported the case of prosecution and admitted that the requisition was received on 07.04.2017 whereas medical certificate was issued on 26.04.2017 and further admitted that there was an overwriting on the date and time on the Ex.P7 the PW6 admitted without giving the treatment the Ex.P7 was issued. PW5 and PW7 who were the official witnesses supported the case of prosecution. The PW1 and PW7 admitted that it was not mentioned about the alleged vehicle which hit the

PW1.

19.From the above discussion in the Para No.18 it is clear that, the PW1, PW3 who are the defacto-complainant and related witness supported the case of prosecution and

PW5, PW6 and PW7 who are the official witnesses supported the case of prosecution and PW2 who is the eye witness and PW4 who is mediator for CDF did not supported the case of prosecution. Though the PW1 and PW3 supported the case of prosecution there is an inconsistency between the Ex.P1 and chief of PW1 and PW3 it was nowhere testified about the accused no.2 and also failed to mention about the vehicle which hit the PW1 in the Ex.P1 and 161 Cr.P.C statements. The PW6 admitted the Ex.P7 was issued without the medical examination. There is an inconsistency in the evidence of

PW6. The Court cannot rely on the evidence of PW6. The major ingredients of Section 324 IPC is that there should be a voluntarily hurt caused by any dangerous weapon or means. Here whether any injury was occurred was not proved by the prosecution as per the evidence of PW6 the Court cannot consider the Ex.P7. Here the police did not recovered any weapon i.e., the mud brick which was deposed by the PW1 and PW3 by which the accused no.1 beat the PW1. Though the court can rely on injured witness, 10/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur here the injury itself is not proved by the prosecution beyond the reasonable doubts. No witness testified against the accused no.2. From this it is clear that there is inconsistency between the statements and chief of PW1 and PW3. Hence the Court solely cannot rely on the evidence of PW1 and PW3. When the Court cannot rely on PW1 and PW3 the evidence of PW5 and PW7 who are the official witnesses cannot be considered solely.

Hence the prosecution miserably failed to prove the guilt of accused no.1 and 2 beyond the reasonable doubts. Hence the point is answered in the favour of accused no.1 and 2 and against the prosecution.

20. As a result, the accused no.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under sections 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC. The accused no.1 and 2 are thus acquitted under

Section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused no.1 and 2 if any, shall be in force for a period of six months as required under section 437-A Cr.P.C. There is no case property to pass final orders.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 13 th day of June, 2025).

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW1: B.Prakash Goud - None - PW2: B.Raju PW3: B.Srinivas Goud PW4: K.Nagaraju PW5: G.Prasad PW6: B.Vijay Rao 11/11 CC No. 84 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

PW7: K.Vinay

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P1 is the Report/Complaint. - Nil - Ex.P2 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2. Ex.P3 is the signature of PW4 on CDF panchanama. Ex.P4 is the signature of PW4 on rough sketch. Ex.P5 is the CDF. Ex.P6 is the Rough Sketch. ExP7 is the Medical Certificate. Ex.P8 is the FIR.

Sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

:: AT KHANAPUR ::

Present:-J.Bhavishya, I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

Dated, this the 12 th day of December, 2025

CC.No. 837 of 2021

Between: The State of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur. … Prosecution // AND //

Vardelly Gopal, S/o. Rajamallu, age: 30 years, Occ: Carpenter, R/o. Dasturabad village, R/M. Kadam. …Accused

This case is coming for final hearing before me on this day in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri M.Suresh and M.Kavitha, Advocate Counsel for accused person and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

01.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Khanapur, laid charge sheet against accused in Cr.No.137 of 2014 for the offence under Section 304-A IPC and

Sec. 182 of MV Act.

02. The brief facts of the charge-sheet are as follows:-

On 12.09.2014 at about 08.00 hours, the deceased went to Nirmal to see her nephew who is delivered and gave birth to child, on the same day the accused also went to Nirmal on his motorcycle bearing No. TS 01 EC 1420, the deceased met the

JFCM, Khanapur.

2/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur accused and both proceeded to Dasthurabad from Nirmal on the accused motorcycle and when they reached Mancherial chowrastha, Khanapur the acused drove his motorcycle in rash and negligent manner with high speed due to which he lost control on his motorcycle and turned turtle beside the road, as a result the deceased received injuries on his head and died on the spot, the accused also received injuries on his body and shifted to Govt. Hospital, Khanapur for treatment. Later LW1 lodged a report against the accused.

03.Based on the report of LW1, LW15/Investigation Officer registered a case in

Cr.No.137/2014 for the offence U/sec.304-A of IPC, issued an FIR, and took up investigation, examined and recorded the statement of LW1. LW14 visited the Govt.

Hospital, Khanapur. During the course of investigation, the LW15 examined and recorded the statement of LW1 and visited government hospital, Khanapur, examined and recorded the statements of LW2 to LW7, observed the dead body minutely and took photographs of the dead body of the deceased with the help of LW8 and recorded his statement and secured the presence of LW9 and LW10 and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and subjected for autopsy. Accordingly,

LW13 held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. Later LW15 visited the scene of offence situated at Mancherial chowrastha, Khanapur village, secured LW11 and

LW12 and conducted CDF panchanama before them and drafted rough sketch of scene of offence. Later the accused was arrested and caused inquiry about his vehicle documents and found to be correct but the accused drove the vehicle without having

JFCM, Khanapur.

3/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur valid driving license. Later LW13 who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased issued PME report opining that the cause of death is due to shock, due to injury to vital organs like skull and brain, lungs, spleen and other viscera. On requisition of LW15, LW14 inspected the crime vehicle and issued a report opining that the accident was not occurred due to any mechanical defects of the vehicle. After completion of investigation, the LW15 filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offence U/Sec. 304-A IPC and Sec. 182 of MV Act.

04. This court took cognizance, on the police report, for the offence under section 304-A of IPC and Sec. 182 of MV Act and issued summons to the accused.

05.On the appearance of the accused before the Court, copies of documents were furnished to him as required under section 207 Cr.P.C. He was examined under section 251 of Cr.P.C for the offence under section 304-A of IPC and Sec. 182 of MV

Act were read over, and explained to him in his vernacular language for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

06.On behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW8 were examined and got marked

Ex.P1 to Ex.P8. As the Ex.P4 was marked twice, Ex.P4 is the signature of PW6 on

Confession cum seizure panchanama and Ex.P4/1 is the PME Report. Based on the evidence of PWs1 to 8, the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of LW3 to LW6, LW9, LW14. The concerned police has filed the report of LW7 as went abroad. Hence the evidence of LW3 to LW6, LW7, LW9, LW14 is closed.

JFCM, Khanapur.

4/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

07.After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused was given an opportunity of being heard by putting before him all the accusations alleged by the prosecution witnesses in the form of questions which have been recorded in the prescribed format in the manner as envisaged under section 313 of Cr.P.C. As aforesaid, the defence denied the allegations in toto and declined to adduce evidence.

08. Heard arguments of learned APP for the prosecution and the learned counsel

for the accused.

09.Now, the point for determination is as follows:

“Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused for the

offence punishable under section 304-A of IPC and Sec. 182 of MVAct

beyond reasonable doubt”?

POINT:

10.In a nutshell, it is the prosecution’s case that, on 12.09.2014 at about 23.15 hours, the accused drove his motorcycle bearing No. TS 01 EC 1420 without having valid driving license in rash and negligent manner due to which he lost control over his motorcycle and turned turtle as a result the deceased received injuries to his head and died on the spot and accused also received injuries on his body. Therefore the accused is liable to be punished for the offence under section 304-A of IPC and Sec.

182 of MV Act.

11.PW1 who is the defacto-complainant/informant testified that, about (10) years ago, in the morning hours, PW1’s brother/deceased went to Nirmal to see the grand

JFCM, Khanapur.

5/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur daughter of their sister. On the same day, at about 11.00 pm hours, PW1 received an information from the police Khanapur that his brother and accused met with accident at Mancherial X Road, Khanapur. Police also informed that PW1’s brother sustained head injury and died on spot and accused also sustained injury and was shifted to hospital. PW1 further testified that, he do not know who drove the crime vehicle.

Later, PW1 learned the crime vehicle bearing No. 1420. Later, PW1 went to the police station and lodged the report. PW1 admitted that Ex.P1 is his report. Police examined PW1 and recorded his statement.PW1 admitted that PW1 do not know the contents of Ex.P1 and at the instance of police the PW1 signed on Ex.P1.

12.PW2 who is the circumstantial witness testified that, in the year 2014, her husband went to Nirmal to see grand daughter of her sister in law and on the same day, accused i.e., PW2’s husband returned back to her village from Nirmal on the motor cycle of accused in the night hours. PW2 further testified that, on the intervening night at about 2.00 am, PW2 received information from her village elders that her husband and accused met with an accident at Mancherial X-road Khanapur and PW2’s sustained severe injuries and died on the spot. PW2 further testified that, when PW2 was present in the police station, PW2 came to know that accused drove the vehicle on high speed and caused the accident at Mancherial X-road. As a result

PW2’s husband died on the spot in the incident. The crime vehicle bearing number is 1420 and accused is owner of crime vehicle. The incident was caused due to fault of accused. Police examined PW2 and recorded her statement. The PW2 admitted that

JFCM, Khanapur.

6/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur the name of village elder who informed about the accident was not mentioned in 161

Cr.P.C statement. The PW2 further admitted that the village elder did not witnessed the incident.

13. PW3 who is photographer testified that, in the year 2014 on the requisition of

SI of Police, PS Khanapur, PW3 went to the Govt Hospital Khanapur for taking photographs of the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter PW3 clicked (04) photographs through his DSLR camera and handed over the same photographs and further converted to CD. The PW3 admitted that the PW3 did not receive any summons from SI of Police Khanapur and also further admitted no development process instrument available at studio and no money receipt of photographs was given to police.

14.PW4 who is the mediator for inquest panchanama testified that, about (09) years back, police conducted inquest panchanama at Govt. Hospital Khanapur infront of PW4 and in the presence of LW9. PW4 further testified that, inquest was done over the dead body of one person namely K. Narsaiah and after conducting inquest panchanama, police took PW4’s signature on inquest panchanama. PW4 admitted that PW4 do not know the contents of panchanama, at the instance of police PW4 signed on it.

15.PW5 who is the mediator for CDF testified that, police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama before PW5. PW5 further testified that, he do not know anything about this case. Police took PW5’s signatures on white blank papers.

JFCM, Khanapur.

7/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

16.PW6 who is the mediator for CDF have not supported the case of prosecution testified that, no panchanama was conducted in his presence. No confession was made by accused in PW6’s presence. PW6 further testified that nothing was seized from the possession of accused and on one day when PW6 went to police station for his personal work over there police stopped him and on the request of police PW6 put his signature.

17.PW7 who is medical officer testified that, on 13.09.2014 PW7 received a requisition from PS Khanapur to conduct autopsy over the dead body of deceased namely Kuchanapally Narsaiah, accordingly PW7 started the PME on 13.09.2014 at 10.50 am and concluded the proceeding at 12.45 pm on same day. PW7 further testified that he found following injuries. External Injury: 1) Head Injury with flap of skull opened on the top with a laceration 9x7 cms X bone depth. 2) Laceration of 6X4 cm X bone depth above right eyes with swelling of right side of forehead with bleeding from the injuries. 3) Laceration of 3 X 1 X ½ cm on the angle of the mouth on right side. 4) Fracture Mandible on both sides. 5) Fracture of left Upper limb bones. 6) Abrasion 1 X ½ cm in left axilla. 7) Abrasion of 6 X 1 cm on left arm. 8)

Abrasion 3 X 1 cm on left elbow. 9) Abrasion of 10 X 2 cm on left loin (Hip region).

10) Laceration of 15 X 6 X 1 on left thigh with bones fractured and visible outside.

11) Fracture of Right clavicle towards chest side. 12) Abrasion of 6 X 2 cm on right arm 3 X 1 cm on right wrist. 13) Laceration 6X2X½ cm on right groin. 14) Abrasion of 3X1 cm on Right knee and 2X1 cm on right foot. Internal injuries:- 1) Lacerated

JFCM, Khanapur.

8/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur into pieces and spleen injured (congested), 2) Heart is empty, 3) Skull fractured in many areas, 4) Brain tissues is congested and injured below the skull fractures. PW7 further testified that, the cause of death is due to shock due to injury to vital organs like skull, brain, lungs, spleen and other viscera.

18.PW8 who is investigating officer testified that, on 13.09.2014 at 0100 hours,

PW8 received Ex.P1 from PW1, on the basis of Ex.P1, PW8 registered a case in

Cr.No. 137/2014 U/sec.304-A of IPC and issued FIR copies to all concerned officers and took up the investigation. During the course of investigation PW8 recorded the statement of PW1 and visited the government hospital, Khanapur and gave medical certificate to medical officer for treatment of accused and necessary certificate. Later

PW8 enquired the LW2 to LW7 and recorded the 161 Cr.P.C statements and observed the dead body minutely and took the photographs of the deceased dead body with the help of PW3 and recorded 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3. Later PW8 secured the presence of LW9 and PW4 and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and sent a dead body to mortuary for autopsy under escort of PC 240 of

PS Khanapur. Accordingly PW7 conducted autopsy and issued Ex. P4. Later PW8 visited the scene of offence and secured the presence of PW5 and PW6 and conducted

CDF panchanama and drawn rough sketch of scene of offence. Later PW8 gave a requisition to LW14 to inspect a crime vehicle and give a opinion. PW8 further testified that, on 10.10.2014 he arrested the accused and caused inquires about the alleged crime vehicle the documents were correct but the accused drove the

JFCM, Khanapur.

9/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur motorcycle without driving license and which is violation U/sec.182 of MV Act. Later

PW8 prepared remand report and produced the accused before Hon'ble Court for judicial custody. The LW14 inspected the crime vehicle and issued a report. Later on completion of investigation, PW8 filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence U/Sec. 304-A IPC and Sec. 182 of MV Act before the Hon’ble Court. The

PW8 admitted that in Ex.P6 the nature, condition, width of the road and skids marks were not mentioned, date and time in Ex.P6. The PW8 admitted that the PW2 is not an eye witness. The PW8 further admitted that the column no.8 in Ex.P4 is kept blank. The PW8 admitted that the accused also received injuries but the medical certificate was not submitted to this Court.

19.The PW1 who is the defacto complainant firstly supported the case of prosecution and later testified that at the instance of police the PW1 signed on Ex.P1 and do not know the contents of Ex.P1. The PW2 who is the circumstantial witness supported the case of prosecution. Here the PW2 is not an eye witness to the alleged scene of offence. PW3 who is the photographer supported the case of prosecution.

The PW4, PW5 and PW6 did not support the case of prosecution. The PW7 who is the medical officer supported the case of prosecution and issued Ex.P4/1. From the evidence of PW1, PW2, PW3, PW7 and PW8 it is clear there is a death of a person but there is no independent nor eye witness was produced by the prosecution. The

PW1 and PW2 were the circumstantial witnesses and the PW8 is the investigating officer. Except the death nothing was elicited in the evidence of prosecution. The

JFCM, Khanapur.

10/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur prosecution failed to prove whether accused drove the alleged crime vehicle or not.

Firstly the prosecution did not prove with regard to who drove the vehicle and whether such vehicle was driven in rash and negligent manner. From the evidence and above discussion it is clear that, except the official witness no other witness was produced and except PW2 who is the circumstantial witness no other independent or circumstantial witnesses supported the case of prosecution. The mediators for Ex.P6 and Ex.P7 also not supported the case of prosecution. The court solely cannot rely on the evidence of official witness when there is no other evidence. Hence prosecution miserably failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence the point is answered in favour of accused and against the prosecution.

20. In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under sections 304-A of IPC and Sec. 182 of MV Act and thus acquitted under Section 255 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused if any, shall be in force for a period of six months as required under section 437-A Cr.P.C. There is no case property to pass final orders.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 12 th day of December, 2025).

sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

JFCM, Khanapur.

11/11 CC No. 837 of 2021 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Khanapur

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW1: K.Gangadhar -None- PW2: K.Vijaya PW3: T.Panindra Kumar PW4: P.Lachanna PW5: Potu Srinivas PW6: P.Venkanna PW7: Dr.C.Venugopala Krishna PW8: B.Sunil Kumar

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P1 is the report of PW1. - Nil - Ex.P2 is the photographs along with CD. Ex.P3 is the signature of PW5 on CDF panchanama along with rough sketch. Ex.P4 is the signature of PW6 on Confession cum seizure panchanama. Ex.P4/1 is the PME report. Ex.P5 is the FIR. Ex.P6 is the CDF along with rough sketch. Ex.P7 is the Inquest panchanama. Ex.P8 is the AMVI Report.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- NIL -

sd/-

I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khanapur

JFCM, Khanapur.