Sri. Challuri Sampath

Junior Civil Judge

Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex · Mancherial · Telangana

Sri. Challuri Sampath, Junior Civil Judge, is posted at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex, Mancherial, Telangana, India. 497 court orders on record since 2023. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles STC, CC, OS cases.

497

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/101/2023 Acquitted

Prohibition and Excise Station Luxettipet vs Jadhav Santhosh

06 Aug 2024

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 1 of 7

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, LUXETTIPET

AT :: LUXETTIPET

Present: Sri. Challuri Sampath, Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class Luxettipet

Tuesday, this the 06th day of August,2024

CC No.101 Of 2023

Between:

The Telangana State through Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Luxettipet. (COR. No. 32/2022)

... Complainant

//And//

Jadhav Santhosh, S/o. Bahava Singh, Age. 30 years, Occ. Coolie, R/o. Juvviduga village of Jannaram Mandal. … Accused

This case is coming before me on 23.07.2024 for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.

S. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the accused, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1. The Prohibition & Excise SubInspector, Luxettipet has filed a charge sheet against the accused in C.O.R No. 32/2022 for the offence punishable under Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.03.2022, on reliable information about the possessing of ID liquor by the accused/Jadhav

Santhosh LW3/ A. Roop Chand Jhon Robert, Proh. & Excise Sub

JFCM

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 2 of 7

Inspector of Police, Luxettipet along his staff and mediators i.e., LW1 and 2 (Ellanki Narayana and Thoutu Rajanna) proceeded to

Badampalli village and conducted route watch. During the route watch, at bout 8:30AM, at that time one person came on Kinetic Boss

Bike bearing AP1F 5812 in a suspicious manner with one bag. When

LW3 opened the said bag, and poured said liquid into his hand, on smelling it, it was found polythene covers it was an ID Liquor. On enquiry, the accused disclosed his particulars and also confessed that he used to buy said ID Liquor from an unknown person to sell the same at a high cost. LW3 found that said the polythene cover contained (02) Litres of I.D Liquor, LW3 seized the contraband and drew (1) sample of ID liquor in a 180 ml bottle for chemical analysis under the cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators, duly sealing the sample by pasting Panch chits. The Excise officials brought the accused along with seized property to the Excise Station and based on the panchanama a case in COR. No. 32/2022 registered under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 against the accused.

3. During the course of the investigation, LW3 sent the seized sample to the Chemical Examiner, Nizamabad for analysis and report. After receiving the report vide C.E. No. 197/202203, Dt. 26.03.2022 opening that the samples are illicitly distilled liquor unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. The remaining ID liquor was produced before the Dy. Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Adilabad for confiscation and after receiving the CE report the property was ID liquor was destroyed and the seized vehicle was sold in Public auction.

Effected the arrest of the accused and released him on bail by issuing

Sec. 41A Cr.PC notice. After completion of the investigation, LW3

JFCM

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 3 of 7

filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 7(A)r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995.

4. On the strength of the said charge sheet, this court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995 and issued summons to the accused. On the appearance of the accused before this court, case copies furnished to him duly complying with Sec. 207 Cr.PC and thereafter he is examined under Sec. 239 Cr.PC for the accusation levelled against him under Sec. 7 (A) r/w. 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 and the accused pleaded not guilty. The charges framed for the abovesaid offences, were read over and explained to him in vernacular language for which he denied and claimed to be tried.

5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs1 & 2 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 and MO.1. PW's 2 & 3 are the panch witness.

PW1 is the Investigation Officer.

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.PC, for which he pleaded innocence and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides and perused the record.

8. The point for determination is:

" Whether the prosecution has proved its case against the accused

for the charges levelled against him for the offences punishable under

Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond all reasonable

doubt?"

POINT:

9. To make out its case for the offence under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of T.S

Prohibition Act, 1995, the prosecution examined LWs1 and 2, who are the panch witnesses as PW2 & 3. But they did not support the

JFCM

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 4 of 7

case of prosecution by stating that their do not know anything about this case, The excise police never conducted any panchanama nor drew rough sketch in their presence, he further said that the Excise

Officials obtained their signatures on white papers.

Due to the hostile attitude of PW1, the learned APPO declared them as hostile witness and cross examined them with the permission of the court but nothing could be elicited in favour of the prosecution.

10. To tie the accused with the crime, the prosecution examined LW 3/Investigation Officer as PW1. During the chief examination, he reiterated the contents of charge sheet and panchanama, about the investigation chronologically conducted by him and also about filing of charge sheet after the completion of investigation.

During crossexamination,he admitted that he had not examined any neighbours to the accused house to ascertain whether he was selling ID Liquor, he had not examined any customers/persons to say that the accused sold the ID Liquors to customers. PW1 further admitted that he has not collected any documents to show that said bike is belongs to the accused.

11. On perusal of the above, it is clear that except for the evidence of the investigation officer i.e., PW1, there is no other supporting evidence to substantiate the prosecution case, due to the hostile of PW2 & PW3 panch witnesses, conducting of panchanama and seizure of case property on 18.08.2022 is remained not proved. PW2 and PW3 did not support the case of the prosecution, he went on extent of saying that the Excise Police obtained their signatures on white papers.

Thus, it is highly unsafe to rely upon the version of PW1 as the

Excise Official is interested in the outcome of the prosecution of the

JFCM

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 5 of 7

accused without any corroboration of evidence of independent witnesses. Furthermore, it is clear that PW1 did not examine neighbours to the house of the accused and also any person to say that they were the customers of accused whose presence could be secured at the scene of offence. It is alleged that PW1 received credible information in the night time and there is no explanation from him for not securing any neighbours as a witnesses.

12. Therefore, there is a delay of nearly about (148) days from the seizure of ID Liquor to issuance of report under Ex.P3. On careful perusal of the Ex.P3, the the date of receipt of sample is kept blank. There is no whisper of explanation about the said delay either in charge sheet or in the version of PW1. There is no evidence to show that samples were kept in proper custody without giving scope for tampering.

At this stage, it is relevant to mention the legal position held in

Ratnbala Brundavanam Vs. State of A.P reported in 2004 (1) ALD (Crl.) 905, the Hon'ble High Court at Hyderabad held that " The delay in sending a samples are always fatal to the case of prosecution, where no explanation is offered for such delay".

13. In the light of above, as the independent mediators did not support the case of prosecution and as there is no material to connect the accused with the seizure of ID Liquor and in view of above legal aspects, I hold that prosecution failed to prove the guilt of accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8 (e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond all reasonable doubt and thus accused is entitled for acquittal.

Accordingly, the point is answered.

14. In the result, the accused is found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 and accordingly he is acquitted of the said offences under Sec. 248(1) Cr.PC. The bail

JFCM

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 6 of 7

bonds of the accused, if any, shall stand cancelled subject to Sec.

437(A)CrPC. MO.1 is case property deposited vide CP. No. 07/2023 shall be destroyed after lapse of appeal period.

Typed to my dictation by the typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 06 th day of August,2024.

Sd/

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For ProsecutionFor Defence (PW1)Sri. A. Roop Chand John LW3RobertP.&E Sub Inspector, NONE Station Luxettipet (PW2)Ellanki Narayana, Panch LW1Witness for confession and seizure

PW3 Thoutu Rajanna, Panch (LW2)Witness for confession and seizure

Exhibits marked

Ex.P1CORNIL.

Ex.P2Confessioncum Seizure Panchanama

Ex.P3C.E Report

JFCM

CC. No. 101 Of 2023 Page No. 7 of 7

Ex.P4Signature of PW3 on confession cum seizure Panchanama

MO.1 is empty liquor bottle

Sd/ JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

JFCM

CC/180/2024 Acquitted

State of Telangana through Prohibition and Excise Station, Luxettipet vs Malavath Ramesh, S/o. Lachu Nayak

06 Aug 2024

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 1 of 7

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, LUXETTIPET

AT :: LUXETTIPET

Present: Sri. Challuri Sampath, Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class Luxettipet

Tuesday, this the 06th day of August,2024

CC No.180 Of 2024

Between:

The Telangana State through Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Luxettipet. (COR. No. 106/2022)

... Complainant

//And//

Malavath Ramesh, S/o. Lachu Nayak, Age. 34 years, Occ. Coolie, R/o. Thanimadugu village of Dandepally Mandal. … Accused

This case is coming before me on 23.07.2024 for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.

Akkala Sridhar, learned counsel for the accused, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1. The Prohibition & Excise SubInspector, Luxettipet has filed a charge sheet against the accused in C.O.R No. 106/2022 for the offence punishable under Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.11.2022, on reliable information about the possessing of ID liquor by the

JFCM

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 2 of 7

accused/Malavath Ramesh LW3/ T. Mahender Singh, Proh. & Excise

SubInspector of Police, Luxettipet along his staff and mediators i.e.,

LW1 and 2 (Malavath Neelesh and Banavath Ramulu) proceeded to

Venkatraopet village and conducted route watch. During the route watch, at bout 6:30PM, at that time one person came on Honda

Splender Plus, Bearing no. AP01K3470 in suspicious manner with one bag. When LW3 opened the said bag, and poured said liquid into his hand, on smelling it, it was found polythene covers it was an ID

Liquor. On enquiry, the accused disclosed his particulars and also confessed that he used to buy said ID Liquor from an unknown person to sell the same at a high cost. LW3 found that said the polythene cover contained (10) Litres of I.D Liquor along with Honda

Splender Plus Bike, LW3 seized the contraband and drew (1) sample of ID liquor in a 180 ml bottle for chemical analysis under the cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators, duly sealing the sample by pasting Panch chits. The Excise officials brought the accused along with seized property to the Excise Station and based on the panchanama a case in COR. No. 106/2022 registered under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 against the accused.

3. During the course of the investigation, LW3 sent the seized sample to the Chemical Examiner, Nizamabad for analysis and report. After receiving the report vide C.E. No. 890/202207, Dt. 29.11.2022 opening that the samples are illicitly distilled liquor unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. The remaining ID liquor was produced before the Dy. Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Adilabad for confiscation and after receiving the CE report the property was destroyed on 27.03.2023. Effected the arrest of the accused and released him on bail by issuing Sec. 41A Cr.PC notice. After completion of the investigation, LW3 filed charge sheet against the

JFCM

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 3 of 7

accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 7(A)r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995.

4. On the strength of the said charge sheet, this court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP

5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs1 & 2 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 and MO.1. PW's 1 & 2 are the panch witness.

PW3 is the Investigation Officer.

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.PC, for which he pleaded innocence and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides and perused the record.

8. The point for determination is:

" Whether the prosecution has proved its case against the accused

for the charges levelled against him for the offences punishable under

Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond all reasonable

doubt?"

POINT:

9. To make out its case for the offence under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of T.S

Prohibition Act, 1995, the prosecution examined LWs1 and 2, who are the panch witnesses as PW1 & 2. But they did not support the

JFCM

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 4 of 7

Officials obtained their signatures on white papers.

10. To tie the accused with the crime, the prosecution examined LW 3/Investigation Officer as PW3. During the chief examination, he reiterated the contents of charge sheet and panchanama, about the investigation chronologically conducted by him and also about filing of charge sheet after the completion of investigation.

During crossexamination, he admitted that he had not examined any neighbours to the accused house to ascertain whether he was selling ID Liquor, he had not examined any customers/persons to say that the accused sold the ID Liquors to customers. PW3 further admitted that he has not collected any documents to show that said bike is belongs to the accused.

11. On perusal of the above, it is clear that except for the evidence of the investigation officer i.e., PW3, there is no other supporting evidence to substantiate the prosecution case, due to the hostile of PW1 & PW2 panch witnesses, conducting of panchanama and seizure of case property on 15.02.2023 is remained not proved. PW1 and PW2 did not support the case of the prosecution, he went on extent of saying that the Excise Police obtained their signatures on white papers.

Thus, it is highly unsafe to rely upon the version of PW3 as the

Excise Official is interested in the outcome of the prosecution of the

JFCM

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 5 of 7

accused without any corroboration of evidence of independent witnesses. Furthermore, it is clear that PW3 did not examine neighbours to the house of the accused and also any person to say that they were the customers of accused whose presence could be secured at the scene of offence. It is alleged that PW3 received credible information in the night time and there is no explanation from him for not securing any neighbours as a witnesses.

12. Therefore, there is a delay of nearly about (83) days from the seizure of

ID Liquor to issuance of report under Ex.P5. On careful perusal of the

Ex.P5, the the date of receipt of sample is kept blank. There is no whisper of explanation about the said delay either in charge sheet or in the version of PW3. There is no evidence to show that samples were kept in proper custody without giving scope for tampering.

At this stage, it is relevant to mention the legal position held in

Accordingly, the point is answered.

JFCM

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 6 of 7

bonds of the accused, if any, shall stand cancelled subject to Sec.

437(A)CrPC. MO.1 is case property deposited vide CP. No. 48/2024 shall be destroyed after lapse of appeal period.

Typed to my dictation by the typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 06 th day of August,2024.

Sd/

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For ProsecutionFor Defence (PW1)Malavath Neelesh, Panch LW1Witness for confession and NONE seizure (PW2)Banavath Ramulu, Panch LW2Witness for confession and seizure

PW3 Sri.T. Mahender Singh, (LW3)RobertP.&E Sub Inspector, Station Luxettipet

Exhibits marked

Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on confession NIL. cum seizure Panchanama

Ex.P2Signature of PW2 on confession cum seizure Panchanama

Ex.P3COR

JFCM

CC. No. 180 Of 2024 Page No. 7 of 7

Ex.P4Confession cum Seizure Panchanama

Ex.P5C.E Report

MO.1 is empty liquor bottle

Sd/ JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

JFCM

CC/181/2024 Acquitted

State of Telangana through Prohibition and Excise Station, Luxettipet vs Bhukya Ramchandar, S/o. Shankar

06 Aug 2024

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 1 of 7

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, LUXETTIPET

AT :: LUXETTIPET

Present: Sri. Challuri Sampath, Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class Luxettipet

Tuesday, this the 06th day of August,2024

CC No.181 Of 2024

Between:

The Telangana State through Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Luxettipet. (COR. No. 107/2022)

... Complainant

//And//

Bhukya Ramchandar, S/o. Shankar, Age. 34 years, Occ. Coolie, R/o. Thanimadugu village of Dandepalli Mandal. … Accused

This case is coming before me on 23.07.2024 for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.

Akkala Sridhar, learned counsel for the accused, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1. The Prohibition & Excise SubInspector, Luxettipet has filed a charge sheet against the accused in C.O.R No. 107/2022 for the offence punishable under Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.11.2022, on reliable information about the possessing of ID liquor by the accused/Bhukya

JFCM

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 2 of 7

Ramchandar LW3/ T. Mahender Singh, Proh. & Excise SubInspector of Police, Luxettipet along his staff and mediators i.e., LW1 and 2 (Malavath Neelesh and Banavath Ramulu) proceeded to Venkatraopet village and conducted route watch. During the route watch, at bout 6:50AM, at that time one person came on Honda Shine, Chasis no.

ME4jc366ca8410665 in suspicious manner with one bag. When LW3 opened the said bag, and poured said liquid into his hand, on smelling it, it was found polythene covers it was an ID Liquor. On enquiry, the accused disclosed his particulars and also confessed that he used to buy said ID Liquor from an unknown person to sell the same at a high cost. LW3 found that said the polythene cover contained (10) Litres of

I.D Liquor along with Honda Shine bike, LW3 seized the contraband and drew (1) sample of ID liquor in a 180 ml bottle for chemical analysis under the cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators, duly sealing the sample by pasting Panch chits. The Excise officials brought the accused along with seized property to the Excise Station and based on the panchanama a case in COR. No. 107/2022 registered under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 against the accused.

3. During the course of the investigation, LW3 sent the seized sample to the Chemical Examiner, Nizamabad for analysis and report. After receiving the report vide C.E. No. 890/202208, Dt. 29.11.2022 opening that the samples are illicitly distilled liquor unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. The remaining ID liquor was produced before the Dy. Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Adilabad for confiscation and after receiving the CE report the property was destroyed on 27.03.2023. Effected the arrest of the accused and released him on bail by issuing Sec. 41A Cr.PC notice. After completion of the investigation, LW3 filed charge sheet against the

JFCM

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 3 of 7

accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 7(A)r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995.

4. On the strength of the said charge sheet, this court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP

5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs1 & 2 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 and MO.1. PW's 1 & 2 are the panch witness.

PW3 is the Investigation Officer.

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.PC, for which he pleaded innocence and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides and perused the record.

8. The point for determination is:

" Whether the prosecution has proved its case against the accused

for the charges levelled against him for the offences punishable under

Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond all reasonable

doubt?"

POINT:

9. To make out its case for the offence under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of T.S

Prohibition Act, 1995, the prosecution examined LWs1 and 2, who are the panch witnesses as PW1 & 2. But they did not support the

JFCM

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 4 of 7

Officials obtained their signatures on white papers.

During crossexamination, he admitted that he had not examined any neighbours to the accused house to ascertain whether he was selling ID Liquor, he had not examined any customers/persons to say that the accused sold the ID Liquors to customers. PW3 further admitted that he has not collected any documents to show that said bike is belongs to the accused.

Thus, it is highly unsafe to rely upon the version of PW3 as the

Excise Official is interested in the outcome of the prosecution of the

JFCM

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 5 of 7

12. Therefore, there is a delay of nearly about (76) days from the seizure of

ID Liquor to issuance of report under Ex.P5. On careful perusal of the

At this stage, it is relevant to mention the legal position held in

Accordingly, the point is answered.

JFCM

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 6 of 7

bonds of the accused, if any, shall stand cancelled subject to Sec.

437(A)CrPC. MO.1 is case property deposited vide CP. No. 49/2024 shall be destroyed after lapse of appeal period.

Typed to my dictation by the typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 06 th day of August,2024.

Sd/

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For ProsecutionFor Defence (PW1)Malavath Neelesh, Panch LW1Witness for confession and NONE seizure (PW2)Banavath Ramulu, Panch LW2Witness for confession and seizure

PW3 Sri.T. Mahender Singh, (LW3)RobertP.&E Sub Inspector, Station Luxettipet

Exhibits marked

Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on confession NIL. cum seizure Panchanama

Ex.P2Signature of PW2 on confession cum seizure Panchanama

Ex.P3COR

JFCM

CC. No. 181 Of 2024 Page No. 7 of 7

Ex.P4Confession cum Seizure Panchanama

Ex.P5C.E Report

MO.1 is empty liquor bottle

Sd/ JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

JFCM

CC/537/2023 Acquitted

Prohn. and Excise Luxettipet vs Baluguri Sathaiah, S/o. Lingaiah, Age.45 years, Occ. Coolie

06 Aug 2024

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 1 of 7

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, LUXETTIPET

AT :: LUXETTIPET

Present: Sri. Challuri Sampath, Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class Luxettipet

Tuesday, this the 06th day of August,2024

CC No.537 Of 2023

Between:

The Telangana State through Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Luxettipet. (COR. No. 292/2020)

... Complainant

//And//

Baluguri Sathaiah, S/o. Lingaiah, Age. 45 years, Occ. Coolie, R/o. Venkatraopet village of Luxettipet Mandal. … Accused

This case is coming before me on 23.07.2024 for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.

K. Bhooma Reddy, learned counsel for the accused, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1. The Prohibition & Excise SubInspector, Luxettipet has filed a charge sheet against the accused in C.O.R No. 292/2020 for the offence punishable under Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.12.2020, on reliable information about the possessing of ID liquor by the accused/Baluguri Sathaiah LW3/ A. Roop Chand Jhon Robert, Proh.

JFCM

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 2 of 7

& Excise SubInspector of Police, Luxettipet along his staff and mediators i.e., LW1 and 2 (Baluguri Ellaiah and Merugu Thirupathi) proceeded to Venkatraopet village and conducted raids. During the raids, at bout 9:30AM, at that time one person moving in a suspicious manner with one bag. When LW3 opened the said bag, and poured said liquid into his hand, on smelling it, it was found polythene covers it was an ID Liquor. On enquiry, the accused disclosed his particulars and also confessed that he used to buy said ID Liquor from an unknown person to sell the same at a high cost. LW3 found that said the polythene cover contained (02) Litres of I.D Liquor, LW3 seized the contraband and drew (1) sample of ID liquor in a 180 ml bottle for chemical analysis under the cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators, duly sealing the sample by pasting Panch chits. The

Excise officials brought the accused along with seized property to the

Excise Station and based on the panchanama a case in COR. No.

292/2020 registered under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 against the accused.

3. During the course of the investigation, LW3 sent the seized sample to the Chemical Examiner, Nizamabad for analysis and report. After receiving the report vide C.E. No. 03/202107, Dt. 05.01.2021 opening that the samples are illicitly distilled liquor unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. The remaining ID liquor was produced before the Dy. Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Adilabad for confiscation and after receiving the CE report the property was destroyed on 30.09.2021. Effected the arrest of the accused and released him on bail by issuing Sec. 41A Cr.PC notice. After completion of the investigation, LW3 filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 7(A)r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995.

JFCM

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 3 of 7

4. On the strength of the said charge sheet, this court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP

5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs1 & 2 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 and MO.1. PW's 1 & 2 are the panch witness.

PW3 is the Investigation Officer.

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.PC, for which he pleaded innocence and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides and perused the record.

8. The point for determination is:

" Whether the prosecution has proved its case against the accused

for the charges levelled against him for the offences punishable under

Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond all reasonable

doubt?"

POINT:

9. To make out its case for the offence under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of T.S

Prohibition Act, 1995, the prosecution examined LWs1 and 2, who are the panch witnesses as PW1 & 2. But they did not support the case of prosecution by stating that their do not know anything about this case, The excise police never conducted any panchanama nor

JFCM

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 4 of 7

drew rough sketch in their presence, he further said that the Excise

Officials obtained their signatures on white papers.

During crossexamination, he admitted that he had not examined any neighbours to the accused house to ascertain whether he was selling ID Liquor, he had not examined any customers/persons to say that the accused sold the ID Liquors to customers. PW1 further admitted that he has not collected any documents to show that said house is belongs to the accused.

11. On perusal of the above, it is clear that except for the evidence of the investigation officer i.e., PW3, there is no other supporting evidence to substantiate the prosecution case, due to the hostile of PW1 & PW2 panch witnesses, conducting of panchanama and seizure of case property on 03.09.2021 is remained not proved. PW1 and PW2 did not support the case of the prosecution, he went on extent of saying that the Excise Police obtained their signatures on white papers.

Thus, it is highly unsafe to rely upon the version of PW3 as the

Excise Official is interested in the outcome of the prosecution of the accused without any corroboration of evidence of independent witnesses. Furthermore, it is clear that PW3 did not examine

JFCM

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 5 of 7

neighbours to the house of the accused and also any person to say that they were the customers of accused whose presence could be secured at the scene of offence. It is alleged that PW3 received credible information in the night time and there is no explanation from him for not securing any neighbours as a witnesses.

12. Therefore, there is a delay of nearly about (259) days from the seizure of ID Liquor to issuance of report under Ex.P5. On careful perusal of the Ex.P5, the the date of receipt of sample is kept blank. There is no whisper of explanation about the said delay either in charge sheet or in the version of PW3. There is no evidence to show that samples were kept in proper custody without giving scope for tampering.

At this stage, it is relevant to mention the legal position held in

Accordingly, the point is answered.

JFCM

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 6 of 7

437(A)CrPC. MO.1 is case property deposited vide CP. No. 162/2023 shall be destroyed after lapse of appeal period.

Typed to my dictation by the typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 06 th day of August,2024.

Sd/

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For ProsecutionFor Defence (PW1)Balguri Ellaiah, Panch LW1Witness for confession and NONE seizure (PW2)Merugu Thirupathi, Panch LW2Witness for confession and seizure

PW3 Sri. A. Roop Chand John (LW3)RobertP.&E Sub Inspector, Station Luxettipet

Exhibits marked

Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on confession NIL. cum seizure Panchanama

Ex.P2Signature of PW2 on confession cum seizure Panchanama

Ex.P3COR

JFCM

CC. No. 537 Of 2023 Page No. 7 of 7

Ex.P4Confession cum Seizure Panchanama

Ex.P5C.E Report

MO.1 is empty liquor bottle

Sd/ JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

JFCM

CC/369/2023 Acquitted

The Telangana State through Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Luxettipet vs Lavudya Umadevi, W/o. Ganganna, Age. 45 yrs, R/o. Venkatapur village of Jannaram Mandal

05 Aug 2024

CC. No. 369 Of 2023 Page No. 1 of 6

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, LUXETTIPET

AT :: LUXETTIPET

Present: Sri. Challuri Sampath, Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. FAC: Judicial Magistrate of First Class Luxettipet

Monday, this the 05th day of August,2024

CC No.369 Of 2023

Between:

The Telangana State through Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Luxettipet. (COR. No. 95/2022)

... Complainant

//And//

Bhukya Ramchandar, S/o. Shankar, Age. 37 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Thanimadugu village of Dandepally Mandal. … Accused

This case is coming before on 02.08.2024 this court for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.

K. Bhooma Reddy, learned counsel for the accused, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1. The Prohibition & Excise SubInspector, Luxettipet has filed a charge sheet against the accused in C.O.R No. 174/2019 for the offence punishable under Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.06.2019, on reliable information about the possessing of ID liquor by the accused/Lavudya

JFCM

CC. No. 369 Of 2023 Page No. 2 of 6

Umadevi the LW3/ A. Roop Chand Robert, Proh. & Excise Sub

Inspector of Police, Luxettipet along his staff and mediators i.e., LW1 and 2 (Malyala Mahesh and Lavudya Srinivas) proceeded to

Venkatapur village and conducted raids. During the route watch, at bout 09:10AM, at that time one person moving in suspicious manner along with one bag, When LW3 opened the said bag, and poured said liquid into him hands, on smelling it, it was found that polythene covers it was an ID Liquor. On enquiry, the accused disclosed her particulars and also confessed that she used to buy said ID Liquor from an unknown person to sell the same at a high cost. LW3 found that said the polythene covers contained (03) Litres of I.D Liquor, LW 3 seized the contraband and drew (01) sample of ID liquor in a 180 ml bottle for chemical analysis under the cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators, duly sealing the sample by pasting Panch chits. The Excise officials brought the accused along with seized property to the Excise Station and based on the panchanama a case in COR. No. 174/2019 registered under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995 against the accused.

3. During the course of the investigation, LW3 sent the seized sample to the Chemical Examiner, Nizamabad for analysis and report. After receiving the report vide C.E. No. 539/201902, Dt. 06.08.2019 opening that the samples are illicitly distilled liquor unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. The remaining ID liquor was produced before the Dy. Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Adilabad for confiscation and after receiving the CE report the property was destroyed on 12.02.2020. Effected the arrest of the accused and released her on bail by issuing Sec. 41A Cr.PC notice. After completion of the investigation, LW3 filed charge sheet against the

JFCM

CC. No. 369 Of 2023 Page No. 3 of 6

accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 7(A)r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995.

4. On the strength of the said charge sheet, this court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act, 1995 and issued summons to the accused. On the appearance of the accused before this court, case copies furnished to her duly complying with Sec. 207 Cr.PC and thereafter she is examined under Sec. 239 Cr.PC for the accusation levelled against her under Sec. 7 (A) r/w. 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act, 1995 and the accused pleaded not guilty. The charges framed for the abovesaid offences, were read over and explained to her in vernacular language for which he denied and claimed to be tried.

5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs1& 2 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 and MO.1. PW2 is the panch witnesses. PW1 is the Investigation Officer.

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.PC, for which she pleaded innocence and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides and perused the record.

8. The point for determination is:

" Whether the prosecution has proved its case against the accused

for the charges levelled against her for the offences punishable under

Sec. 7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond all reasonable

doubt?"

POINT:

9. To make out its case for the offence under Sec. 7 (A) r/w 8(e) of T.S

Prohibition Act, 1995, the prosecution examined LW2, who is the panch witness as PW 2. But he did not support the case of prosecution by stating

JFCM

CC. No. 369 Of 2023 Page No. 4 of 6

that he do not know anything about this case, The excise police never conducted any panchanama nor drew rough sketch in their presence, they further said that the Excise Officials obtained their signatures on white papers.

Due to the hostile attitude of PW 2, the learned APPO declared him as hostile witness and cross examined him with the permission of the court but nothing could be elicited in favour of the prosecution.

During crossexamination, he admitted that he had not examined any neighbours to the accused house to ascertain whether she was selling ID

Liquor, he had not examined any customers/persons to say that the accused sold the ID Liquors to customers. PW1 further admitted that he has not collected any documents to show that said house is belongs to the accused.

11. On perusal of the above, it is clear that except for the evidence of the investigation officer i.e., PW1, there is no other supporting evidence to substantiate the prosecution case, due to the hostile of PW2/panch witness, conducting of panchanama and seizure of case property on 18.08.2022 is remained not proved. PW 2 did not support the case of the prosecution, he went on extent of saying that the Excise Police obtained his signature on white paper. Thus, it is highly unsafe to rely upon the version of PW1 as the

Excise Official is interested in the outcome of the prosecution of the accused without any corroboration of evidence of independent witnesses.

Furthermore, it is clear that PW1 did not examine neighbours to the house

JFCM

CC. No. 369 Of 2023 Page No. 5 of 6

of the accused and also any person to say that they were the customers of accused whose presence could be secured at the scene of offence. It is alleged that PW1 received credible information in the night time and there is no explanation from his for not securing any neighbours as a witness.

12. Therefore, there is a delay of nearly about (187) days from the seizure of ID Liquor to issuance of report under Ex.P3. On careful perusal of the

Ex.P3, the the date of receipt of sample is kept blank. There is no whisper of explanation about the said delay either in charge sheet or in the version of

PW1. There is no evidence to show that samples were kept in proper custody without giving scope for tampering.

At this stage, it is relevant to mention the legal position held in

437(A)CrPC. MO.1 is case property deposited vide CP. No. 93/2023 shall be destroyed after lapse of appeal period.

JFCM

CC. No. 369 Of 2023 Page No. 6 of 6

Typed to my dictation by the typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 05 th day of August,2024.

Sd/

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For ProsecutionFor Defence (PW1)Sri.A. Roop Chand John LW3RobertP.&E Sub NONE Inspector, Station Luxettipet (PW2) Lavudya Srinivas LW2 Panch Witness for confession and seizure

Exhibits marked

Ex.P1CORNIL.

Ex.P2Confessioncum Seizure Panchanam

Ex.P3 C.E Report.

Ex.P4Signature of PW2 on Confessioncum Seizure panchanama

MO.1 is empty liquor bottle

Sd/ JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMJUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

LUXETTIPET.

JFCM

Order Record 487 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/9/2023	Kotte Lachaiah, S/o. Mallaiah, Age.62 years, Occ. Agril. vs Yembadi Lachanna, S/o. Venkatrajam, Age.60 years, Occ. Agril	28 Sep 2024	order	Compromised
CC/45/2024	State of Telangana PS. Dandepally vs Srinivas Katkam	28 Sep 2024	order	Convicted
CC/50/2021	State of Telangana PS Dandepalli vs Kotha Sravan kumar	28 Sep 2024	order	Convicted
CC/53/2024	State of Telangana PS. Hajipur vs Abhishek Kumuram	28 Sep 2024	order	Acquitted
CC/64/2024	State of Telangana Ps. Hajipur vs Santosh Parshuram Kosare	28 Sep 2024	order	Acquitted
CC/143/2021	State of Telangana ps Dandepally vs Jadi Ramesh	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/219/2024	State of Telangana ps hajipur vs Anji Kurra	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/261/2024	State of Telangana Ps Dandepalli vs Srinivas Katukam	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/316/2024	State of Telangana,through PS. Hajipur vs Sharadha Jagannatham	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/323/2019	SHO PS Luxettipet vs Gampa Srinivas	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/353/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Karthik Pagidi	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/392/2024	State of Telangana through Ps. Hajipur vs Karthik Pagidi	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/413/2022	State of Telangana PS Hazipur vs Volapu Sharadha	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/461/2023	State of Telangana PS Jannaram vs Kumar Salluri	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/518/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Jannaram vs Sathyam Chetpalli	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/519/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Ravinder Gadikoppula	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/534/2020	State of Telangana PS Luxettipet vs GOURISHETTY SRINIVAS	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/577/2023	State of Telangana through PS. hajipur vs Ravi Medi	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/601/2020	State of Telangana PS Hajipur vs Bapu Dega	28 Sep 2024	order	—
CC/677/2020	State of Telangana PS Luxettipet vs SHAIK MOHIUDDIN	28 Sep 2024	order	—
DVC/14/2023	Medi @ Utnooi Shirisha @ Varshitha, W/o. Medi Ravi, Age.26 years, Occ. Housewife vs Medi Ravi, S/o. Hanmanthu, Age.30 years, Occ. Private Job	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/655/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police, Hajipur vs Kunde Kalyan	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/656/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Kanduri Akash	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/657/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Purnam Shyam Lal	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/658/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Kukkala Srikanth	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/659/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Nagula Malyala Laxman Kumar	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/660/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Dande Rajashekar	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/661/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Revelli Kiran	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/662/2024	State of TelanganaState of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Lingampelli Kumar	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/663/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Bonala Mallesh	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/664/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Revelli Laxman	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/665/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Gummula Venkanna	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/666/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Paidi Shiva Ranjan	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/667/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Rama Sudharshan	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/668/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Upparla Sathish	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/669/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Reddaveni Vamshi	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/670/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Kanakam Praveen Kumar	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/671/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Nalivela Sathish	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/672/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Darani Pawan	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/673/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Surineni Shiva Ramakrishna	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/674/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Sirikonda Rajesham	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/675/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Enaganti Sampath	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/676/2024	State of Telangana through SI of Police,Hajipur vs Ravula Kiran, S/o. Mallesh	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/677/2024	State of Telangana of through PS. Hajipur vs Gummula Narender, S/o. Bapaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/678/2024	State of Telangana of through PS. Hajipur vs Eluka Komuraiah, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/679/2024	State of Telangana of through PS. Hajipur vs Santhosham Raghuvarma C/o. Lachireddy	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/680/2024	State of Telangana of through PS. Hajipur vs Motapalukula Rajaiah, S/o. Ramaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/681/2024	State of Telangana of through PS. Hajipur vs Akudari Pochaiah, S/o. Rajaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/682/2024	State of Telangana of through PS. Hajipur vs Gummula Ailaiah, S/o. Narsaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/683/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Merugu Lachanna, S/o. Rajaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/684/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Nuthi Anil Kumar, S/o. Ramachandram	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/685/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Agurla Raju, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/686/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Chityala Lachaiah,S/o. Rajaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/687/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Alishetti Mahesh, S/o. Shankaraiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/688/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Balguri Rakesh, S/o. Posham	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/689/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Kudarapu Narayana, S/o. Hanumanthu	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/690/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Gopi Thirupathi, S/o. Ramanna	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/691/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Gandhari Naresh, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/692/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Kyasa Srinivas, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/693/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Pugam Balakrishna, S/o. Jaggaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/694/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Sanga Odelu, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/695/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Imdla Chandraiah, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/696/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Aggu Thirupathi, S/o. Ramaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/697/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Parshaneni Gattaiah, S/o. Lingaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/698/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Kampelli Ravi, S/o. Chandraiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/699/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Katham Rathnaiah, S/o. Shankaraiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/700/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Mula Manideep Reddy, S/o. Chandrashekhar Reddy	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/701/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Nimmala Shivaiah, S/o. Venkataiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/702/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Redapaka Prashanth, S/o. Rajaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/703/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Maram Rajireddy, S/o. Ramreddy	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/704/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Banoth Raju, S/o. Amru	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/705/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Potharaveni Ganganna, S/o. Ramulu	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/706/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Katakam Sai Kumar, S/o. Thirupathi	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/707/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Satharapu Namdev, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/708/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Kamera Ramulu, S/o. Posham	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/709/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Kondu Ramesh, S/o. Narayana	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/710/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Hajipur vs Gajalla Ramesh, S/o. Posham	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/711/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Eleshwaram Samaiah, S/o. Balaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/712/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Konga Srinivas, S/o. Annaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/713/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Biyyala Ajay @ Thunugula Ajay, S/o. Sudhkar	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/714/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Ponakanti Ramulu, S/o. Lachaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/715/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Ponnam Srinivas goud, S/o. Bala Goud	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/716/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Badhapuri Sandeep Kumar, S/o. Bapu	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/717/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Bheshpally Mallesh, S/o. Rajam	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/718/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Balavanthula Rajukumar, S/o. Rajesham	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/719/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Jillapelly Abhilash, S/o. Srinvias	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/720/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Kamtam Santhosh, S/o. Rajaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/721/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Mudugam Gangadhar, S/o. Rajalingam	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/722/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Pettem Ramesh, S/o. Rajaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/723/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Bakam Parmesh, S/o. Bheemaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/724/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Kethireddy Ramana Reddy, S/o. Rajeshwar Reddy	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/725/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Parumala Komuraiah, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/726/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Gatika Thirupathi, S/o. Veeraiah,	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/727/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Pettem Suresh, S/o. Mallaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/728/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Motapalukula Ravi, S/o. Lingaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/729/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Dummani Sathaiah, S/o. Ramaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/730/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Bairneni Sathish, S/o. Laxmaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/731/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Bheema Vidya Sagar, S/o. Padmaiah	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/732/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Balijapalli Shankaraiah, S/o. Rayanarsu	28 Sep 2024	order	—
STC/733/2024	State of Telangana through PS. Luxettipet vs Routhu Srinivas, S/o. Laxmaiah,	28 Sep 2024	order	—

Showing 100 of 487 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Sep 2024		356
Aug 2024		9
Jul 2024		26
Jun 2024		85
May 2024		9
Apr 2024		12

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri. Challuri Sampath handled?

Sri. Challuri Sampath has handled 497 court orders since 2023 at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 29 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri. Challuri Sampath hear?

Based on available records, Sri. Challuri Sampath primarily handles Criminal matters (Summary Trial Cases, Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex.

Where is Sri. Challuri Sampath currently posted?

Sri. Challuri Sampath is posted as Junior Civil Judge at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex, Mancherial, Telangana.

Are judgments by Sri. Challuri Sampath available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by Sri. Challuri Sampath are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri. Challuri Sampath dispose cases?

Sri. Challuri Sampath disposes approximately 29 cases per month, based on 497 orders handled over their tenure at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex.

Since when is Sri. Challuri Sampath serving?

Sri. Challuri Sampath has been serving at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex since 2023.

Case Types

STC 72%

CC 23%

OS 2%

RC 2%

EP 1%

PRC 0%

DVC 0%

Posting History

Aug 2024 — Oct 2024

Junior Civil Judge · 357 orders
Apr 2024 — Aug 2024

Junior Civil Judge · 140 orders
May 2023 — May 2023

Junior Civil Judge
May 2023 — May 2023

Junior Civil Judge, Bellampalli

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 7

Convicted 2

Compromised 1

Other Judges at this Court

Mr. Sai Kiran Kasamala

Junior Civil Judge

1,444 orders

← View all judges at Luxettipet, JCJ Court Complex