Boya Srinivasulu

Fast Track Special Court for Rape and POCSO Act cases,Wanaparthy

Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex · Wanaparthy · Telangana

Boya Srinivasulu, Fast Track Special Court for Rape and POCSO Act cases,Wanaparthy, is posted at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex, Wanaparthy, Telangana, India. 923 court orders on record since 2019. 9 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles EP, MVOP, AS cases.

923

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

SC.POCSO/86/2017 Acquitted

Kumari Bandari Gayathri vs Sri Erragoti Raju @ Balraju

07 Apr 2022

1of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

Thursday, the 7th day of April, 2022.

Present:- Sri Boya Srinivasulu, IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge Wanaparthy, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE No.86 of 2017.

Name of the Accused:

Erragoti Raju @Balraju S/o Ushanna age 20 yrs, Caste: Waddera Occ: Student, R/o Chelimilla village, Pebbair mandal. Name of the Complainant: The State of Telangana through Police, Pebbair P.S.

Nature of offences : Under Section 354-D of IPC and also under Sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012.

Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty. :

Finding of the court Found not guilty. :

: In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.235 Sentence or order (1) Cr.P.C. for the offences U/Sections 354-D of IPC and also under Sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

2of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017 *** This case is coming on before me for final hearing on 4.4.2022 in the presence of Sri K.Mohan Goud, Advocate for the accused and of Sri

B.Chandrashekar Rao, Special Public Prosecutor for the complainant and the matter having stood over for consideration till today this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair P.S., filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 354-D IPC and sec.11 r/w.sec. 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, based on a complaint lodged by the victim alleging inter alia that while she was studying 10th class at SriSaraswathi Vidya Nikethan school at Pebbair the accused was daily teasing and following her, after that since 2016 she was studying at

Nagarkurnool and staying in hostel, the accused some time goes to

Nagarkurnool and harassing and tortured her in the name of love; further on 10.1.2017 in this matter she was informed to her parents, after that her parents brought her from Nagarkurnool and kept her at home at Chelimilla by dropping her studies; further the accused came to tailoring shop and teasing same way. Basing on the above said complaint a case in Cr.No.30/2017

U/S.354-D IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 was registered and investigated into by the Head constable of P.S.Pebbair. During the course of investigation,he examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the scene of offence, conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of two mediators; on 22.3.2017 the accused himself surrendered before him, then a notice U/S.41-A of Cr.P.C was issued to the accused. The Sub-inspector of police took up further investigation verified the investigation done by Head constable and found it on correct lines. From the evidence collected during the course of investigation it is established that while the victim was studying 10th class at Sri Saraswathi Vidya Nikethan School at Pebbair the accused 3of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017 was daily teasing and following her, after that the victim went to

Nagarkurnool and since 2016 the victim was staying in Nagarkurnool, there also the accused started harassing and teasing the victim. Therefore the accused is liable for punishment for the offences U/S.354-D IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2) The case is taken on file for the offences U/Sections 354-D of IPC and also under Sec.11 r/w Sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012 against the accused by the court of I-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar.

3) After appearance of accused, examined him and framed charges under Sections 354-D of IPC and Sec.12 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The accused pleaded not guilty and preferred to be tried. The prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 6 and got marked EXs.P1 to

P3 by the court of II-Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC),

Mahabubnagar and in this court the prosecution examined PWs 7 to 9 and got marked Exs.P4 and P5.

4) In view of establishment of New Fast Track Special Court at

Wanaparthy this case is transferred to this court.

5) After closure of the prosecution evidence the accused is examined

U/S.313 Cr.P.C explaining him the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses for which he denied the evidence and reported no defence.

6) Heard, the learned Special Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused.

7) The points for consideration are:

4of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

POINT No.1:- Whether the prosecution could establish the offences under Sections 354-D of IPC and also under Sec.12 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused in this case beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT No.2:- If so, to what relief?

8) POINT No.1:-

Here PW1 is the defacto complainant cum victim, PW2 and PW3 are the parents of the victim. PW4 is brother of the victim. At first instance PW1 deposed in her evidence that accused used to talk with her saying that he is in love with her, in the year 2016 while she was studying Intermediate first year at Nagarkurnool by residing in hostel, the accused came to her college and created a galata shouting that he is living her and wanted to marry her, after that she gave complaint before police; and after giving complaint also the accused started following her and harassing her stating that he is loving her and wanted to marry her and that recently her parents fixed her marriage alliance after that also the accused started threatening her as well as her family stating that he is loving her and that he should not marry her.

Ex.P1 is complaint given by her. PWs 2 and 3 who are the parents of the victim also at first instance supported the version of PW1about the harassment and torture of accused towards their daughter. Pw4 who is brother of the victim also at first instance supported the version of PWs 1 to 3.

But during further cross examination by the counsel for the accused Pw1 deposed that she do not know the contents of Ex.P1, one Shankaraiah drafted Ex.P1 and without knowing the contents of it she signed onEx.P1; and she further deposed that the accused did not commit any offence against her and she do not know anything about this case and that as per the instructions of said Shankaraiah and police she gave statement before the

Magistrate at Atmakurb and also at II.Additional District court,

5of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

Mahabubnagar and that the accused did not cause any inconvenience to her and that the accused never informed her that he was in love with her.

Nothing was elicited even during further cross examination by learned

Special Public Prosecutor. At the same time PWs 2 to 4 were also further cross examined by learned counsel for the accused, in which they deposed that accused not committed any act or offence against PW1 and that as per the instructions of one Shankaraiah they gave evidence before the II.Addl.District

Judge, Mahabubnagar and that accused not caused any inconvenience

nor annoyance to Pw1. Nothing was elicited even during further cross examination by learned Special Public Prosecutor. In this case the two eye witnesses who are examined as PW5 and 7 did not support the prosecution case and they are treated as hostile. Even during their cross examination nothing was elicited by Special public prosecutor. One of the panch witnesses examined as PW6 deposed about drafting scene of offence panchanama in his presence. PW8 who is one of the investigating officers deposed about his verifying the investigation done by LW9 J. Krishna Reddy and later filed charge sheet. Pw9 who is investigating officer who deposed that on 17.2.2017 at 3P.M on receipt of complaint from Pw1 he registered a case in cr.No.30 of 2017 for the offences U/Ss.354-D IPC and sec.121 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and issued FIR, examined and recorded the statements of Pws 1 to 5 and 7, visited the scene of offence and conducted panchanama and after that handed over CD file to PW8 for further investigation. PW9 in the cross examination admitted that he did not obtain the signature of complainant as she did not come to police station. He also admitted that he did not examine any one of the inmates of hostel or the persons who are connected with the hostel and also not examined any one of the inhabitants of the scene of offence and also not examined any of the class mates of the victim. Since the main material witnesses i.e. the victim/Pw1 retracted her earlier version and during her further cross examination she deposed that the accused did not commit 6of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017 any offence against her and she did not lodge any complaint against the accused and the accused not caused any inconvenience nor annoyance to her. So also PWs 2 and 3 who are parents of Pw1 and PW4 who is brother of

Pw1 also did not support the prosecution case and they also retracted to their earlier version. The other evidence witnesses PWs 5 and 7also did not support the prosecution case. There are latches in the evidence of PW9 who is one of the investigating officer. Therefore the evidence of PWs 8 and 9 is not helpful to convict the accused since all the material witnesses did not support the prosecution case. Here the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore the accused is entitled for acquittal. The point is accordingly answered.

9. Point No.2:

In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable

U/S.354-D of IPC and alsoSec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences, Act, 2012 and he is acquitted for the said offences U/Sec.235 (1)

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 7th day of April, 2022.

IX-Addl. District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for Prosecution: Defence: None. PW1 Mother of victim, PW2 Father of victim, PW3 Victim, 7of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

PW4 Bandari Vishnu PW5 Jangala Mahendra PW6 thatikonda Anjaneyulu PW7 Pusala Savaramma Pw8P.Nagashekara Reddy. Exhibits marked for Prosecution:

Ex.P1 is complaint given by PW1. Ex.P2 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW5 Ex.P3 Scene of offence panchanama Ex.P4 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW7 Ex.P5 FIR in Cr.No.30/2017 of P.S.Pebbair dt.17.2.2017. Defence: Nil. MOs marked: Nil.

IX-Addl. District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

8of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

1. Case.No. Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

2. Name of the station Pebbair P.S.

3. Name of the accused. Erragoti Raju @Balraju S/o Ushanna age 20 yrs, Caste: Waddera Occ: Student, R/o Chelimilla village, Pebbair mandal.

4. Date of:

1OccurrencePrior to17.1.2017 2Complaint 17.1.2017 3ApprehensionSurrendered on 22.3.2017 4Released on bailNotice U/S.41-A Cr.P.C. 22.3.2917 5Commitment- 6Commencement of trial16.12.2019 7Close of trial23.3.2022 8Sentence or order/judgment.7.4.2022

Sentence or order/judgment.

In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/S.354-D of IPC and alsoSec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 and he is acquitted for the said offences U/Sec.235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after appeal time is over. Explanation for delay : Due to non-production of the witnesses by the prosecution.

IX-Addl.Sessions Judge, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

9of7 Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2017

SC.POCSO/71/2019 Acquitted

PS Pebbair vs Dyarangula Mahesh

08 Apr 2022

1 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

1. Case.No. Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019

2. Name of the station Pebbair P.S.

3. Name of the accused: Dyarangula Mahesh S/o Balachandraiah age 21 yrs, Caste: Vaddera Occ: Agril, R/o nachahally village of Wanaparthy mandal.

4. Date of:

1OccurrencePrior to 4.4.2018 2Complaint 6.6.2018 3Apprehension10.6.2018 4Released on bailNotice U/S.50-A Cr.P.C. 10.6.2018 5Commitment- 6Commencement of trial29.7.2021 7Close of trial6.4.2022 8Sentence or order/judgment.8.4.2022

Sentence or order/judgment.

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs.366 and 376(2)(i)(n) of IPC and also sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Explanation for delay : Due to non-production of the witnesses by the prosecution.

IX-Addl.Sessions Judge, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

2 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

Friday, the 8th day of April, 2022.

Present:- Sri Boya Srinivasulu, IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge Wanaparthy, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE NO.71 of 2019.

Name of the Accused : Dyarangula Mahesh S/o Balachandraiah age 21 yrs, Caste: Vaddera Occ: Agril, R/o nachahally village of Wanaparthy mandal. Name of the complainant: The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair P.S.

Nature of offences : Under Sections 366,376(2)(i)(n) of IPC and Sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012.

Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty. :

Finding of the court Found not guilty. :

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 : Sentence or order Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366,376(2)(i)(n) of IPC and Sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

*** 3 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019

This case is coming on before me for final hearing on 6.4.2022 in the presence of Sri Md. Fazal Baig, Advocate for the accused and of Sri B.Chandra Shekar Rao, Special Public Prosecutor for the complainant and the matter having stood over for consideration till today this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair, P.S., filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 366,376(2)(i)(n) IPC and also

Sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, based on a complaint lodged by the father of the victim on 6.6.2018 at 1000hours, wherein he alleged that on 4.6.2018 at morning hours he and his wife went to coolie work and returned to home at 1600hours by that time his second daughter/victim not appeared at home, on coming to know that his daughter went to natural calls at about 11.00hours and did not return to home. Further he searched for her here and there but in vain; and also found that his brother’s second daughter also missing from home and that he shows suspicion on the accused. Basing on the above complaint a case was registered against the accused for the above said offences inCr.No.92./2018 by the Sub-inspector of police, Pebbair. During the course of investigation the S.I of police examined and recorded the statements of witnesses; and that on 10.6.2018 at 1900hours the victims came to P.S; since one of the victim is minor her statement was got recorded through Woman Head constable, in which the minor girl alleged that she was completed 10th class and joined intermediate but not attended the final examination and residing at Kanchiraopally village learning tailoring work; that during the time of her studying in school the accused proposed love and then both fell in love with each other, her cousin sister Anitha was in love with one Narender when she was going to Hyderabad, about six months back the accused visited her house and participated sexual intercourse with her and since then he regularly visited her house and continued it several times; and that recently 4 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019 the marriage alliance was arranged to another victim, then herself and another victim decided to marry their lovers and as per their plan on 4.6.2018 both of them came to Pebbair, she called the accused and Narender, all of them proceeded to Cuddapah, where their marriages were performed in

Anjaneyaswamy temple, after that they taken a rented room nearby Railway station and that on coming to know that their parents filed a case at Pebbair

P.S, all of them came to Pebbair. Basing on the statement of victim/minor girl section of law was altered from girl missing to Sec.366,376(2)(i)(n) IPC and also Sec.5(L) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. During the course of further investigation the C.I of police examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, sent the victim girl to Govt. District Hospital,

Wanaparthy for medical treatment, where the doctor examined the victim and seized the clothes of victim preserved the vaginal swabs and the same were went to FSL for chemical examination. On 10.6.2018 the C.I of police taken the accused into custody and effected his arrest sent him to

Government hospital, Wanaprthy for potency test, there the medical officer examined the accused and issued report. On 11.6.2018 the C.I of police visited the scene conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of two mediators, issued requisition to the Headmaster, ZPHS,

Kanchiraopally and obtained bonafide certificate of victim girl and after collecting FSL report and final opinion from the medical officer who opined that no definite opinion is given regarding the act of sexual intercourse. From the evidence collected during the course of investigation it is established that the accused has committed the offence punishable U/S.366,376(2)(i)(n) IPC and also Sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences

Act, 2012.

2) The case is taken on file for the offences U/Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of

IPC and Sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences

Act, 2012 against the accused by the learned I-Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Mahabubangar.

5 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019

3) In view of establishment of New Fast Track Special Court at

Wanaparthy this case is transferred to this court. After appearance of accused, this court examined him and framed charges under Sections 366, 376(2)(i)(n) of IPC and also Sec.5(L) r./w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The accused pleaded not guilty and preferred to be tried.

4) To prove its case the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 5 and got marked

EXs.P1 to P6 documents.

5) The examination of accused U/S.313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with since there is no incriminating material appearing against the accused person in the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

6) Heard, the learned Special Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused.

7) The points for consideration are:

POINT No.1:- Whether the prosecution could establish the offences under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sec.5(L) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused in this case beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT No.2:- If so, to what relief ?

8) POINT No.1:-

Here the material witnesses are PW1, PW2, PW3, PW4 and PW5. Out of them PW1 and PW2 are parents of victim girl,, PW3 is victim girl,PW4 is father of another missing woman and PW5 is another missing woman and none of them supported the case of the prosecution. PWs 1 and 2 categorically deposed that the victim girl is their daughter and they do not know the accused and do not know anything about the facts of the case, the accused did not commit any offence against the victim/PW3. PW1 further deposed that at the instance of villagers he put his thumb mark on a white paper, but he do not know the contents of the report. PW3 who is victim girl 6 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019 deposed that she do not know anything about the facts of the case; accused did not commit any offence against her, nothing was happened to her and at the instance of some of her relatives she deposed before the

Magistrate, but no incident was happened. PW4 is father of another missing

woman deposed that he do not know anything about the facts of the case and accused did not commit any offence against his daughter and nothing was happened to his daughter. Pw5 is also victim deposed that she do not know anything about the facts of the case and accused did not commit any offence against her and nothing was happened to her. The learned Special

Public Prosecutor declared tPWs1 to 5 as hostile and cross examined them.

Even during their cross examination nothing was elicited against the accused. Since all the main material witnesses did not support the prosecution case, the learned Special Public Prosecutor given up all the remaining witnesses including the medical officers and investigating officers.

Therefore the prosecution has utterly failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

9. Point No.2:

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 8th day of April, 2022.

IX Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

7 of 6 Spl.S.C.No.71 of 2019

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for Prosecution: Defence:None. PW1 is complainant& father of Victim Pw2 is mother of victim PW3 is Victim girl. PW4 father of missing woman PW5 missing woman/victim. Exhibits marked for Prosecution: Ex.P1 is complaint marked in the cross examination by learned Spl.PP. Ex.P2 is 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex.P3 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2, Ex.P4 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3, Ex.P5 is 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW4. Ex.P6 is 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW5.

Defence:Nil.

MOs marked: Nil. IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SC.POCSO/20/2021 Acquitted

PS Pebbair vs Gantibayanolla Manoha

13 Apr 2022

Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

Wednesday, the 13th day of April, 2022.

Present:- Sri Boya Srinivasulu, IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge Wanaparthy, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE NO.20 of 2021.

Name of the Accused : Gantibayanolla Manohar S/o Maddileti age 22 yrs, caste:Telugu, Occ; Private Job R/o Rampur village of Pebbair mandal.

Name of the complainant: The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair P.S.

Nature of offences : Under Sections 366-A of IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012.

Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty. :

Finding of the court Found not guilty. :

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 : Sentence or order Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366-A of IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

***

Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021

This case is coming on before me for final hearing on 11.4.2022 in the presence of Sri Md. Fazal Baig, Advocate for the accused and of Sri B.Chandra Shekar Rao, Special Public Prosecutor for the complainant and the matter having stood over for consideration till today this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair, P.S., filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 366-A of IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, based on a complaint lodged by the father of the victim girl on 7.8.202o alleging inter alia that he has one daughter aged 13 years studied 8th class in

Pebbair; few days back his daughter requested that she want to stay at his maternal uncle Kahsnna’s house at Pebbair and with his permission she is staying there, further on 7.8.2020 at about 07.30hours his brother-in-law informed him over phone that his daughter/victim left from home by saying to attend natural calls, but did not return home, on which he along with his family members searched for her near and there but in vain, he shown suspect on the accused. Basing on the above complaint a case in cr.No.142/2020 Under Girl missing was registered. During the course of investigation the Assistant Sub-inspector of police, Pebbair examined and recorded the statement of complainant and other witness, on credible information missing girl was traced and brought to Police station, then the S.I of police got recorded the statement of victim girl, in which she stated that when she was studying 8th class in their village the accused used to visit their home and developed friendship with her and they loved each other, but her parents not accepted their love and sent her to their relative by name

Kashanna, further the accused also used to visit her frequently; and that 7.8.2020 at evening at about 19.00hours the accused came and convinced her to elope anywhere and will get marriage, accordingly she went along with him on his bike and went to Kaluvabugga temple and on the next day

Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021 i.e. on 8.8.2020 at about 11.00hours they both married, further they stayed for 10 days at the same temple, further they visited to his relatives house and said with them that recently they got married and usually visiting to their relatives; and that the accused stated deceitful words to his maternal aunty and used to live in her home and in their absence and seduced to illicit intercourse with her and on coming to know about registration of case the accused left her alone. During the course of investigation the S.I of police collected the bonafide certificate of victim and then altered the section of law from girl missing to 366-A IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sent the victim girl to hospital for examination. On 29.9.2020 at 11.00hours the S.I of police apprehended the accused and recorded his confession statement in the presence of two mediators, served a notice U/S.50(a)Cr.P.C to accused and got recorded the statement of victim U/S.164 Cr.P.C. From the evidence collected during the course of investigation it is established that the accused has committed the offence punishable U/Ss.366-A of IPC and Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act,2012.

2) The case is taken on file for the offences U/Sections 366-A IPC and

Sec.11 r/.w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused by the learned I-Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubangar.

3) In view of establishment of New Fast Track Special Court at

Wanaparthy this case is transferred to this court. After appearance of accused, this court examined him and framed charges under Sections 366-A of IPC and also Sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012. The accused pleaded not guilty and preferred to be tried.

4) To prove its case the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 3 and got marked

EXs.P1 to P3 documents.

Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021

5) The examination of accused U/S.313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with since there is no incriminating material appearing against the accused person in the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

6) Heard, the learned Special Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused.

7) The points for consideration are:

POINT No.1:- Whether the prosecution could establish the offences under Sections 366-A of IPC and alsoSec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused in this case beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT No.2:- If so, to what relief ?

8) POINT No.1:-

Here the material witnesses are PW1, PW2 and PW3. Out of them PW1 is the grandfather of victim, PW2 is victim and Pw3 is mother of the victim and none of them supported the case of the prosecution. In this case the complainant who is father of victim girl died hence his evidence is closed.

PW1 deposed that the victim is his granddaughter; and that he do not know anything about this case and the accused not committed any offence against his granddaughter and police did not examine him. Pw2 who is victim deposed that her father died about 9 months ago, Pw1 is her grandfather and that she do not know anything about the facts of the case and the accused did not commit any offence against her and nothing was happened to her; and that at the instance of village elders she stated before the Magistrate at Atmakur but no incident was happened to her. Pw3 is who is mother of victim also stated on the same lines of Pws 1 and 2. The learned

Special Public Prosecutor declared them as hostile and even during their cross-examination nothing was elicited against the accused except marking their 161 Cr.P.c statements as EXs.P1 to P3. Since all the main material witnesses did not support the prosecution case, the learned Special Public

Prosecutor given up all the remaining witnesses including the investigating

Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021 officers. Therefore the prosecution has utterly failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

9. Point No.2:

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366-A IPC and also sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day of April, 2022.

IX Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for Prosecution: Defence:None. PW1 is Grandfather of victim Pw2 is victim PW3 is mother of victim. Exhibits marked for Prosecution: Ex.P1 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex.P2 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2, Ex.P3 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3, Defence:Nil.

MOs marked: Nil. IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

1. Case.No. Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2021

2. Name of the station Pebbair P.S.

3. Name of the accused: Gantibayanolla Manohar S/o Maddileti age 22 yrs, caste:Telugu, Occ; Private Job R/o Rampur village of Pebbair mandal.

4. Date of:

1Occurrence7.8.2020 2Complaint 7.8.2020 3Apprehension29.9.2020 4Released on bail20.11.2020 5Commitment- 6Commencement of trial16.2.2022 7Close of trial11.4.2022 8Sentence or order/judgment.13.4.2022

Sentence or order/judgment.

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366-A of IPC and also sec.11 r/w.sec.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Explanation for delay : Due to non-production of the witnesses by the prosecution.

IX-Addl.Sessions Judge, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SC.POCSO/67/2020 Acquitted

PS Pangal vs Meenige Naresh

22 Apr 2022

1of 5 Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

Friday, the 22nd day of April, 2022.

Present:- Sri Boya Srinivasulu, IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge Wanaparthy, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE NO.67 of 2020.

Name of the Accused :

Meenige Naresh S/oRamulu age 23 years, Caste:Boya, Occ: Driver R/o

Kethepally village of Pangal mandal.

Name of the complainant: The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police,Pangal P.S.

Nature of offences : Under Sections 376-AB of IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012.

Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty. :

Finding of the court Found not guilty. :

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 : Sentence or order Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 376-AB of IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

*** 2of 5 Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020

This case is coming on before me for final hearing on 20.4.2022 in the presence of Sri Md. Fazal Baig, Advocate for the accused and of Sri B.Chandra Shekar Rao, Special Public Prosecutor for the complainant and the matter having stood over for consideration till today this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pangal P.S., filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 376AB IPC and sEc.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, based on a complaint lodged by the mother of the victim girl on 6.2.2019 at 22.15 hours alleging inter alia that her marriage was performed with Narsimha of

Kethepally village in the year 2008 after his first wife expired, they were blessed with one daughter aged 8 years and son aged 5 years; her daughter is studying 2nd class in Government Primary school near to their house; that as usual on 5.2.2019 at 10.00hours her daughter was not able to walk properly and in a normal way, immediately she asked her, what happened, in which her daughter replied that on 4.2.2019 afternoon 1.P.M while she was coming home from school, the accused who is her neighbor took her into his home and closed the doors and removed her clothes and forcibly participated sexual intercourse with her, then she immediately took her daughter into house and found reddish colour at vagina. Basing on the above said complaint a case was registered for the above said offences.

The Sub-divisional Officer took up investigation and visited the scene conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of two mediators examined and recorded the statements of parents of victim girl, sent the victim to District Hospital, Wanaparthy for medical checkup, where the medical officer examined the victim reported that the victim is sexually assaulted and preserved her clothes for chemical examination; and that the statement of victim girl was got recorded, collected bonafide certificate of victim and on 8.2.2019 apprehended the accused recorded the confession 3of 5 Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020 statement of accused in the presence of two mediators, effected the arrest of accused got examined the accused through medical officer, collected the potency of accused and also sent material objects to FSL Hyderabad and after receipt of FSL report and after completion of all due formalities filed charge sheet. The evidence collected during the course of investigation it is established that the accused has committed the offence U/S,.376AB IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act,2012.

2) The case is taken on file for the offences U/Sections 376-AB of IPC and

Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused by the learned I-Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Mahabubangar.

3) In view of establishment of New Fast Track Special Court at

Wanaparthy this case is transferred to this court. After appearance of accused, this court examined him and framed charges under Sections 366-A

Bof IPC and also Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012. The accused pleaded not guilty and preferred to be tried.

4) To prove its case the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 5 and got marked

EXs.P1 to P6 documents.

5) The examination of accused U/S.313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with since there is no incriminating material appearing against the accused person in the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

6) Heard, the learned Special Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused.

7) The points for consideration are:

POINT No.1:- Whether the prosecution could establish the offences under Sections 366-AB of IPC and alsoSec.3 R/w.sec.4 of the Protection of 4of 5 Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused in this case beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT No.2:- If so, to what relief ?

8) POINT No.1:-

Here the material witnesses are PW1to 4. Out of them PWs1 and w are the parents of the victim,PW3 is panchayat elder and PW4 is victim and none of them supported the case of the prosecution. PW1who is mother of victim and also defacto complainant deposed that nothing was happened to his daughter and the accused did not commit any offence against the victim and that he did not lodge any complaint before police. PW2 who is father of victim also stated on the same lines of Pw1. PW3 who is elder of panchayat deposed that no panchayat was convened in his presence, even PW2 never informed anything before him and he do not know anything about the facts of the case. Pw4 who is victim deposed that the accused did not commit any act against her at any point of time. Since PWs 1 to 4 did not support the prosecution case, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor declared them as hostile and cross examined them. Nothing was elicited during their cross examination except marking Exs.P1 complaint and their 161 Cr.P.C statements as Exs.P2 to 5. PW5 who is Headmaster who issued bonafide certificate of victim stated that the victim studying 5th class and in the year 2019 was studied 2nd standard in his school, for which he issued bonafide certificate of victim which is marked as Ex.P6. Since the material witnesses

Pws 1 to 5 did not support the prosecution case, the evidence of PW5 is not helpful to the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused. Since all the main material witnesses did not support the prosecution case, the learned

Special Public Prosecutor given up all the remaining witnesses including the investigating officers. Therefore the prosecution has utterly failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

5of 5 Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020

9. Point No.2:

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366-AB of IPC and also sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 22nd day of April, 2022.

IX Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for Prosecution: Defence:None. PW1 is Mother of victim Pw2 is Father of victim PW3 is Venkataiah. PW4 victim PW5Venakteshwarlu Exhibits marked for Prosecution: Ex.P1 is complaint marked in the cross examination of PW1 by learned Addl.PP. Ex.P2 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex.P3 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2, Ex.P4 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3 Ex.P5 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw4 Ex.P6 161 Cr.P.c statement of PW5 Defence:Nil. MOs marked: Nil. IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

6of 5 Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

1. Case.No. Spl.S.C.No.67 of 2020

2. Name of the station Pangal P.S.

3. Name of the accused: Meenige Naresh S/oRamulu age 23 years, Caste:Boya, Occ: Driver R/o Kethepally village of Pangal mandal.

4. Date of:

1Occurrence4.2.2019 2Complaint 6.2.2019 3Apprehension8.2.2019 4Released on bail2.5.2019 5Commitment- 6Commencement of trial4.1.2022 7Close of trial20.4.2022 8Sentence or order/judgment.22.4.2022

Sentence or order/judgment.

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366-AB of IPC and also sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Explanation for delay : Due to non-production of the witnesses by the prosecution.

IX-Addl.Sessions Judge, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SC.POCSO/152/2017 Acquitted

G.Arunamma PS.Pebbair vs Laxmanna

08 Apr 2022

1 of 5 Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

Friday, the 8th day of April, 2022.

Present:- Sri Boya Srinivasulu, IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge Wanaparthy, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE NO.152 of 2017.

Name of the Accused : Laxmanna S/o Ramulu ag e 25 years, Caste: SC Madiga Occ: Agril, R/o Thomalapally village of Pebbair mandal. Name of the complainant: The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair P.S.

Nature of offences : Under Sections 366,376(2)(L) of IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012.

Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty. :

Finding of the court Found not guilty. :

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 : Sentence or order Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 366,376(2)(i)(L) of IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

***

This case is coming on before me for final hearing on 7.4.2022 in the presence of Sri Md. Fazal Baig, Advocate for the accused and of Sri 2 of 5 Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017

B.Chandra Shekar Rao, Special Public Prosecutor for the complainant and the matter having stood over for consideration till today this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pebbair, P.S., filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 366,376(2)(L)IPC and also Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, based on a complaint lodged by the victim girl on 20.3.2017 at 11.00hours, wherein she alleged that pm 19.3.2017 at 1800hours while she went to outskirts of the village to attend calls of nature near Gunthapampu bushes the accused came from her back side and committed rape on her forcibly.

Basing on the above said complaint a case in Cr.No.68/2017 U/Ss.376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 was registered. During the course of investigation the C.I of police,

Kothakota examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the scene conducted panchanama in the presence of two mediators, there seized four broken red colour pieces of bangles and one pair of cheppal (Paragon) and also seized the cloths of the victim under a cover of panchanama in the presence of two mediators, got examined the victim through medical officer, obtained age certificate of victim from medical officer. The S.I of police apprehended the accused on 21.3.2017 and produced before the C.I of police and on interrogation the accused confessed his guilt and it was recorded in the presence of two mediators, sent the accused to Government District hospital, Wanaparthy and obtained potency certificate of accused through medical officer, effected the arrest of the accused and after receipt of FSL report and also medical report and after completion of all due formalities filed charge sheet against the accused for the above said offences. From the evidence collected during the course of investigation it is established that the accused has committed the 3 of 5 Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017 offence punishable U/Ss.376(2)(L) IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of Protection of

Childrfen from Sexual Offences act,2012.

2) The case is taken on file for the offences U/Sections 376(2)(L) of IPC and

Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused by the learned I-Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Mahabubangar.

3) In view of establishment of New Fast Track Special Court at

Wanaparthy this case is transferred to this court. After appearance of accused, this court examined him and framed charges under Sections 376(2)(L) of IPC and also Sec. e r./w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The accused pleaded not guilty and preferred to be tried.

4) To prove its case the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 4 and got marked

EXs.P1 to 5 documents.

5) The examination of accused U/S.313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with since there is no incriminating material appearing against the accused person in the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

6) Heard, the learned Special Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused.

7) The points for consideration are:

POINT No.1:- Whether the prosecution could establish the offences under Sections 376(2)(L) of IPC and Sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused in this case beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT No.2:- If so, to what relief ?

8) POINT No.1:-

Here the material witnesses are PW1, PW2, PW3, PW4 and PW5. Out of them PW1 is the victim, PW2 is mother and Pws 3 and 4 are brothers of the victim and none of them supported the case of the prosecution. PW1 4 of 5 Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017 deposed that she do not know the accused and accused did not commit any offence against her, nothing was happened to her and at the instance of villagers she put her thumb on white papers but she do not know the contents of it. Pw2 is mother of the victim deposed on the same lines as deposed by Pw1, that the accused did not commit any offence against her daughter. PWs 3 and 4 who are the brothers of the victim also deposed that the accused did not commit any offence against their sister and nothing was happened to their sister. The learned Special Public Prosecutor declared

PWs1 to 4 as hostile and cross examined them. Even during their cross examination nothing was elicited against the accused. Since all the main material witnesses did not support the prosecution case, the learned Special

Public Prosecutor given up all the remaining witnesses including the medical officers and investigating officers. Therefore the prosecution has utterly failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

9. Point No.2:

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 376 (2)(L) of IPC and also sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 8th day of April, 2022.

IX Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

5 of 5 Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for Prosecution: Defence:None. PW1 is victim Pw2 is mother of victim PW3 is brother of the Victim girl. PW4 brother of the victim girl. Exhibits marked for Prosecution: Ex.P1 is complaint marked in the cross examination by learned Spl.PP. Ex.P2 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex.P3 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2, Ex.P4 is161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3, Ex.P5is 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW4.

Defence:Nil.

MOs marked: Nil. IX-Addl.District and Sessions Judge FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

6 of 5 Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

WANAPARTHY

1. Case.No. Spl.S.C.No.152 of 2017

2. Name of the station Pebbair P.S.

3. Name of the accused: Laxmanna S/o Ramulu ag e 25 years, Caste: SC Madiga Occ: Agril, R/o Thomalapally village of Pebbair mandal.

4. Date of:

1Occurrence19.3.2017 2Complaint 20.3.2017 3Apprehension21.3.2017 4Released on bail26.4.2017 5Commitment- 6Commencement of trial12.2.2021 7Close of trial7.4.2022 8Sentence or order/judgment.8.4.2022

Sentence or order/judgment.

In the result, the accused is acquitted U/Sec.232 Cr.P.C. for the offences under Secs. 376 (2)(L) of IPC and also sec.3 r/w.sec.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Explanation for delay : Due to non-production of the witnesses by the prosecution.

IX-Addl.Sessions Judge, FAC of Fast Track Spl.Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

Order Record 908 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/7/2021	E. Rajini Babu vs Alivelamma	29 Apr 2022	Order	—
EP/91/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Madgani Raju	28 Apr 2022	Judgement	—
EP/92/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Mohd.Imran Khan	28 Apr 2022	Judgement	—
EP/93/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs K.Veeraiah Setty	28 Apr 2022	Judgement	—
EP/94/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Pedda Gangulu	28 Apr 2022	Judgement	—
G.W.O.P/4/2022	Janamoni Latha vs Janamoni Balraju	28 Apr 2022	Order	—
EP/34/2019	Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs R.Mojana chary	26 Apr 2022	Order	—
EP/103/2019	Sriram city finance Ltd., Wanaparthy vs P. Vinod Kumar	26 Apr 2022	Order	—
SC.POCSO/67/2020	PS Pangal vs Meenige Naresh	22 Apr 2022	Judgement	Acquitted
CRLA/40/2021	Rathlavath Nirmala Naik vs Rathlavath Rohith Naik	21 Apr 2022	Judgement	—
CRLA/121/2019	Rathlavath Rohit Naik vs Mudavath Nirmala	21 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/12/2022	G.Thirupatamma vs Bala Nagamma	19 Apr 2022	Order	—
G.W.O.P/2/2022	Janamoni Bal Raju vs Janamoni Lalitha	19 Apr 2022	Order	—
SC/138/2021	State of Telangana Through PS Peddamandadi vs Megavath Manemma	18 Apr 2022	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/20/2021	PS Pebbair vs Gantibayanolla Manoha	13 Apr 2022	Judgement	Acquitted
MVOP/65/2016	C.Parijathamma vs Varkala Prasad	12 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/10/2022	Surya Sridevi vs Konda Chandrakala	11 Apr 2022	Order	—
SC.POCSO/71/2019	PS Pebbair vs Dyarangula Mahesh	08 Apr 2022	Judgement	Acquitted
SC.POCSO/152/2017	G.Arunamma PS.Pebbair vs Laxmanna	08 Apr 2022	Judgement	Acquitted
SC.POCSO/86/2017	Kumari Bandari Gayathri vs Sri Erragoti Raju @ Balraju	07 Apr 2022	Judgement	Acquitted
SC.POCSO/110/2021	PS Pangal vs Rathlavath Jagapathi	31 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/172/2019	Sriram city union finance Ltd., Wanaparthy vs Keerthi Dresses	29 Mar 2022	Order	—
OS/19/2021	B.Krishnamma vs B.Jayasimha	25 Mar 2022	Order	—
EP/81/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Nenavath Hanmanthu	24 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/83/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Eslavath Govindu	24 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/85/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Peddauri Venkataiah	24 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/86/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Ginukuntal Rajesh	24 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
OS/9/2022	P.Shiva Shankar Reddy vs Smt.Beeram Deepthi chandrika	23 Mar 2022	Order	—
G.W.O.P/9/2021	Mahaboob Bee vs To whomsoever it is concerned	23 Mar 2022	Order	—
ELECOP/1/2022	India Mennonite Brethren Church vs P.S.David Raj	23 Mar 2022	Order	—
EP/77/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Maddi Venkatesh	22 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/78/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Mudavath Ramulu	22 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/66/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Nimmala Lingaswami	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/67/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Pilladolu Nagesh	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/68/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Chinthakunta Shiva Shankar	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/69/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Mohammad Roshan Jameer	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/70/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Amgoth Dasu	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/71/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Dandu Beeraj	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/72/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Mudavath Gopal Mudavath	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/73/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Yatam Srinu	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/74/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Rathlavath Leelavathi	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/75/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Gummakonda Nagaraju	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/76/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Appala Narsimha	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/82/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Guvalla Balakrishna	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/84/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Odusu Mallesh	21 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/217/2018	Shriram City Union Finance Limited vs K.Janardhan	21 Mar 2022	Order	—
OS/8/2022	Rakasi Narasimha Reddy vs R.Srinivas Reddy	21 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/7/2020	Beesireddy Renuka @ R.Renuka vs Premkumar	14 Mar 2022	Order	—
SC.POCSO/138/2019	PS Kothakota, Bathula Nagesh vs Sudharshan	14 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
MVOP/41/2020	Jahangeer Be vs M.Yadagiri	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/46/2021	U.Ramulu vs Rahul Dhull	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/49/2021	Meesala Buchanna vs Rahul Dhull	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/58/2018	Borla Chennaiah vs K.Krishnaiah	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/64/2019	Gouri Alivela vs P.Ramudu	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/65/2019	Uppari Krishna Sagar vs P.Ramudu	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/66/2019	Mangali Gopal vs P.Ramudu	12 Mar 2022	Order	—
EP/62/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy vs Muddangula Mallaiah	11 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/63/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Janaki Ramulu	11 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/64/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs S.Venugopal	11 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/65/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Putta Jadadeeswar Reddy	11 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/13/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Gadwal vs B.Kurumurthi Reddy	09 Mar 2022	Order	—
EP/16/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Gadwal vs Puri Dhanunjayudu	09 Mar 2022	Order	—
EP/58/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs G.Bharath Kumar	04 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/59/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs E.Mogulalu	04 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/60/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs G.Narsimha Reddy	04 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
EP/61/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Cheemarla Narayana reddy	04 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/56/2021	PS Wanaparthy Rural vs Mandla Anjaneyulu	04 Mar 2022	Judgement	—
AS/19/2022	T.Venkat Reddy vs Kadukuntla Saraswathamma	03 Mar 2022	Order	—
AS/20/2022	K.Ramulu vs S.Sudershan	03 Mar 2022	Order	—
MVOP/14/2022	Kummari Mangamma vs Arun Kumar	24 Feb 2022	Order	—
AS/17/2022	K.Balraj vs T.Satyanarayana	22 Feb 2022	Order	—
OS/5/2022	Nalgonda Diocese society, represented by its president and administrator Marneni Balaswamy vs The Young Farmers Rural Development Society represented by its T.Inna Reddy	22 Feb 2022	Order	—
AS/16/2022	Kondeti Chinna Ramaiah @ Ramulu vs Kundeti Balaiah	18 Feb 2022	Order	—
EP/33/2022	M/s Bajaj finance Limited vs Zaaz Digitals	18 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/34/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Peddireddy Bhaskar Reddy	18 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/35/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs MD.Kamruddin	18 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/36/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs K.Udya Kumar	18 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/37/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Chikondra Srinu	18 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/38/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wanaparthy. vs Guvaani Naveen	18 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
AS/15/2022	B.Rushi Raj vs The Principal Government Junior College, Nagarkurnool.	16 Feb 2022	Order	—
ID/2/2022	Kadthala vijayaraju vs Kadthala Shailaja	16 Feb 2022	Order	—
OS/4/2022	Mekala Pradeep Kumar vs Padamati Bhagya Laxmi	16 Feb 2022	Order	—
EP/52/2019	State Bank of India vs Smt.Kethavath kesli	09 Feb 2022	Order	—
EP/28/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Malekedi Maheswarji	04 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/29/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs Kethavath Bhasker Naik	04 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
EP/30/2022	IndusInd Bank Limited, Mahabubnagar branch vs K.Ramakrishna	04 Feb 2022	Judgement	—
AS/12/2022	Md. Pasha Miya vs Kalvagadda Sashidhar	02 Feb 2022	Order	—
AS/11/2022	Thirupathamma vs Kundella Laxmamma	28 Jan 2022	Order	—
AS/10/2022	P.Kousalya vs Kethepally Narsimha Reddy	24 Jan 2022	Order	—
MVOP/13/2020	Desu Jayamma vs S.Ushanna	22 Jan 2022	Order	—
MVOP/17/2021	Yellapu Bala Nagaiah vs S. Ushanna	22 Jan 2022	Order	—
MVOP/18/2021	G. Balamma vs S. Ushanna	22 Jan 2022	Order	—
MVOP/19/2021	G. Krishnanna vs S. UShanna	22 Jan 2022	Order	—
EP/12/2022	M/s Uni Tech Equipments vs M/s Seetha Ramanjaneya Industries (Billakanti Ravinder)	21 Jan 2022	Judgement	—
AS/6/2022	P.Vikram Goud vs A.Rajeshwar Reddy	20 Jan 2022	Order	—
AS/7/2022	Sripuram Dayanand Reddy vs Cheemarla Bharatamma	20 Jan 2022	Order	—
AS/8/2022	N.Vijaya Laxmi vs Vstahasildar	20 Jan 2022	Order	—
AS/9/2022	Thaviti Mallesh vs Thavithi Ramulu	20 Jan 2022	Order	—
OS/1/2022	Sama Jaya Shankar goud vs Rayesha Begum	20 Jan 2022	Order	—
AS/4/2022	K.Balamma vs M.Jangaiah Goud	19 Jan 2022	Order	—

Showing 100 of 908 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2022		20
Mar 2022		51
Feb 2022		18
Jan 2022		28
Dec 2021		16
Nov 2021		26
Oct 2021		17
Sep 2021		27
Aug 2021		21
Jul 2021		20
Jun 2021		2
Apr 2021		15

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Boya Srinivasulu handled?

Boya Srinivasulu has handled 923 court orders since 2019 at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 24 orders per month.

What types of cases does Boya Srinivasulu hear?

Based on available records, Boya Srinivasulu primarily handles Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Appeal Suits) and Motor Accident matters (Motor Accident Claims) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases) at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Boya Srinivasulu currently posted?

Boya Srinivasulu is posted as Fast Track Special Court for Rape and POCSO Act cases,Wanaparthy at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex, Wanaparthy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Boya Srinivasulu available online?

Yes. 9 judgments by Boya Srinivasulu are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Boya Srinivasulu dispose cases?

Boya Srinivasulu disposes approximately 24 cases per month, based on 923 orders handled over their tenure at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Boya Srinivasulu serving?

Boya Srinivasulu has been serving at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex since 2019.

Case Types

EP 40%

MVOP 20%

AS 15%

SC 10%

OS 7%

G 3%

CMA 2%

CRLRP 2%

Posting History

Oct 2020 — May 2022

Fast Track Special Court for Rape and POCSO Act cases,Wanaparthy · 67 orders
Feb 2019 — May 2022

Additional District and Sessions Judge · 856 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 5

Other Judges at this Court

D.ramakanth

Principal District and Sessions Judge

4 orders

Karthik Reddy T

Prl JCJ cum JMFC

1,482 orders

Smt.Bandari Srilatha

I Addl JCJ cum JMFC

1,258 orders

Ms. N.Ashwini

II Addl JCJ cum JMFC

130 orders

Smt. G.kalarchana

Principal Senior Civil Judge cum Assistant Session...

215 orders

Smt.K.Kavitha

Additional Senior Civil Judge cum Additional Assi...

196 orders

← View all judges at Wanaparthy, PDJ Court Complex