Currently Serving

Smt. Challa Janaki

Junior Civil Judge

Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka) · Chittoor · Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Challa Janaki, Junior Civil Judge, is posted at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka), Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh, India. 224 court orders on record since 2025. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, EP, OS cases.

224

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

CC/316/2023 Acquitted

Enforcement Inspector, Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Nagari vs K.Siva

10 Apr 2026

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 1 Dated:10-04-2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

PRESENT: Smt. C.JANAKI,

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nagari.

Friday, this the tenth (10th) day of April,2026.

CALENDAR CASE No.316 of 2023

(Crime No.193 of 2020 of SEB, Nagari) Between:

State represented by the Inspector of Police, SEB, Nagari. … Complainant.

And:

K.Siva, aged about 20 years, S/o K.C.Munaswamy, R/o Mulanatham Village, Nagari Mandal. … Accused.

This case came before me on this day i.e., 13.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri M.Nagarajan, Learned counsel for the accused; upon perusing the material on record and this Court having stood over for consideration till this day, delivered the following:

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 2 Dated:10-04-2026

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, SEB, Nagari filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime Number 193 of 2020 for the offence punishable under

Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020.

2.The facts of the prosecution case as mentioned in the charge sheet in nutshell are as follows:

That on 14.07.2020 the Special Enforcement Inspector, Nagari conducting raids along with staff, the raid party reached at water tank, which is situated on Tadukupeta Village to Sundarammakandriga Village Road of Nagari

Mandal and at about 09.00 am found one male person coming in one vehicle by keeping one white color bag on the petrol tank of the vehicle between handle and seat and on seeing the Enforcement Officials in uniform at a distance of 20 Yards, the raider stopped the vehicle and turned back to escape, on suspicion the LW.3 with the help of staff surrounded and cached and hold the raider of the vehicle bay surrounding him and when questioned about the accused, trying to escape from the scene of offence, the accused stated with a fear of arrest, the accused to escape as the bag in his possession contains liquor bottles. Then LW.3 tried for mediators in surroundings but went in vain. Further LW.3 deputed one of the Head Constable Sri

A.Govindaswamy near village Sundaramakandriga for securing mediators, he came after 30 minutes and reported that the villager officials voluntary, village secretary

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 3 Dated:10-04-2026 were not available in the village, further tried for some village elders to act as mediators but they were refused. Then LW.3 in the presence of remaining staff and examined the contents of the white color bag and found totally 08 bo0ttles i.e., 03

Pints of King Fisher Magnum Strong beer Brandy Bottles (each 180 ml) on the bottles affixed labels in the labels mentioned sale in Tamil Nadu only and MRP

Rs.140/- only, which were non duty paid liquor in nature meant for sale in Tamil Nadu

State only. On enquiry the accused revealed his identity particulars and

LW.3/Inspector of Police verified the vehicle and found it is Silver and Black color

Hero Honda Splendor Plus Motorcycle bearing No.TN 20 AB 5870. Further verification of the chases and Engine numbers were not visible clearly. Further enquiry the accused person stated that the vehicle belongs to him, the accused failed to produced vehicle records, on enquiry about the liquor bottles, the accused stated that purchased above said liquor bottle at Tamil Nadu Boarder Wine Shops for purpose of drinking. Then the Enforcement LW.3/Inspector of Police has taken one bottles (650 ml) and one bottle (180 ml) separately (totally two samples) as samples from contraband, duly sealed and labeled for chemical analysis and the remaining bottles were kept in the same bag as they were duly sealed and labeled. After disclosing the grounds, the SEB LW.3/Inspector of Police arrested the accused.

Then the LW.3//SI seized the property along with the vehicle under the cover of

Special Report. After returning to the SEB Station, Nagari at about 11.00 am the

LW.3/SI, SEB, Nagari registered the case as in Cr.No.193/2020, U/Sec.34(1) r/w 34

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 4 Dated:10-04-2026

(a) 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise Act 2020 of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Nagari.

Further, the arrest information was given to his relatives, kept the accused in Station lock-up. Necessary entries were made in P.S.R. Further the accused is produced

before The Hon-ble J.F.C.M. court Nagari on 14.07.2020 for Judicial Custody with

proper escort. During the course of investigation, the LW.3/Inspector of Police sent the preserved sample to the chemical examiner for chemical analysis and after receiving chemical analysis report and after completion of investigation and

LW.3/Inspector of Police, SEB Station Nagari, laid charge sheet against the accused.

3.This Court took cognizance of offence under Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020 against the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused before the Court, relevant copies of documents were furnished to him as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C, he was explained in

Telugu, the charges framed for the accusation of the offence punishable under

Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.W.1 to PW.3 were examined, Exs.P.1 to P.5 and MO.1 were marked. Ex.P.1 is the Special

Report. Ex.P.2 is the First Information Report. Ex.P.3 is letter of advise. Ex.P.4 the

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 5 Dated:10-04-2026 chemical analysis report. Ex.P.5 is Destruction Proceedings. M.O.1 and MO.2 are the sealed sample bottles.

7. After closure of evidence on prosecution side, accused was examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel.

9.Now the point that has arisen for consideration is:

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offence underSec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act –

2020, beyond reasonable doubt?”

POINT:

10.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.3. P.W.1 is the Head Constable, who participated raid, PW.2 is the Excise Constable and PW.3 the CI of Police, who seized the contraband, registered the crime and LW.4/SI of police filed charge sheet.

11.The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that though independent witnesses are not examined by the prosecution, both the prosecution

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 6 Dated:10-04-2026 witnesses corroborated with each other and proved the seizure of contraband from the possession of accused. She argued that the accused is proved to be in possession of liquor bottles without any permit or license and so the prosecution proved this case and prays to convict the accused.

12.Per contra, the learned defence counsel argued that there are no mahazar witnesses examined by the prosecution to corroborate the prosecution witnesses, the investigating officer did not secure mediators at the scene of offence and did not prepare rough sketch. He argued that the accused is falsely implicated in this case for statistical purpose by conducting table investigation and so he prays to acquit the accused.

13. PW.1 is Police Constable, who participated in the raid, deposed that on 14.07.2020 at about 09.00 a.m., LW3/CI of Police received credible information about the possession of ID arrack and immediately, PW.1 along with LW1, LW3 & LW4 proceeded to the scene of offence place situated at water tank in Thadukupeta

Village Hamlet of Sundaramma Kandriga of Nagari Mandal and found the accused was coming on his motorcycle bearing No.TN20 AB 5870 having possession of one bag on the petrol tank in between handle and seat and on seeing the raid party, the accused tried to escape from the scene of offence place by taking U-Turn and on suspicion LW3 and staff detained the accused and on enquiry, the accused revealed his name and address particulars and confessed that he used to sell away the NDPL

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 7 Dated:10-04-2026 bottles to gain unlawfully. LW3 tried to secure mediators nearby village at

Sundaramma Kandriga, but the VRO, VRA and Secretary are not available in the

Village. On verification, they found (1) 3 bottles of Kingfisher Strong Beer (2) 5 bottles of Honey Bee fine brandy bottles each 180 ml i.e., total 8 bottles which are non-duty paid for sale in Tamilnadu only. LW.3 seized the 8 bottles and Hero

Splendor Plus motorcycle and lifted one bottle each from each brand as MO1 & MO2 samples for chemical analysis purpose. Labels with signatures of LW3 and accused were affixed on the sample bottles. LW1 drafted the Ex.P1Special report. Witness identified the accused in the open Court. Further investigation done by LW3.

14. P.W.2 is the Excise Constable, SEB, Nagari, On 07.02.2021, PW.2 received credible information about selling of ID arrack. Immediately, PW.2 secured

PW1 & LW1 and proceeded to the scene of offence situated at Railway Gate of

Gundrajukuppam Village to conduct raids and they went to the Railway Gate at

Gundrajukuppam Village at about 07-30 pm in a private Vehicle and near

Gundrajukuppam Railway Gate, they noticed one person sitting with one can and on seeing us, the accused tried to escape and they caught hold of accused. On enquiry, the accused revealed his name and identity particulars and confessed that he purchased ID arrack from unknown persons and selling the same at higher price at the scene of offence. On verification, they found 20 liters of ID arrack filled in 20 liters capacity white color can in possession of the accused. PW.2 drew sample from the above said can to 180 ML quarter bottle. Labels with signatures of the accused and

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 8 Dated:10-04-2026

PW.2 were affixed on the sample bottle. PW.1 prepared special report on my dictation. Thereafter, the arrested accused and the seized contraband were taken to the police station and PW.2 registered a case in Cr.No.51/2021 for the offence punishable U/Sec.7B r/w. 8(B) of APP Act, 1995. PW.2 forwarded the accused to the Court for Judicial custody. PW.2 sent the contraband to the Laboratory for chemical analysis. After completion of investigation, LW4 filed charge sheet. Ex.P1 is the special report, dated 07.02.2021. Ex.P2 is the fIR in Crime No.51/2021. Ex.P3 is the chemical analysis report, dated 18.02.2021. MO1 is the sealed sample bottle.

15. PW.3/CI of Police, CI of Police, SEB, Nagari, who seized the contraband, registered the Crime and filed charge sheet, PW.3 deposed that on 14.07.2022 on receipt of credible information, PW.3 along with his staff at about 09.00 am, went to Water Tunk in Tadukupeta Village and on seeing us one person who was sitting with plastic cover tried to skulk away and they caught hold him and on enquiry, the accused revealed his identity particulars and stated that he purchased

Tamil Nadu and selling the in Andhra Pradesh. On search they found 3 Pints of King

Fisher Beer and 5 Nips Honey Beer Brandy and PW.3 have arrested the accused, seized the contraband and PW.3 have drawn a sample from each variety of liquor under cover of police proceedings and PW.3 have affixed our signatures in the police proceedings. From there they returned to the police station. Basing on the strength of Ex.P1, PW.3 registered the case in Cr.No.183/2020, U/sec.34 (1) r/w 34 (a), 11 (2) and 42 of AP Excise Act submitted the FIR copies to all the concerned officers and

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 9 Dated:10-04-2026 tookup investigation. Ex.P2 is the FIR. PW.3 produced the accused before the court for Judicial custody. PW.3 have sent to sample bottle for chemical analysis, along with letter of advice. Ex.P3 is the letter of advice. PW.3 received chemical analysis report. Ex.P4 is the chemical analysis report. They got destructed seized contraband as per proceedings of our Superintendent of Police. Ex.P5 is the destruction proceedings. After completion of investigation LW.4/SI of Police filed charge sheet.

16.As this is the case under Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020 the prosecution has to establish the offence of possession of (1) 3 bottles of Kingfisher Strong Beer (2) 5 bottles of Honey Bee fine brandy bottles each 180 ml i.e., total 8 bottles in a white color bag without permit or license.

P.W.1 to PW3 corroborated with each other and deposed that they found (1) 3 bottles of Kingfisher Strong Beer (2) 5 bottles of Honey Bee fine brandy bottles each 180 ml i.e., total 8 bottles in the possession of accused. They also deposed that the contraband was seized from the accused under the cover of Special Report. The chemical analysis report under Ex.P.4, prima facie shows that the sample of the contraband is Illicitly distilled liquor unit for human consumption and injurious to health. Except the said confession of the accused before the police under

Ex.P.1/Special Report, there is no other material produced by the prosecution, which is not admissible, as the confession before the police is hit under Section 25 of Indian

Evidence Act.

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 10 Dated:10-04-2026

17.Further regarding the alleged seizure of contraband, PW1 to PW3 admitted the suggestions put by defence counsel in the cross examination that there are 300 residential houses in Tadukupeta Village. PW1 to PW3 further admitted that they did not secure the village Volunteers or Secretary and independent persons as mediators. PW.1 to PW.3 denied the suggestions put by defence counsel in their cross examination that they did not go to the place of offence and did not seize any contraband from the possession of the accused. As per the law, P.W.3 is bound to follow the procedure laid down under the Code of Criminal Procedure relating to search and arrest. It envisages that Sec.100 of Cr.P.C has to be followed by P.W.2 at the time of search and seizure of the contraband. But it is admitted by the prosecution witnesses that they did not secure the independent persons or inhabitants of nearby locality.

18.In a case, our Hon'ble High Court, which is squarely applicable to the facts of this case, Yeduru Sreenivasulu Reddy Vs State of A.P 2002(1) ALD (Crl.) 347 (A.P) held that when no mediators examined though search was conducted in a busy locality, the search and seizure as well as conviction cannot be sustained.

19.In another case, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P in a judgment

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 11 Dated:10-04-2026

Prohibition officials are bound to take the local respectable mediators, that is mandate U/sec.100(4) of Cr.P.C.”

20.In another case our Hon'ble High Court in Adapa Ramababu @

Ramu Vs. State of A.P 2014 (1) ALD (Crl) 966 (A.P) in para No.13 held that, whatever be the truthfulness or otherwise of the evidence of Police officials, it is not at all safe to convict an individual on the basis of that. It is only in Extreme cases where other evidence is not available and the suspicion that surrounds the evidence of a police officials is almost removed, that the court can rest its conclusion on the evidence of the police officials.

21.In the present case on hand also, it can be seen from the record that during the raid participated by PW1 to P.W.3 who are the police officials, no independent witnesses have been secured or the efforts made by them to secure the mediators were not reflected anywhere in the record to believe their version. As per the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3, the scene of offence is on the village there are 300 houses from where the independent persons can be secured as mediators, but no witnesses were summoned by the police personnel, to act as mediators and no proof of such act was brought on record. Thus, the sole testimony of the police personnel cannot be relied on, to prove the alleged seizure of contraband from the possession of the accused. As such the seizure was not proved in accordance with law.

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 12 Dated:10-04-2026

22.The prosecution is heavily relying on Ex.P4 to prove the nature of the contraband. Though the prosecution witnesses denied the suggestion that this case is filed for statistical purpose and all the documents were prepared in the police station, however it is the burden of the prosecution to prove the alleged seizure and preparation of Ex.P1 to Ex.P.5 beyond reasonable doubt. As discussed supra, the cloud of doubt is created in favour of the accused and so this Court is inclined to hold that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

23.Hence in view of foregoing discussion, this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove that the investigating officer duly followed the procedure for search and seizure of the contraband and so failed to prove the connection of the accused to the contraband, which is the foundation for the entire case of the prosecution. So this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove the seizure and thereby failed to prove this case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Hence this Court finds that the charges framed against the accused are not proved and he is entitled for acquittal.

24.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence underSec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020 and accordingly, he is acquitted for the above offence under Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for six months from today as per Sec.437-A of

Cr.P.C.

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 13 Dated:10-04-2026

25.The property in C.P.R.No.30 of 2026 i.e., M.O.1 MO.2 are the sealed sample bottles ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 10 th day of April, 2026.

(Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

P.W.1:A.Govindaswamy None P.W.2:K.Chandu P.W.3:G.P.Vijaya Kumar

DOCUMENTS MARKED

Ex.P.1/PW1:Ex.P.1 is Special Report. Nil Ex.P.2/PW3:First Information Report. Ex.P.3/PW3:Letter of Advice. Ex.P.4/PW3:Chemical Analysis Report. Ex.P.5/PW3:Destruction Proceedings.

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 14 Dated:10-04-2026

Material objects:

M.O.1 and 2 are the 180 ml sealed sample bottle.

// True Copy //

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Puttur,Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -Puttur,

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum

Nagari.- Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 15 Dated:10-04-2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

Calendar in C.C.No.316 of 2023

(Cr.No.193 of 2020 of SEB, Nagari)

Date of offence:14.07.2020

Date of complaint:14.07.2020

Date of taken on cognizance:13-10-2023

Date of appearance of accused:30.11.2023

Date of commencement of trial:18.10.2025

Date of close of trial:09.01.2026

Explanation for delay:No delay

Date of sentence or order: 10.04.2026

Complainant:State represented by the Inspector of Police, SEB, Nagari.

Name of theFather’s nameAgeVillage,Occupation AccusedMandal/ District K.Siva, aged K.C.MunaswamyAged about R/o Mulanatham Village, Coolie 20 yearsNagari Mandal.

Nature of offence: Illegal selling of liquor without permit or license

Section of Law: Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020.

Plea of the accused: Pleaded not guilty.

APCH120004672023

C.C.No.316 of 2023 16 Dated:10-04-2026

Finding of the Court: Accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020.

Sentence or order: In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.34(1) r/w 34(a), 11 (2) 42 of A.P Excise (Amendment) Act – 2020 and accordingly, he is acquitted for the above offence under Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for six months from today as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.

The property in C.P.R.No.30 of 2026 i.e., M.O.1 MO.2 are the sealed sample bottles ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

// True Copy //

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Puttur,Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) –Puttur, cum - Judicial Magistrate of I Class,FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum - Nagari.Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.

CC/57/2021 Acquitted

Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs K. Sudhakar

10 Apr 2026

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 1 Dated 10-04-2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

PRESENT: Smt. C.JANAKI,

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nagari.

Friday, this the (10th) day of April, 2026.

CALENDAR CASE No.57 of 2021

(Crime No.65 of 2020 of Nagari UPS) Between:

State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari. … Complainant.

And:

K.Sudhakar, aged abut 39 years, S/o K.Munaswamy, D.No.3-20-1, Desuruagarm Village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District. … Accused.

This case came before me on this day i.e., 13.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri N.Mahadevan, Learned counsel for the accused; upon perusing the material on record and this Court having stood over for consideration till this day, delivered the following:

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 2 Dated 10-04-2026

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime Number 65 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Sec.34(a) of

AP Excise Act.

2.The facts of the prosecution case as mentioned in the charge sheet in nutshell are as follows:

That on 21.03.2020 at 06.00 pm in the thorny bushes, near Sudhakar’s

Chicken Shop, Buggaagraharam Village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District and reported in the PS on the same day at 08.15 pm by the SI of Police, Nagari UPSm, where in the accused/K.Sudhakar of Desurugaram Village of Nagari mandal was selling liquor illegally. On credible information, the SI of Police, Nagari UPS arrested the accused and seized (1) 360 quarter bottles of Mc Dowells No.1 fine brandy containing with 180 ML, (2) 23 quarter bottles of Old Adminirals VSOP containing with 180 ml (3) 20 quarter bottles of Legend whisky containing with 180 ml, total quarter bottles 403 and worth about Rs.81600/- under a cover of Mahazaranama.

Then LW.8 brought the accused and seized case property to Nagari Police Station at 08.15 pm and registered the above Mahazarnama as a case in Cr.No.65/2020,

U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P Excise Act-1968 of Nagari UPS on 21.03.2020 at 08.15 pm and submitted FIRs to all concerned officers and tookup an investigation. LW.8/SI of

Police send the arrested accused to remand for Judicial Custody on the same day.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 3 Dated 10-04-2026

On 23.03.2020, LW.8/SI of Police sent the seized contraband to Regional Prohibition and Excise Laboratory, Chittoor for chemical analysis and during the investigation

LW.8/SI of Police sent a requisition to the Superintendent of Police, Chittoor to obtain confiscation orders for the seized contraband and after receiving chemical analysis report and after completion of investigation and LW.8/SI of Police, Nagari UPS filed charge sheet against the accused.

3.This Court took cognizance of offence under Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise

Act-1968 against the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused before the Court, relevant copies of documents were furnished to him as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C, he was explained in

Telugu, the charges framed for the accusation of the offence punishable under

Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.W.1 to PW.4 were examined, Exs.P.1 to P.4 and MO.1 were marked. Ex.P.1 is the Panchanama.

Ex.P.2 is the First Information Report. Ex.P.3 is the chemical analysis report. Ex.P.4 is Destruction Proceedings. M.O.1 is the sealed sample bottles.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 4 Dated 10-04-2026

8. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel.

9.Now the point that has arisen for consideration is:

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offence under Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968, beyond reasonable

doubt?”

POINT:

10.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.4. P.W.1 is the ASI, who participated raid, PW.2 is the Intelligence Constable, PW.3 is the VRA and PW.4 is the SI of Police, who seized the contraband, registered the crime and filed charge sheet.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 5 Dated 10-04-2026 possession of liquor bottles without any permit or license and so the prosecution proved this case and prays to convict the accused.

13. PW.1 is ASI, who participated in the raid, deposed that on 21.03.2020 at about 6.00 p.m., LW8/SI of Police received credible information about the transportation of IML (Non Duty paid) liquor bottles. Immediately, LW8 along with

PW.1, LW1/ASI, LW2/PC LW4/PC and secured the presence of mediators LW5/VRO & LW6/VRA proceeded to the scene of offence place situated at thorny bushes near

Sudhakar’s Chicken Shop in Bugga Agraharam Village of Nagari Mandal and on the same day at about 8.15 pm, they found the accused was selling IML bottles illegally.

On seeing the police party the accused tried to escape from the scene of offence place and on suspicion they detained the accused and on enquiry the accused confessed before mediators that he used to sell away the NDPL bottles to gain lawfully. Then LW8 seized 360 quarter bottles of MC Dowell Fine Brandy and (2) 23 quarter bottles of Old Admiral VSOP Brandy, (3) 20 quarter bottles of Legend

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 6 Dated 10-04-2026

Whiskey, total 403 bottles worth Rs.81,600/- was seized under cover of

Ex.P1/Panchanama drafted by LW.1/ASI on the dictation of LW8/SI of Police and lifted one bottle each as MO1 to MO3 for chemical analysis purpose and affixed identity slips duly attested by LW8/SI of Police and the accused. The entire process was recorded by LW8/SI of Police under cover of panchanama/Ex.P1 drafted by

LW8/SI of Police. Later they returned to the police station along with arrested accused and seized contraband. Further investigation done by LW8/SI of Police.

14. P.W.2 is the Intelligence Constable, Nagari, on 21.03.2020 at about 6.00 p.m., LW8/SI of Police received credible information about the transportation of IML (Non Duty paid) liquor bottles. Immediately, LW8 along with PW.2, PW1, LW1/ASI,

LW2/PC and secured the presence of mediators LW5/VRO & LW6/VRA proceeded to the scene of offence place situated at thorny bushes near Sudhakar’s Chicken Shop in Bugga Agraharam Village of Nagari Mandal and on the same day at about 8.15 pm we found the accused was selling IML bottles illegally. On seeing the police party the accused tried to escape from the scene of offence place and on suspicion they detained the accused and on enquiry the accused confessed before mediators that the accused used to sell away the NDPL bottles to gain lawfully. Then LW8/SI of

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 7 Dated 10-04-2026 by LW1 on the dictation of LW8 and lifted one bottle each as MO1 to MO3 for chemical analysis purpose and affixed identity slips duly attested by LW8 and the accused. The entire process was recorded by LW8 under cover of panchanama/Ex.P1 drafted by LW8. PW.2 attested on Ex.P1/Panchanama. Later they returned to the police station along with arrested accused and seized contraband. Further investigation done by LW8/SI of Police.

15.PW.3/P.Babu, VRA deposed that on 21.03.2020 at about 6.00 p.m.,

LW8/SI of Police called me and LW5/VRO as mediators and proceeded to the scene of offence place situated at thorny bushes near Sudhakar’s Chicken Shop in Bugga

Agraharam Village of Nagari Mandal and on the same day at about 8.15 pm, they found the accused was selling IML bottles illegally. On seeing the police party the accused tried to escape from the scene of offence place and on suspicion we detained the accused and on enquiry the accused confessed before mediators that the accused used to sell away the NDPL bottles to gain lawfully. Then LW8/SI of

Police seized 360 quarter bottles of MC Dowell Fine Brandy and (2) 23 quarter bottles of Old Admiral VSOP Brandy, (3) 20 quarter bottles of Legend Whiskey, total 403 bottles worth Rs.81,600/- was seized under cover of Ex.P1/Panchanama drafted by LW1 on the dictation of LW8 and lifted one bottle each as MO1 to MO3 for chemical analysis purpose and affixed identity slips duly attested by LW8 and the accused. The entire process was recorded by LW8 under cover of

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 8 Dated 10-04-2026 panchanama/Ex.P1 drafted by LW8. PW.3 attested on Ex.P1/Panchanama. Later they returned to the police station along with arrested accused and seized contraband. Further investigation done by LW8/SI of Police.

16. PW.4/K.Siva Sankar, SI of Police, who seized the contraband, registered the crime and filed charge sheet, PW.4 deposed that on 21.03.2020 on receipt of credible information, PW.4 I along with his staff at about 06.00 pm went to thorny bushes near Sudhakar Chiken Shop in Bagga Agraharam Village. On seeing the police party one person, tried to skulk away. They caught hold him. On enquiry the accused revealed his identity particulars and stated that he purchased liquor bottles from Tamil Nadu and selling the same for higher prices. On search in the bushes they found 403 of 180 ml liquor bottles. Those are Mc.Mcdowel Brandy Nips 360 Number, Old Admiral VSOP Brandy in 3 number, legend whiskey nips 20 in number. PW.4 have arrested the accused, seized the contraband and PW.4 have drawn one sample from each variety of liquor bottle under cover of

Panchanama/Ex.P.1. PW.4 have affixed their signatures in the Ex.P.1. From there they returned to the police station. Basing on the strength of Ex.P1, PW.4 registered the case in Cr.No.65/2020, U/Sec.34 (a) AP Excise Act, submitted the FIR copies to all the concerned officers and tookup investigation. Ex.P2 is the FIR. PW.4 have sent to sample bottle for chemical analysis. PW.4 received chemical analysis report.

Ex.P.3 is the chemical analysis report. They got destructed seized contraband as per

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 9 Dated 10-04-2026 proceedings of our Superintendent of Police. Ex.P.4 is the destruction proceedings.

After completion of investigation PW.4 filed charge sheet.

17.As this is the case under Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968 the prosecution has to establish the offence of possession of 360 quarter bottles of MC

Dowell Fine Brandy and (2) 23 quarter bottles of Old Admiral VSOP Brandy, (3) 20 quarter bottles of Legend Whiskey, total 403 bottles without permit or license. P.W.1,

PW.2 and PW.4 corroborated with each other and deposed that they found 360 quarter bottles of MC Dowell Fine Brandy and (2) 23 quarter bottles of Old Admiral

VSOP Brandy, (3) 20 quarter bottles of Legend Whiskey, total 403 bottles in the possession of accused. They also deposed that the contraband was seized from the accused under the cover of Mediator Report. The chemical analysis report under

Ex.P.4, prima facie shows that the sample of the contraband is Illicitly distilled liquor unit for human consumption and injurious to health. Except the said confession of the accused before the police under Ex.P.1/Panchanama, there is no other material produced by the prosecution, which is not admissible, as the confession before the police is hit under Section 25 of Indian Evidence Act.

18.Further regarding the alleged seizure of contraband, PW1, PW.2 and

PW.4 admitted the suggestions put by defence counsel in the cross examination that there are residential houses and chicken shop in the surroundings. PW1, PW.2 and

PW.4 further admitted that they did not secure the village Volunteers or Secretary

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 10 Dated 10-04- 2026 and independent persons as mediators. PW.1, PW.2 and PW.4 denied the suggestions put by defence counsel in their cross examination that they did not go to the place of offence and did not seize any contraband from the possession of the accused. As per the law, P.W.4 is bound to follow the procedure laid down under the

Code of Criminal Procedure relating to search and arrest. It envisages that Sec.100 of Cr.P.C has to be followed by P.W.4 at the time of search and seizure of the contraband. But it is admitted by the prosecution witnesses that they did not secure the independent persons or inhabitants of nearby locality.

19.In a case, our Hon'ble High Court, which is squarely applicable to the facts of this case, Yeduru Sreenivasulu Reddy Vs State of A.P 2002(1) ALD (Crl.) 347 (A.P) held that when no mediators examined though search was conducted in a busy locality, the search and seizure as well as conviction cannot be sustained.

20.In another case, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P in a judgment

Prohibition officials are bound to take the local respectable mediators, that is mandate U/sec.100(4) of Cr.P.C.”

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 11 Dated 10-04- 2026

21.In another case our Hon'ble High Court in Adapa Ramababu @

22.In the present case on hand also, it can be seen from the record that during the raid participated by PW.1, PW.2 and PW.4 who are the police officials, no independent witnesses have been secured or the efforts made by them to secure the mediators were not reflected anywhere in the record to believe their version. As per the evidence of P.W.1, PW.2 and P.W.4, the scene of offence is on the village there are chiken shops and residential houses from where the independent persons can be secured as mediators, but no witnesses were summoned by the police personnel, to act as mediators and no proof of such act was brought on record. Thus, the sole testimony of the police personnel cannot be relied on, to prove the alleged seizure of contraband from the possession of the accused. As such the seizure was not proved in accordance with law.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 12 Dated 10-04- 2026

23.The prosecution is heavily relying on Ex.P.3 to prove the nature of the contraband. Though the prosecution witnesses denied the suggestion that this case is filed for statistical purpose and all the documents were prepared in the police station, however it is the burden of the prosecution to prove the alleged seizure and preparation of Ex.P1 to Ex.P.4 beyond reasonable doubt. As discussed supra, the cloud of doubt is created in favour of the accused and so this Court is inclined to hold that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

24.Hence in view of foregoing discussion, this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove that the investigating officer duly followed the procedure for search and seizure of the contraband and so failed to prove the connection of the accused to the contraband, which is the foundation for the entire case of the prosecution. So this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove the seizure and thereby failed to prove this case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Hence this Court finds that the charges framed against the accused are not proved and he is entitled for acquittal.

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

Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968 and accordingly, he is acquitted for the above offence under Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for six months from today as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 13 Dated 10-04- 2026

25.The property in C.P.R.No.173 of 2020, i.e., M.Os.1 to 3 are the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 10 th day of April, 2026.

(Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 14 Dated 10-04- 2026

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

P.W.1:R.GovindarajuluNone P.W.2:C.Nagaraju P.W.3:P.Babu PW.4K.Siva Sankar

DOCUMENTS MARKED

Ex.P.1/PW1:Ex.P.1 is Panchanama. Nil Ex.P.2/PW4:First Information Report. Ex.P.3/PW4:Letter of Advice. Ex.P.4/PW4:Chemical Analysis Report. Ex.P.5/PW4:Destruction Proceedings.

Material objects:

The property in C.P.R.No.173 of 2020, i.e., M.Os.1 to 3 are the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 15 Dated 10-04- 2026

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 16 Dated 10-04- 2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

Calendar in C.C.No.57 of 2021

(Cr.No.65 of 2020 of Nagari UPS)

Date of offence:21.03.2020

Date of complaint:21.03.2020

Date of taken on cognizance:20.01.2021

Date of appearance of accused:26.02.2021

Date of commencement of trial:04.10.2024

Date of close of trial:06.02.2026

Explanation for delay:No delay

Date of sentence or order:10.04.2026

Complainant:State represented by the Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS.

Name of theFather’s nameAgeVillage,Occupation AccusedMandal/ District K.SudhakarK.MunaswamyAged about D.No.3-20-1, Coolie 39 yearsDesuruagarm Village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District.

Nature of offence: Illegal selling of liquor without permit or license

Section of Law: Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968

Plea of the accused: Pleaded not guilty.

APCH120000612021

C.C.No.57 of 2021 17 Dated 10-04- 2026

Finding of the Court: Accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968.

Sentence or order: In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act-1968 and accordingly, he is acquitted for the above offence under Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for six months from today as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.

The property in C.P.R.No.173 of 2020, i.e., M.Os.1 to 3 are the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

// True Copy //

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Puttur,Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -Puttur,

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Nagari.Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.

CC/184/2023 Acquitted

The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs V.Sampath

04 May 2026

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 1 Dt.04.05.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

PRESENT: Smt. C.JANAKI,

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nagari.

Monday, this the fourth (04th) day of May, 2026.

CALENDAR CASE No.184 of 2023

(Crime No.386 of 2022 of Nagari UPS)

Between:

State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station. … Complainant.

And:

V.Sampath, aged about 47 years, S/o Late S.Chinnupaiah Reddy, Adavikothuru Village, Nagari Mandal. Chittoor District. … Accused.

This case came before me on this day i.e., 01.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri M.Nagarajan, Learned counsel for the accused; upon perusing the material on record and this Court having stood over for consideration till this day, delivered the following:

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 2 Dt.04.05.2026

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime Number 386 of 2023 for the offence punishable under

Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020.

2.The facts of the prosecution case as mentioned in the charge sheet in nutshell are as follows:

This is a case a seizure of illegal selling of prohibited ID arrack that occurred on 16.12.2022 at 09.00 am at the fields of S.Sampath, beside

Adavikothuru – Gollakandriga Road, Adavikothur village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor

District and reported in the PS on the same day at 10.45 am by the LW.4/ASI,

Nagari UPS, the accused/V.Sampath was selling the prohibited ID Arrack illegally.

The LW.4/ASI and his staff conducted a raid, arrested the accused and seized 20 liters of ID arrack from his possession under a cover of police proceedings. The seized ID arrack is worth about Rs.6000/-. That on 16.12.2022 at 08.30 AM, while LW.4/ASI received credible information about illegal selling ID arrack at the fields of S.Sampath, beside Adavikothuru – Gollakandriga Road, Adavikothur village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District. Then, Immediately LW.4 collected his staff left the PS in a police vehicle were reached to the spot at 09.00 AM and found the accused and the accused was present there along with one can, on

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 3 Dt.04.05.2026 seeing Police persons, the accused tried to escape from the spot with can.

Immediately, LW.4 surrounded and caught hold of them with active assistance of his staff, asked accused about accused name and address. The accused confessed that his name is V.Sampath of Adavikothuru Village, Nagari

Municipality and due to financial problem, he illegally distilled the distilled ID arrack in the hillock near to his fields and sell the same to unknown persons for highter rates without any prior permission and eanring the money illegally. Then the accused was arrested and seized 20 liters of ID arrack along with one can and sample bottle under a cover of police proceedings. LW.4 left there along with seized contraband to Nagari UPS and reached at 10.45 am. Basing on the police proceedings LW.4/ASI was registered a case in Cr. No.386/2022,

U/Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 of

Nagari UPS and submitted FIRs to all concerned officers and took up investigation into and send the accused to Judicial custody. During the course of investigation LW.5/SI of Police seized sample seized ID arrack samples to Govt.

Chemical Examiner. Prohb.. & Excise Department, Chittoor for chemical analysis and after completion of investigation and LW.5/Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari

UPS laid charge sheet against the accused.

3.This Court took cognizance of offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 against the accused.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 4 Dt.04.05.2026

4.On appearance of the accused before the Court, relevant copies of documents were furnished to him as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C, he was explained in Telugu, the charges framed for the accusation of the offence punishable under

Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.W.1 and

PW2 were examined, Exs.P.1 to P.4 and MO1 were marked. Ex.P.1 is the

Police Proceedings. Ex.P.2 is the First Information Report. Ex.P.3 is Letter of advise. Ex.P.4 is Chemical analysis Report. M.O.1 is the 180 ml sealed sample bottle of ID Arrack.

8. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel.

9.Now the point that has arisen for consideration is:

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 5 Dt.04.05.2026

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C)of A.P Prohibition

(Amendment) Act, 2020., beyond reasonable doubt?”

POINT:

10.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 and P.W.2.

P.W.1 is is the constable, who participated raid, PW.2 is the ASI of Police, who seized the contraband registered the crime and LW.5/SI of Police filed charge sheet.

11.The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that though independent witnesses are not examined by the prosecution, both the prosecution witnesses corroborated with each other and proved the seizure of contraband from the possession of accused. She argued that the accused is proved to be in possession of ID Arrack without any permit or license and so the prosecution proved this case and prays to convict the accused.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 6 Dt.04.05.2026

13. PW.1 is Police Constable, who participated in the raid, deposed that on 16.12.2022 at about 8.30 a.m., LW4/ASI received credible information about the selling of ID liquor. Immediately PW.1, LW4/ASI along with LW1/PC went to the scene of offence place situated at the fields of accused in Adavikothuru Village situated by the side of the road which leads from Adavikothuru to Gollakandriga Village in Nagari

Mandal and found the accused having possession of one plastic can and on seeing the police party the accused tried to escape from the scene of offence place and on suspicion, they detained the accused and on enquiry the accused confessed that the accused used to selling the prohibited ID arrack illegally and verified the can and found 20 liters of ID liquor in one plastic can and he used to manufacture the same at

Adavikothuru Village for selling the same to gain unlawfully. LW.4 explained the grounds of offence and arrested the accused and taken 180 ml of lD liquor into MO1 sample bottle and it is marked as MO1. LW4 seized the property under the cover of

Ex.P1/police proceedings. We returned to the police station along with seized property and arrested accused. Further investigation done by LW4/ASI.

14.P.W.2 is the ASI, who seized the contraband, registered the Crime and

LW.5/SI of Police filed charge sheet, PW.2 deposed that on 16.12.2022 at about 08.30 am, PW.2 received credible information and PW.2 along with his staff went to the fields of accused in Adavikothuru Village situated by the side of the road which leads from Adavikothuru to Gollakandriga Village in Nagari Mandal. There PW.2 along with his staff seen the accused suspiciously with a plastic can and on

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 7 Dt.04.05.2026 seeing them, the accused tried to skulk away and the PW.2 along with his staff caught hold him. On enquiry, the accused revealed his identity particulars and stated that the accused purchased ID arrack from unknown person and selling the same. They found 20 liters of ID arrack in one plastic can. PW.2 have arrested the accused, seized the contraband and drawn two samples of ID arrack of 180 ml under cover of police proceedings. One constable has prepared the police proceedings to my dictation. PW.2 have affixed his signature in police proceedings. MO1 is sealed sample bottle. From there they returned to the police station. Basing on the strength of Ex.P1, PW.2 registered the case in

Cr.No.386/2026, U/Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment)

Act, 2020, submitted the FIR copies to all the concerned officers and tookup investigation. Ex.P.2 is FIR. PW.2 have sent to sample bottle for chemical analysis, along with letter of advice. Ex.P.3 is the letter of advise. LW.5/SI of

Police received chemical analysis report. Ex.P.4 is the chemical analysis report.

After completion of investigation LW.5/SI of Police filed charge sheet.

15.As this is the case under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 8 Dt.04.05.2026 from the accused under the cover of Police Proceedings. The chemical analysis report under Ex.P.4, prima facie shows that the sample of the contraband is Illicitly distilled liquor unit for human consumption and injurious to health. Except the said confession of the accused before the police under Ex.P.1/Police

Proceedings, there is no other material produced by the prosecution, which is not admissible, as the confession before the police is hit under Section 25 of Indian

Evidence Act.

16.Further regarding the alleged seizure of contraband, PW1 and PW2 admitted the suggestions put by defence counsel in the cross examination that there was frequent traffic of vehicles on the scene of offence road is busy locality and there are 100 houses in Adavikothuru Village. PW1 and PW2 further admitted that they did not secure the village Volunteers or Secretary and independent persons as mediators. PW1 and P.W.2 denied the suggestions put by defence counsel in their cross examination that they did not go to the place of offence and did not seize any contraband from the possession of the accused. As per law, P.W.2 is bound to follow the procedure laid down under the Code of

Criminal Procedure relating to search and arrest. It envisages that Sec.100 of

Cr.P.C has to be followed by P.W.2 at the time of search and seizure of the contraband. But it is admitted by the prosecution witnesses that they did not secure the independent persons or inhabitants of nearby locality.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 9 Dt.04.05.2026

17.In a case, our Hon'ble High Court, which is squarely applicable to the facts of this case, Yeduru Sreenivasulu Reddy Vs State of A.P 2002(1) ALD (Crl.) 347 (A.P) held that when no mediators examined though search was conducted in a busy locality, the search and seizure as well as conviction cannot be sustained.

18.In another case, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P in a judgment

Between S.Babu Saheb @ Babu Vs. State of A.P. cited in 2010 (1) A.L.T. (Crl.) held in Para No: 32, “When conducting the search in a colony or at a place wherein there is possibility of securing the presence of independent mediators, the Excise or Prohibition officials are bound to take the local respectable mediators, that is mandate U/sec.100(4) of Cr.P.C.”

19.In another case our Hon'ble High Court in Adapa Ramababu @

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 10 Dt.04.05.2026

20.In the present case on hand also, it can be seen from the record that during the raid participated by PW1 and P.W.2 who are the police officials, no independent witnesses have been secured or the efforts made by them to secure the mediators were not reflected anywhere in the record to believe their version.

As per the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2, the scene of offence is on the main road from where the independent persons can be secured as mediators, but no witnesses were summoned by the police personnel, to act as mediators and no proof of such act was brought on record. Thus, the sole testimony of the police personnel cannot be relied on, to prove the alleged seizure of contraband from the possession of the accused. As such the seizure was not proved in accordance with law.

21.The prosecution is heavily relying on Ex.P.4 to prove the nature of the contraband. Though the prosecution witnesses denied the suggestion that this case is filed for statistical purpose and all the documents were prepared in the police station, however it is the burden of the prosecution to prove the alleged seizure and preparation of Ex.P1 to Ex.P.4 beyond reasonable doubt. As discussed supra, the cloud of doubt is created in favour of the accused and so this Court is inclined to hold that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 11 Dt.04.05.2026

22.Hence in view of foregoing discussion, this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove that the investigating officer duly followed the procedure for search and seizure of the contraband and so failed to prove the connection of the accused to the contraband, which is the foundation for the entire case of the prosecution. So this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove the seizure and thereby failed to prove this case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence this Court finds that the charges framed against the accused are not proved and he is entitled for acquittal.

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

Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 and accordingly, he is acquitted for the above offence under Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for six months from today as per

Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.

24.The property in C.P.R.No.106 of 2023, i.e., M.O.1 is the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 04 th day of May, 2026.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 12 Dt.04.05.2026 (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

P.W.1:D.Gavaskar None P.W.2:P.Nagaraju

DOCUMENTS MARKED

Ex.P.1/PW2:Ex.P.1 is Police Proceedings. Nil Ex.P.2/PW2:First Information Report in Cr.No.18/2023 of Nagari UPS. Ex.P.3/PW2:Letter of advise. Ex.P.4/PW2:Chemical Analysis report.

Material objects:

MO1/PW1 – 180 ml sample bottle // True Copy //

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Puttur,Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cumPuttur,FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) - Judicial Magistrate of I Class, – cum - Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.Nagari.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 13 Dt.04.05.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

Calendar in C.C.No.184 of 2023

(Cr.No.386 of 2022 of Nagari U.P.S)

Date of offence:16-12-2022

Date of complaint:16-12-2022

Date of taken on cognizance:16-05-2023

Date of appearance of accused:25.01.2024

Date of commencement of trial:25-07-2024

Date of close of trial:27.02.2026

Explanation for delay:No delay

Date of sentence or order:04.05.2026

Complainant:State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station.

Name of theFather’s nameAgeVillage,Occupation AccusedMandal/ District

V.SampathLate S.Chinnupaiah Aged about Adavikothuru Village, Coolie Reddy47 yearsNagari Mandal. Chittoor District.

Nature of offence: Illegal selling of liquor without permit or license

Section of Law: Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020.

Plea of the accused: Pleaded not guilty.

APCH120002572023

C.C.No.184 of 2023 14 Dt.04.05.2026

Finding of the Court: Accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020.

Sentence or order: In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 and accordingly, he is acquitted for the above offence under Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remain in force for six months from today as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.

The property in C.P.R.No.106 of 2023, i.e., M.O.1 is the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

// True Copy // (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur,Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cumFAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum - - Judicial Magistrate of I Class,Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.Nagari.

CC/167/2023 Acquitted

The Sub Inspector of Police Nagari UPS vs S.Mohan

13 Mar 2026

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 1 Dt.13.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

PRESENT: Smt. C.JANAKI,

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nagari.

Friday, this the thirteenth (13th) day of March, 2026.

CALENDAR CASE No.167 of 2023

(Crime No.356 of 2022 of Nagari UPS)

Between:

State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station. … Complainant.

And:

S.Mohan, aged about 50 years, S/o Late Sundaram, Nagarajukuppam D/Wada, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District. … Accused.

This case came before me on this day i.e., 06.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri M.Nagarajan, Learned counsel for the accused; upon perusing the material on record and this Court having stood over for consideration till this day, delivered the following:

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 2 Dt.13.03.2026

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime Number 356 of 2022 for the offence punishable under

Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020.

2.The facts of the prosecution case as mentioned in the charge sheet in nutshell are as follows:

This is a case submit that Occurred on 04.11.2022 at 09.30 am at the accused of accused i.e., S.Mohan of Nagarajukuppam D/Wada, Nagari and reported in the PS on the same day at 10.45 am by LW.4/ASI of Nagari UPS and wheren in the accused was possession and manufactured and same sell the prohibited ID arrack in his village. On credible information, the ASI of Police and his staff conducted a raid, arrested the accused and seized 25 litter of ID arrack from his possession under a cover of police proceedings. The seized ID arrack is worth about Rs.7500/-. On 04.11.2022 at 09.00 am, LW.4/ASI was present in the station, LW.4/ASI received credible information about selling of prohibited ID arrack in illegally. Immediately LW.4/ASI left the station along with Lws.1 and 2 in private vehicle and reached to Nagarajakuppam Village at 09.30 am and found one person was present there along with one can, on seeing the police party, the accused tried to run away from there, on that LW.4 cahsed him and caught hold

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 3 Dt.13.03.2026 him and interrogated him, he confessed that his name is S.Mohan of Nagari

Mandal due to financial problems, the accused distilled the ID arrack at the water pond and transport the same to his village and sell the same to the public by hiking its price. As usually on 18.10.2022, while he was selling the ID arrack, at the same time the police caught hold him. Then LW.4/ASI found 25 liters of ID arrack in that can, then LW.4 separate the 180 ML ID arrack as a sample for chemical analysis report. LW.4/ASI arrested the accused, seized the 25 liters of

ID arrack along with one can and sample bottle under a cover of police proceedings. LW.4/ASI let there along with the arrested accused and seized contraband to Nagari UPS and reached at 10.45 am. Basing on the police proceedings LW.4/ASI was registered a case in Cr. No.356/2022, U/Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 of Nagari UPS and submitted FIRs to all concerned officers and took up investigation into and send the accused to Judicial custody. During the course of investigation LW.5/SI of

Police seized sample seized ID arrack samples to Govt. Chemical Examiner.

Prohb.. & Excise Department, Chittoor for chemical analysis and after completion of investigation and LW.5/Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS laid charge sheet against the accused.

3.This Court took cognizance of offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 against the accused.

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 4 Dt.13.03.2026

4.On appearance of the accused before the Court, relevant copies of documents were furnished to him as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C, he was explained in Telugu, the charges framed for the accusation of the offence punishable under

Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.W.1 and

PW2 were examined, Exs.P.1 to P.4 and MO1 were marked. Ex.P.1 is the

Police Proceedings. Ex.P.2 is the First Information Report. Ex.P.3 is Letter of advise. Ex.P.4 is Chemical analysis Report. M.O.1 is the sealed sample bottle of

ID Arrack.

8. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel.

9.Now the point that has arisen for consideration is:

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 5 Dt.13.03.2026

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C)of A.P Prohibition

(Amendment) Act, 2020., beyond reasonable doubt?”

POINT:

10.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 and P.W.2.

P.W.1 is is the constable, who participated raid, PW.2 is the ASI of Police, who seized the contraband registered the crime and LW.5/SI of Police filed charge sheet.

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 6 Dt.13.03.2026 implicated in this case for statistical purpose by conducting table investigation and so he prays to acquit the accused.

13. PW.1 is Police Constable, who participated in the raid, deposed that on 04-11-2021 at about 9-30 am on receipt of credible information, PW.1 along with and other staff went to the scene of offence at house of accused in Nagaraju

Kuppam H/W. There they have seen one person by holding two white colour plastic can. On seeing them, the accused tried to skulk away. They caught hold the accused. On enquiry, the accused revealed his identity particulars and stated that he prepared I.D arrack and selling the same. They found 25 liters of ID arrack in plastic can. LW4/ASI has arrested the accused and seized the contraband and he drawn one sample of 180ml under cover of police proceedings. MO1 the sample bottle of ID arrack From there we returned our police station.

14.P.W.2 is the ASI, who seized the contraband, registered the Crime and LW.5/SI of Police filed charge sheet, PW.2 deposed that on 04.11.2025 at about 11.30 am, PW.2 received credible information and PW.2 along with his staff went to the house of accused in Nagarajakupam H/W. There they notice the accused suspiciously with plastic can. On seeing the police party, the accused skulk away. They caught hold the accused. On enquiry, the accused revealed his identity particulars and stated that the accused purchased ID arrack from unknown person and selling the same. They found 25 liters of ID arrack in one

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 7 Dt.13.03.2026 plastic can. PW.2 have arrested the accused, seized the contraband and drawn two samples of ID arrack of 180 ml under cover of police proceedings. One constable has prepared the police proceedings to my dictation. Ex.P.1 is Police

Proceedings. PW.2 have affixed his signature in police proceedings. MO1 is sealed sample bottle. From there they returned to the police station. Basing on the strength of Ex.P1, PW.2 registered the case in Cr.No.356/2022,

U/Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020, submitted the FIR copies to all the concerned officers and tookup investigation.

Ex.P.2 is FIR. PW.2 have sent to sample bottle for chemical analysis, along with letter of advice. Ex.P.3 is the letter of advise. LW.5/SI of Police received chemical analysis report. Ex.P.4 is the chemical analysis report. After completion of investigation LW.5/SI of Police filed charge sheet.

15.As this is the case under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P

Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020 the prosecution has to establish the offence of possession of 20 liter of ID arrack without permit or license. P.W.1 and PW2 corroborated with each other and deposed that they found 25 liters of ID arrack in the possession of accused. They also deposed that the contraband was seized from the accused under the cover of Police Proceedings. The chemical analysis report under Ex.P.4, prima facie shows that the sample of the contraband is Illicitly distilled liquor unit for human consumption and injurious to health. Except the

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 8 Dt.13.03.2026 said confession of the accused before the police under Ex.P.1/Police

Proceedings, there is no other material produced by the prosecution, which is not admissible, as the confession before the police is hit under Section 25 of Indian

Evidence Act.

16.Further regarding the alleged seizure of contraband, PW1 and PW2 admitted the suggestions put by defence counsel in the cross examination that there are 200 houses in Nagarajukupam Village. PW1 and PW2 further admitted that they did not secure the village Volunteers or Secretary and independent persons as mediators. PW1 and P.W.2 denied the suggestions put by defence counsel in their cross examination that they did not go to the place of offence and did not seize any contraband from the possession of the accused. As per law, P.W.2 is bound to follow the procedure laid down under the Code of

Criminal Procedure relating to search and arrest. It envisages that Sec.100 of

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 9 Dt.13.03.2026 conducted in a busy locality, the search and seizure as well as conviction cannot be sustained.

18.In another case, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P in a judgment

19.In another case our Hon'ble High Court in Adapa Ramababu @

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 10 Dt.13.03.2026

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 11 Dt.13.03.2026 entire case of the prosecution. So this Court finds that the prosecution failed to prove the seizure and thereby failed to prove this case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence this Court finds that the charges framed against the accused are not proved and he is entitled for acquittal.

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

Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.

24.The property in C.P.R.No.68 of 2023, i.e., M.O.1 is the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 13 th day of March, 2026.

(Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 12 Dt.13.03.2026

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

P.W.1:V.Gavaskar None P.W.2:P.Nagaraju

DOCUMENTS MARKED

Ex.P.1/PW2:Ex.P.1 is Police Proceedings. Nil Ex.P.2/PW2:First Information Report in Cr.No.18/2023 of Nagari UPS. Ex.P.3/PW2:Letter of advise. Ex.P.4/PW2:Chemical Analysis report.

Material objects:

MO1/PW1 – 180 ml sample bottle // True Copy // (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 13 Dt.13.03.2026

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.Nagari.

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 14 Dt.13.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

Calendar in C.C.No.167 of 2023

(Cr.No.356 of 2022 of Nagari U.P.S)

Date of offence:04.11.2022

Date of complaint:04.11.2022

Date of taken on cognizance:09.05.2023

Date of appearance of accused:19.06.2023

Date of commencement of trial:30.05.2025

Date of close of trial:06.03.2026

Explanation for delay:No delay

Date of sentence or order:13.03.2026

Complainant:State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station.

Name of theFather’s nameAgeVillage,Occupation AccusedMandal/ District

S.MohanLate Sundaram, Aged about Residing in Coolie 50 yearsNagarajukuppam D/Wada Village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District.

Nature of offence: Illegal selling of liquor without permit or license

Section of Law: Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020

APCH120002102023

C.C.No.167 of 2023 15 Dt.13.03.2026

Plea of the accused: Pleaded not guilty.

Finding of the Court: Accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec.7(B) R/W 8 (A), (B), (C) of A.P Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020.

The property in C.P.R.No.68 of 2023, i.e., M.O.1 is the sealed sample bottle ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

// True Copy // (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur,Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cumFAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum - - Judicial Magistrate of I Class,Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nagari.Nagari.

CC/3/2020 Acquitted

M/s Iyyappa Textiles vs M/s Gem Textiles

08 May 2026

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

PRESENT: Smt. C.JANAKI,

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur,

FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nagari.

Friday, this the Eighth (8th) day of May, 2026

CALENDAR CASE No.03 of 2020

Between:

Smt R.S.Devaki, Proprietrix, M/s Iyyappa Textiles, Yarn

Merchants, Ekambarakuppam, Nagari Municipality, Chittoor

District AP. ..Complainant.

And:

1. M/s Gem Textiles, D/o No.5-6-1/E, Manikkavasagar street,

Ekambarakuppam, Nagari Municipality, Chittoor District AP.

2.S.G.Elengo, Proprietor, M/s Gem Textiles, D/o No.5-6-1/E,

Manikkavasagar street, Ekambarakuppam, Nagari Municipality,

Chittoor District AP.

… A1 & A2 This case is coming up before me on this day i.e., 08.5.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri A.Sreenivasan, Counsel for complainant and Sri

P.Chiranjeevi, Counsel for accused; upon perusing the material on record and this Court having stood over for consideration till this day, delivered the following:

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

J U D G M E N T

The complainant filed this complaint against the accused for the offence punishable U/Sec. 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

The brief facts of the complainant case are as follows 2. :

The complainant she is doing yarn business under the name and style of

M/s Iyyappa Textiles. The complainant sells the yarn to the customers on credit basis under the custom of cheques transaction at Ekambarakuppam village, Na- gari Municipality, Chittoor District AP.

The complainant submits that the accused no.2 is doing textiles business under the name and style of M/s Gem Textiles at Ekamabarakukppam. On behalf of accused no.1 company, the accused no.2 had been issued five cheques for his above said yard business transaction as usual on purchasing yarn from the com- plainant’s company in the capacity of proprietor.

The complainant submits that the accused no.2 had issued the following five cheques on behalf of accused no.1 company for the value of the goods pur- chased from the complainant’s company.

The complainant submits that the accused no.2 indebted an amount of

Rs.9,40,640/- to her clients company. The complainant submits that for a valid and legal consideration accused has issued five cheques bearing Nos; 001794 dt.10.7.2019 for Rs.1,45,040/- a cheque no.001795 dt.10.7.2019 for Rs.1,33,900/- a cheque No. 001796, dt.10.7.2019 for Rs.1,60,000/- a cheque No; for

Rs.1,23,600/- all five cheques drawn on Karur vysya bank, Nagari branch issued infavour of her client’s company towards the payment of the above said dues on behalf of accused no.1 company.

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

The complainant submits that she had a permanent account in the Karur

Vysya Bank, Nagari branch, she had presented the five cheques for collection and realization through Karur Vysya Bank, Nagari Branch on 15.7.2019and the same were returned on 15.7.2019 as unpaid due to insufficient funds to honors the said five cheques with a memo containing an endorsement ‘Insufficient funds’.

The complainant had received the said information through her bank.

The complainant submits that it is abundantly to clear the debt of the ac- cused no.2 had issued the aforesaid five cheques mischievously and intentionally with a dishonest motive.

The complainant she had called upon the accused no.2 to make payment of Rs.8,40,640/- through a registered legal notice dt.17.7.2019 along with inciden- tal charges incurred by complainant on its presentation in the bank.

3.The case has been taken on file for the offence punishable U/Sec.

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the Accused A1 & A2.

4. After appearance of the accused, copies were furnished to the ac- cused as required U/Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C.

5.Accused A1 & A2 were examined U/sec. 251Cr.P.C for the offence punishable U/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, its accusation was explained to them in Telugu language, for which they denied, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. During the trial , the complainant filed his chief affidavit as PW1 and the case was coming up for marking of documents on behalf of the complainant and for cross examination of P.W1.

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

8. At this stage, this matter was referred for mediation for amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties. Received report from the mediator along with the terms of settlement arrived between the parties which were reduced into writing in Annexure-II, as follows;

The terms of settlement:-

1. The accused paid a sum of Rs.1,78,100/- (Rupees one lakh Seventy

Eight thousand and one hundred only) by way of cash to the complainant towards full and final settlement of above case amount by way of cash from the accused

C.C.No.03/2020.

2. The accused paid a sum of Rs.12,81,260/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs Eighty one thousand and two hundred sixty only) to the complainant towards full and final settlement of case in CF.No.2362/2022 amount by way of vide demand draft bearing No.000032 dt.4.3.2026 drawn on HDFC Bank.

3. The accused paid a sum of Rs.5,40,640/- (Rupees Five lakhs forty thousand and six hundred forty only) to the complainant towards full and final settlement of case O.S.NO.08/2021 amount by way of vide demand draft bearing No.000033 dt.4.3.2026 drawn on HDFC Bank.

All the above cases are filed before the Civil Judge (Jr.Div) Nagari. There are no any other monetary transaction between the complainant and his family members and accused and accused family members pending till today.

8. On enquiry, both the parties reported that they agreed to the terms mentioned in Annexure-II. Thus, it is inclined to dispose off the present case as per the terms settled before the mediator. Accordingly the complaint is disposed off.

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

9. In the result, this complaint is disposed off,without costs, as per the terms settled before the mediation i.e.

1. The accused paid a sum of Rs.1,78,100/- (Rupees one lakh Seventy

Eight thousand and one hundred only) by way of cash to the complainant towards full and final settlement of above case amount by way of cash from the accused

C.C.No.03/2020.

No.000033 dt.4.3.2026 drawn on HDFC Bank.

As such the accused is acquitted.

Typed to my dictation by the Addl.Stenographer, corrected, signed and

pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 8 th day of May, 2026.

(Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined for

NIL.

// True Copy // (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur,Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.Nagari.

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS:: NAGARI.

CALENDAR CASE No.03 of 2020

Date of offence:10.07.2019 Date of complaint:14.08.2019 Date of taken on file :06.01.2020 Date of apprehension of accused:- Date of commencement of trial:15.02.2023 Date of close of trial:- Explanation for delay:No delay Date of sentence or order:08.5.2026 Complainant:Smt R.S.Devaki, Proprietrix, M/s Iyyappa Textiles,YarnMerchants, Ekambarakuppam,Nagari Municipality, Chittoor District AP.

1. M/s Gem Textiles, D/o No.5-6-1/E, Manikkavasagar street, Ekambarakuppam, Nagari

Municipality, Chittoor District AP.

2.S.G.Elengo, Proprietor, M/s Gem Textiles, D/o No.5-6-1/E, Manikkavasagar street,

Ekambarakuppam, Nagari Municipality, Chittoor District AP. Nature of offence:Dishonour of cheque due to insufficient funds

Section of Law:Under Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act

Plea of the accused:Pleaded not guilty

Finding of the Court:Settled in the mediation

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

Sentence or order: In the result, this complaint is disposed off,without costs, as per the terms settled before the mediation i.e.

1. The accused paid a sum of Rs.1,78,100/- (Rupees one lakh Seventy Eight thousand and one hundred only) by way of cash to the complainant towards full and final settlement of above case amount by way of cash from the accused

C.C.No.03/2020.

2. The accused paid a sum of Rs.12,81,260/- (Rupees

Twelve lakhs Eighty one thousand and two hundred sixty only) to the complainant towards full and final settlement of case in

CF.No.2362/2022 amount by way of vide demand draft bearing No.000032 dt.4.3.2026 drawn on HDFC Bank.

3. The accused paid a sum of Rs.5,40,640/- (Rupees Five lakhs forty thousand and six hundred forty only) to the complainant towards full and final settlement of case

O.S.NO.08/2021 amount by way of vide demand draft bearing

No.000033 dt.4.3.2026 drawn on HDFC Bank.

As such the accused is acquitted.

// True Copy // (Sd/- C.Janaki)

Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur,Puttur, FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -FAC. Civil Judge (Junior Division) – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Nagari.Nagari.

APCH120003492019

C.C.No.3 of 2020 Dt.08.05.2026

Order Record 220 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/3/2020	M/s Iyyappa Textiles vs M/s Gem Textiles	08 May 2026	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/192/2018	E. Munemma vs M. Revanth Kumar	08 May 2026	Other	—
CC/184/2023	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs V.Sampath	04 May 2026	Judgment	Acquitted
OS/64/2024	P.Bhakthavatchalam Naidu vs V.R.Mahesh	17 Apr 2026	Other	—
CC/395/2023	Muthukuru Guru Babu vs Narupalli Anki Reddy	17 Apr 2026	Other	—
EP/4/2025	S.Kesavan vs A.Panchali	10 Apr 2026	Other	—
CC/57/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs K. Sudhakar	10 Apr 2026	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/316/2023	Enforcement Inspector, Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Nagari vs K.Siva	10 Apr 2026	Judgment	Acquitted
EP/27/2022	R.Arumugam vs A.Kannemma	02 Apr 2026	Other	—
EP/17/2022	D.J.Parasuraman vs K.M.Durairaj	30 Mar 2026	Other	—
EP/33/2018	B. Rukmani vs V.G. Shanmugam reddy	30 Mar 2026	Other	—
EP/5/2025	The Agaram Ramakrishna Primary Agri Co-OP Society Ldt G.Subramanyama vs Tejasree JLG	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
EP/6/2025	The Agaram Ramakrishna Primary Agri Co OP Society Ldt. G.Surbamanyam vs Sri Varasidhi Vijanayaka JLG	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
EP/13/2022	Sapthagiri Grameena bank, Tirupati vs Thoti Sampath	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
OS/11/2026	R.S.Samapth Muddaliar vs M.V.Rajendran	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
OS/48/2023	Desipoina Renuka alias Renukamma vs K.Sampornam	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
OS/118/2025	Dasara Raju Eswara Raju vs Sami Reddy	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/12/2026	The SHO., Nagari UPS vs A.Gunasekhar	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/15/2020	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari vs E. Kusuma	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/22/2025	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari PS vs N.Sampoornamma	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/38/2026	The SHO., Nindra Police Station vs M.Nallamma Raju	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/45/2026	The SHO., Vijayapuram Police Station, Vijayapuram vs A.1 D.Venkatesh	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/46/2026	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs G.K.Prakash	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/47/2026	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs V.K.Veerapandiyan	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/48/2026	The SHO., SEB., Nagari vs G.Eswaran	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/49/2026	The SEB., Nagari vs R.Vijay	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/68/2023	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station. vs R.S.Srinivasan	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/83/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nindra P.S vs A.Desamma	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/125/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nindra P.S vs L.Dilli Mohan Raj	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/217/2025	The SHO., Nagari UPS vs V.Sankar	14 Mar 2026	Other	—
EP/17/2023	Nali Dhanamjayulu vs K.J.Iyyappan	13 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/167/2023	The Sub Inspector of Police Nagari UPS vs S.Mohan	13 Mar 2026	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/203/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari U.P.S vs T. Thomas Xavier	13 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/241/2023	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs R.Arjun	13 Mar 2026	Judgment	—
CC/340/2022	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs A.S.Balan@Balaji @Bala	13 Mar 2026	Judgment	—
EP/11/2019	J. Rani vs C. Venkateswara Raju @ Chinnabba Raju	12 Mar 2026	Other	—
CC/244/2025	The SHO., Nagari UPS vs M.Pasava Alias Baswa	06 Mar 2026	Judgment	—
CC/401/2023	Enforcement Sub Inspector, SEB Station, Nagari vs K.D.Karthik	06 Mar 2026	Judgment	—
PRC/9/2018	Inspector of Police, Vijayapuram vs C. Prabhakaran	06 Mar 2026	Order	—
EP/15/2022	M.R.Jagannadham vs G.Gandhi	27 Feb 2026	Other	—
CC/118/2022	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs S. Ponnemma @ Kanchana	27 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
CC/256/2023	U.V.Kumar vs U.V.Kumar	27 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
CC/305/2023	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari vs S.Parthiban	27 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
EP/6/2023	P.V.Gunaseelan vs M.Jayamma	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
EP/17/2019	G. Peddi Naidu vs E. Krishnaveni	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
EP/22/2018	M.R. Jagannadham vs A. Ramaiah (Died)	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
EP/34/2018	B. Rukmani vs M. Shanmugam	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
EP/35/2018	B. Rukmani vs V Umapathi	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
CC/322/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs T. Thomas Xavier	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
MC/2/2025	V.M.Bharathi vs V.Sathyamurthy	20 Feb 2026	Other	—
OS/2/2025	Y.Babu vs G.Chitti Babu	06 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
CC/32/2021	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs K. Sudhakar	06 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
CC/243/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Vijayapuram PS vs K. Payani	06 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
CC/315/2023	The Sub Inspector of Police, Prohibition and Excise Station vs S.Eswaraiah	06 Feb 2026	Judgment	—
OS/51/2021	C. Dhanalakshmi vs M. Mani	30 Jan 2026	Other	—
OS/54/2025	N.Rajesh vs E.Visuruvelu	30 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/288/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari U.P.S vs V. Lakshmi	30 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/483/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs T Thomas Xavier	30 Jan 2026	Decree	—
CC/483/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs T Thomas Xavier	30 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
OS/18/2025	The State Bank of India, rep by its B.M Nagari vs V.M.Hari	23 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
OS/118/2024	R.Renuka vs A.Hemanth Kumzr	23 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
OS/135/2024	N..Subramanyam vs M.Udaya	23 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/208/2022	State represented by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs K. Vinodh	23 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/278/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari U.P.S vs M. Seetharaman	23 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
EP/5/2022	M/s Margadarshi Chit Fund limited, Tirupati vs Syed Mahaboob basha	09 Jan 2026	Other	—
CC/45/2023	Sub Inspector, Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Nagari. vs A.Ramaswamy	09 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/120/2022	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs C.D. Devaiah	09 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/178/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Vijayapuram P.S vs P.Chandra Sekhar Alias Chandhu	09 Jan 2026	Judgment	—
CC/318/2022	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station. vs T.Thomas Xavier	09 Jan 2026	Other	—
EP/16/2022	A. Amaravathamma vs H.Raghavelu	19 Dec 2025	Other	—
CC/70/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nindra PS vs Dedukula Subhan Basha	19 Dec 2025	Other	—
CC/23/2021	Sub Inspector of police, Nindra PS vs Kodikutti Dinesh	17 Dec 2025	Judgment	—
OS/23/2018	S.K.Jayachandran vs Budda kumari	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/44/2025	The Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs M.Raj Kumar	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/55/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nindra P.S. vs K.Venkatesulu alias Venkatesh	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/77/2023	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari Urban Police Station. vs J.B.Subramani	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/81/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nindra vs L.Dill Mohan Raju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/84/2024	The Sub Inspector of Police, Nindra PS vs B.Surbamanyam Raju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/131/2022	Sub Inspector of police, Nagari UPS vs O. Mohan Babu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/175/2025	The SHO., Vijayapuram P.S., VIjayapuram vs K.Munikrishnaiah	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/188/2025	The SHO., Nagari UPS vs A.1 D.THulasiraman	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/225/2025	The SHO., Nindra Police Station vs Vepati Bhaskar Naidu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/226/2025	The SHO., NIndra Police Station, Nindra vs A.1 V.Ravi Naidu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/227/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs R.Munivelu Reddy	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/228/2025	The SHO., SEB Excise Station, Nagari vs V.Lakshmi	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/229/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs S.Govindarajulu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/230/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs S.Sekhar	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/231/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs V.Sankar	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/232/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs S.Chithra	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/233/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs K.Chittemma	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/234/2025	TheSHO., SEB, Nagari vs M.Rajeswari	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/235/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs S.Susmitha	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/236/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs G.Dayalan	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/237/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs L.Dilil Mohan Raju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/238/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs R. Sujan	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/238/2025	The SHO., SEB, Nagari vs V.Lakshmanan	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
MC/15/2025	P.K.Durga vs M.Nageswar	13 Dec 2025	Other	—
STC/7/2025	A.E.Saravanan vs C.A.Thirumalesh Reddy	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
EP/7/2023	S.Leelavathi@ Nelavathi vs K.Muralimohan	12 Dec 2025	Other	—
CC/43/2021	Sub Inspector of Police, Nagari UPS vs G. Sekhar	12 Dec 2025	Judgment	—

Showing 100 of 220 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		3
Apr 2026		6
Mar 2026		31
Feb 2026		15
Jan 2026		16
Dec 2025		33
Nov 2025		9
Oct 2025		10
Sep 2025		30
Aug 2025		24
Jul 2025		38
Jun 2025		3

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt. Challa Janaki handled?

Smt. Challa Janaki has handled 224 court orders since 2025 at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka). The average disposal rate is 17 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt. Challa Janaki hear?

Based on available records, Smt. Challa Janaki primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Original Suits) at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka).

Where is Smt. Challa Janaki currently posted?

Smt. Challa Janaki is posted as Junior Civil Judge at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka), Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Smt. Challa Janaki available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Smt. Challa Janaki are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt. Challa Janaki dispose cases?

Smt. Challa Janaki disposes approximately 17 cases per month, based on 224 orders handled over their tenure at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka).

Since when is Smt. Challa Janaki serving?

Smt. Challa Janaki has been serving at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka) since 2025. and is currently posted there.

Case Types

CC 73%

EP 14%

OS 9%

MC 2%

STC 1%

PRC 0%

Posting History

Apr 2025 — Present

Junior Civil Judge · 224 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 5

← View all judges at Court of Junior Civil Judge,, Nagari (Taluka)