D Ramakanth L L M

1 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ANDOLE

At JOGIPET.

PRESENT: SRI D.RAMAKANTH,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at Jogipet.

Thursday, Dated this the 14 th day of May, 2015.

C.C.No.138 of 2015

Between:

The State of Telangana, through Sub-Inspector, P.S., Papannapet....Complainant.

And

Uggu Beerappa @ Mallesh S/o. Narsimulu,

Aged: 30 Years, Occ: Coolie, R/o. Nizampet Village,

Narayankhed Mandal, Medak District....Accused.

This case is coming before me on this 14.05.2015 for final hearing in the presence of Sri M.Sekhara Chary, A.P.P for Complainant and Sri M.Lingamaiah,

Advocate/Legal Aid Counsel for the accused and the matter stood over for consideration till this day and this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The accused is indicted for the offences U/Secs.457, 380 R/w. 75 IPC by

Sub-Inspector, P.S., Papannapet in Crime No.05/2015 with following allegations.

2.On 26.11.2014 at 1400 hours, the Complainant/Pw1 namely Jinna

Chandraiah lodged report to Police stating that on that day at 10.30 a.m., himself and his wife Lingamma (Lw2) went outside on works and on their return at 1200 hours, they found that the lock of outer door was broken and after entering into the house and on verification of Almarah, they found that a 4½ Tulas Gold Chain, a 2 Tulas Gold Necklace were stolen by some unknown persons and all the articles inside the Almarah were found in pelmel condition and the worth of the stolen ornaments is Rs.1,50,000/-. Basing on the said report, a case in Cr.No.134/2014 U/Secs.454, 380 IPC is registered. The Police examined Pw1, his wife J.Lingamma (Lw2). On On 26.11.2014 at 3.30 p.m., the Police proceeded to the scene of offence i.e., the house of Pw1 at Narsingi village and observed the scene and prepared a

Panchanama and a Rough Sketch in the presence of mediators and seized an Iron rod. On 2 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015 01.12.2014 at 1730 hours, the Police arrested the accused at Edupayala Kaman at

Papannapet Village and on interrogation conducted in the presence of V.Srinivas (Pw3) and

Mohd. Kaleem (Lw5), the accused confessed that he committed theft of Gold ornaments from the house of Pw1 at Narsingi Village on 26-11-2014 and he also confessed that he committed some more property offences in the limits of Nizamsagar Police Station and suffered conviction in that earlier case of Nizamsagar Police Station. Basing on that confession, the Police seized the stolen Gold ornaments from the accused under the cover of a Confession cum Seizure Panchanama in the presence of said mediators. Later the

Police produced the accused and seized property before this Court and filed charge sheet.

3.The offences punishable U/Secs.457, 380 R/w.75 IPC are taken cognizance against the accused. On production of the accused from Jail, copies were furnished to him

U/Sec.207 Cr.P.C and he is examined U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C. Initially the charge for the offences U/Secs. 457, 380 IPC are read over and explained to the accused and he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Though the charge U/Sec.75 IPC is framed, it is not read over to the accused and it shall be dealt with separately.

4.To prove its case, prosecution examined Pws1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P1 to

P5 and M.Os.1 to 3. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the accused is examined

U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C in respect of incriminating material and he reported no defence. No evidence is adduced on his behalf.

5.Heard the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor and the counsel for accused.

6.Point: Whether the Prosecution has proved the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offences U/Secs.457, 380 R/w.75 IPC ?

7.Point:- To make out its case for the offences U/Secs.457, 380 IPC, 3 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015 prosecution examined Pws1 to 5. The Pw1 is the Complainant and Pw2 is the mediator for recording Scene of Offence Panchanama. The Pw3 is the mediator for recording Confession cum Seizure Panchanama. The Pws4 and 5 are the Investigating Officer.

8.Jinna Chandraiah, Pw1 is the Complainant. He deposed that on 26-11-2014 at 10.30 a.m., himself and his wife went outside on works and at 1200 hours on their return, they found that the lock of the outer door was broken and on verification of Almarah, they found that a 4 Tulas Gold Chain, a 2 Tulas of Gold Necklace were stolen by some unknown persons and the articles inside the Almarah were found in pelmel condition and thus he lodged report to Police as in Ex.P1 and after 1 month, the Police informed about the recovery of stolen articles and thus he obtained M.O.1 i.e., a 4 Tulas Gold Chain and M.O.2 i.e., a 2 Tulas Gold necklace for interim custody from this Court.

9.D.Mallesham, Pw2 deposed that on 26-11-2014 at 3.00 p.m., the Police visited the house of Pw1 in respect of theft committed in his house and observed the scene and seized an Iron rod i.e., M.O.3 and prepared a Scene of Offence cum Seizure

Panchanama (Ex.P2) and a Rough Sketch (Ex.P3) and he along with Lw4 Penta Goud attested the same.

10.V.Srinivas, Pw3 deposed that on 01-12-2014 at 05.30 p.m., the Police secured himself Lw5 Mohd. Kaleem at Edupayala Kaman and they found the accused with

Police and on the request of Police, they enquired the accused wherein he confessed that few days prior to that date he committed theft of Gold ornaments in the house of Pw1 at

Narsingi village and also confessed some other offences committed by him in the limits of

Nizamsagar Police Station. As per the Pw3, on such confession the Police seized the stolen

Gold articles from the accused and recorded a Confession cum Seizure Panchanama to that effect as in Ex.P4 and they attested the same.

4 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

11.K.Srikanth, Pw5 deposed that on 26.11.2014 at 1400 hours, on receiving report from Pw1, he registered this case under Ex.P5 and examined Pw1 and handed over the record to Pw4 in view of the gravity of the case. B.Kishan Kumar, Pw4 deposed that on receiving record from Pw5, he examined Pw1 and his wife and on 26.11.2014 at 3.30 p.m., he visited the scene of offence and prepared Panchanama (Ex.P2) and Rough Sketch (Ex.P3) in the presence of mediators and recovered an Iron rod i.e., M.O.3. The Pw4 further stated that on 01.12.2014 at 1730 hours, he arrested the accused at Edupayala Kaman and on interrogation conducted in the presence of mediators, the accused confessed that he committed theft of Gold ornaments from the house of Pw1 at Narsingi Village on 26-11- 2014 and that he also committed some more property offences in the limits of Nizamsagar

Police Station and suffered conviction and on such confession, he seized the stolen Gold ornaments from the accused under a Confession cum Seizure Panchanama I.e., Ex.P4 and he produced the accused before this Court along with seized property.

12.On careful perusal of the above evidence, it is clear that the evidence of Pw1 is showing about the theft of Gold ornaments from his house at Narsingi Village on 26.11.2014 and about his lodging report to Police. The evidence of Pw2, the mediator for recording the Scene of Offence Panchanama, Rough Sketch and contents of said documents marked as Exs.P2 and P3 are clearly proves the visiting of the scene of offence by the

Police and the recording of said documents at that place. However, it is clear from the evidence of Pw1 that he is not a direct or eye witness to the theft in his house. To prove the charge for the offences U/Secs.454, 380 IPC, the trespass into the house of Pw1 and removal of property by accused from the possession of owner, is to be directly established.

Here, there is no direct or eye witness to prove the ingredients for said offences. The prosecution relied upon the confession of accused to connect him with the offence of lurking into the house of Pw1 and commission of theft. However, the confession of the accused under Ex.P4 cannot be based to uphold the prosecution case as it was recorded in the immediate presence of Police and thus it is hit U/Sec.25 and 26 of Indian Evidence 5 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

Act. Therefore, I hold that the prosecution could not make out the ingredients of the offences U/Secs.454, 380 IPC against the accused.

13.As per the provisions of Sec.222 Cr.P.C., when the offence proved forms the part of the offence charged, the accused is liable to be convicted for such proved charge.

The offence U/Sec.411 IPC is an integral part of the offence U/Sec.380 IPC. Here it is the case of the prosecution that the accused was apprehended by Pw4 while he was in possession of the stolen Gold ornaments. The Pw3, mediator clearly stated about the recovery of stolen property from the possession of accused. The Pw3 clearly stated that the

Police arrested the accused and recorded his confession and seized stolen Gold ornaments from him under a panchanama marked as Ex.P4. The evidence of Pw3 corroborates the evidence of Investigating Officer examined as Pw4, who stated that he arrested the accused and seized stolen property from his possession. The evidence of Pw3 and the seizure part of panchanama marked as Ex.P4, fully supports the version of Pw4 and though the Pws3 and 4 were cross examined at length, no material could be elicited to discredit their version.

Thus, the evidence of Pws3 and 4 inspires confidence in prosecution case as to the seizure of stolen property from the possession of accused. As the Pw3 clearly stated about the recovery of stolen property from the possession of accused, I hold that the prosecution could establish about the seizure of stolen Gold ornaments from the accused.

14.The evidence of Pws3 and 4 and the contents of seizure part of panchanama under Ex.P4, are clearly proving that the Police arrested the accused, while in possession of stolen property. The accused from whom the stolen Gold ornaments are said to have been recovered, failed to furnish the account for having possession of the same. As the accused could not furnish the account for the property found in his possession, I hold that a presumption is to be drawn U/Sec.114(a) of Indian Evidence Act., that the property recovered from the accused is the stolen property within the meaning of Sec.410 IPC.

Therefore, I am of the view that there is cogent evidence on record to prove that the stolen 6 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

Gold ornaments were seized by Police from the possession of accused, for which he could not furnish the account. Thus, the prosecution though could not make out a case U/Secs.454 and 380 IPC, could successfully prove the guilt of accused for an offence U/Sec.411 IPC.

15.Having regard to the above facts and circumstances and considering the evidence of Pws1 to 5 and the contents of Ex.P4, I hold that prosecution successfully established the guilt of the accused for an offence U/Sec.411 IPC and he is to be convicted accordingly.

16.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences U/Secs.454, 380 IPC, but he is found guilty for an offence U/Sec.411 IPC and he is convicted U/Sec.

248(2) Cr.P.C.

Prepared by myself, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 14th day of May, 2015.

JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

17.As the accused is also charged U/Sec.75 IPC for enhanced punishment, the portion of examination U/Sec.239 Cr.P.C to the extent of previous conviction suffered by the accused as pleaded by the prosecution is read over and explained to the accused and he denied the same. The content of charge for the offence U/Sec. 75 IPC is now read over and explained to the accused and he claimed to be tried to that extent.

18.Thus the prosecution examined the Pw5 in further to prove the charge U/Sec.

75 IPC and got marked Ex.P6 i.e., the certified copy of Judgment in C.C.No.270/2014 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Banswada of Nizamabad District.

7 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

19.After closure of the additional evidence by prosecution, the accused is re- examined U/Sec. 313 Cr.P.C to the extent of additional incriminating material and he denied the same and pleaded no defence.

20.Heard both sides in further.

21.Point No.2: Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused

for the offence U/Sec. 75 IPC beyond all reasonable doubt ?

22.Point No.2: The Ex.P6 and the evidence of Pw5 clearly shows that the accused herein was found guilty for the offences U/Secs.457, 380 IPC and he was convicted to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 2 ½ (Two and half months) each for the said offences and also to pay a fine of Rs.100/- each for the said offences and in default to suffer a simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month each and all the sentences to run concurrently. The Ex.P6 reads that the accused was tried for committing theft at Gangamma

Temple at Nizamsagar Project on 16-07-2014 and he was convicted by the above said

Court. As per the Pw5, the said Judgment of conviction was not challenged by the accused

before the appellate Court therein and thus the said conviction has become final. In view of

the documentary evidence available under Ex.P6 and in view of the contents therein, I hold that it is proved beyond doubt that the accused was tried for the offence U/Sec.457, 380

IPC by Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Banswada in C.C.No.270/2014 and he was convicted by the said Court on 14.10.2014 and the said conviction was not set aside by any competent Court. Thus, I hold that the prosecution successfully established its case against the accused even for the offence U/Sec.75 IPC and in view of the Provisions therein, the accused is liable to be convicted by awarding enhanced punishment.

23.Thus, the accused is further found guilty for the offence U/Sec.75 IPC and he is convicted U/Sec. 248(3) Cr.P.C.

8 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

Prepared by myself, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 14th day of May, 2015.

JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

Plea of the Accused on Conviction:

The accused is questioned as to the quantum of the sentence being imposed on him and he pleaded that he is doing agricultural labour works and he is having old aged mother, wife and two children, who are solely depending upon him and thus sought to take a lenient view in imposing the sentence upon him. Heard the counsel for the accused and the learned APP in respect of the quantum of sentence to be imposed on the accused. In the above discussion, it is found that the accused was found in possession of stolen property and he could not furnish any account for the same. It is also found that the accused suffered a previous conviction for a property offence on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Banswada of Nizambad District in C.C.No.270/2014 dated: 14-10-2014 and the said conviction has become final. However, the record in C.C.No.270/2014 shows that the property involved in that case is only a cash of Rs.200/- which is a petty small amount. In the present case, it was found that the accused was found in possession of huge valuable

Gold Ornaments for which he could not furnish any account. Keeping in view of the facts of the case and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to extend the benefits of Sec.3 and 4 of P.O. Act or of Sec.360 of Cr.P.C to the accused. However, considering the worth of property involved in this case as well as in the previous case in which he suffered conviction and also considering the age of the accused and his plea as to his family background in mind, I hold that it is a fit case to pass adequate sentence with in the power of this Court and thus the accused is liable to receive the punishment which shall equate and commensurate with the gravity of the offence.

9 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offence U/Sec.411 IPC and he is convicted U/Sec.248(2) Cr.P.C. and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6 months (Six Months Only). The accused is further found guilty for the offence

U/Sec.75 IPC having suffered conviction for the ofence U/Sec.457, 380 IPC by a competent Court of law and he is convicted U/Sec.248(3) Cr.P.C. and sentenced to suffer a rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 months (Four Months Only), which shall be in addition to the principal sentence passed for the offence U/Sec.411 IPC. Both the sentences for a period of 10 months (Ten Months Only) shall run consecutively i.e., one after the other. The remand period of the accused from 02.12.2014 till date i.e., 14.05.2015 shall be given set off U/Sec.428 Cr.P.C. The case properties in C.P.R.No.715/15/2015 i.e., M.O.1

Gold Chain of 4 Tulas, M.O.2 Gold Necklace of 2 Tulas are already returned to Pw1 vide orders in Crl.M.P. No.03/2015 dated 05.01.2015 and the said orders shall be absolute after the expiry of appeal time. The M.O.3 i.e., an Iron Rod in C.P.R.No.715/15/2015 shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time. The office is directed to furnish the free copy of judgment to the accused forthwith. The accused is also informed about the forum of appeal and the limitation.

Prepared by myself, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 14th day of May, 2015.

JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Pw1 J.Chandraiah. --None--

Pw2 D.Mallesham.

Pw3 V.Srinivas.

Pw4 B.Kishan Kumar, IO, C.I.

Pw5 K.Srikanth, IO, S.I.

EXHIBITS MARKED

Ex.P1 Report of Pw1.--Nil-- 10 Of 10 C.C.No.138 of 2015

Ex.P2 Scene of Offence Panchanama.

Ex.P3 Rough Sketch.

Ex.P4 Confession cum Seizure Panchanama.

Ex.P5 FIR in Cr.No.134/2014.

M.O. MARKED:

M.O.1: Gold Chain of 4 Tulas.

M.O.2 : Gold Necklace of 2 Tulas.

M.O.3: Iron Rod.

JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

1 Of 4P.R.C.No. 27 of 2015

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

PRESENT: SRI D.RAMAKANTH.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jogipet.

Wednesday, Dated this the 20 th day of May, 2015.

P.R.C.No.27 of 2015

Between:

The State of Telangana., through SHO, P.S.Papannapet...Complainant

And

1. Peddapapani Sailu, S/o. Mallaiah, Age: 30 years, Occ: Agril,

2. Hanmanthu Lingaiah, S/o. Devaiah, Age: 55 years, Occ: Agril,

3. Muthyamgari Mallikarjun @ Ramesh, S/o. Venkaiah,

Age: 25 years, Occ: Private Job,

All are R/o. Kusangi Village, Tekmal Mandal, Medak District....Accused

This case is coming before me on this 20.05.2015 for final hearing in the presence of Sri M.Shekara Chary, A.P.P for Complainant and of Sri. S.Krishna

Reddy, Advocate for the accused and the matter stood over for consideration till this day and this court delivered the following:

ORDER

The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S. Papannapet filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.35/2015 of P.S. Papannapet for the offence U/Sec. 306 R/w. 34

I.P.C with following allegations.

2.On 13.03.2015 at 2030 hours, the Complainant/Lw1 namely Godari

Bhomavva lodged report to Police, stating that the accused No.1 obtained her land

Patta pass book and basing on that obtained loan from Bank and purchased a New

Tractor in the year 2011 and promised to return the Pass book with in two years, but 2 Of 4P.R.C.No. 27 of 2015 he failed to keep his promise. It is alleged that later the husband of the

Complainant/Lw1 Godari Danaiah several times requested the Accused No.1 to return his land pass book, but the Accused No.1 put a deaf ear and though the matter was placed before the elders, there was no response from the side of Accused No.1.

It is stated that being vexed with the attitude of the Accused No.1, Godari Danaiah brought the trolley of the said tractor and kept the same at his fields and asked the

Accused No.1 to return the land Pass book and to take the said trolley, but the

Accused No.1 stolen away the said trolley and Godari Danaiah again brought the said trolley with the help of the villagers and the Accused No.1 confessed before the elders that he committed theft of the said tractor trolley and also assured to reimburse Rs.50,000/- spent by Godari Danaiah in search of his stolen tractor and the Accused Nos.2 and 3 herein stood as guarantors for the said payment by the

Accused No.1. It is further alleged that inspite of said promise, all the accused failed to pay the amounts to Godari Danaiah and though Godari Danaiah several times requested all the accused for the said amounts, they harassed him and asked to die and to complained anybody and due to such harassment on 13.03.2015 at 9.00 a.m.,

Godari Danaiah committed suicide by hanging in the fields of one Hanumanthu

Lingaiah. It is alleged that only due to the cheating and harassment caused by the accused persons, the said Gadari Danaiah committed suicide. The Police registered the said report as a case in Cr.No.35/2015 U/Sec.306 R/w 34 IPC. The Police examined the Complainant/Lw1 and other witnesses and conducted the Inquest

Panchanama on the corpse of the deceased and sent the dead body for postmortem.

The postmortem report of the deceased revealed that the cause of his death is due to hanging. The Police also visited the Scene of Offence and conducted a Scene of 3 Of 4P.R.C.No. 27 of 2015

Offence Panchanama and prepared Rough Sketch in the presence of the mediators and got photographed the scene of offence. On 17-03-2015 the Police arrested the accused and produced them before this Court. On receipt of postmortem report and on completion of investigation, the charge sheet is filed.

3.The charge sheet as filed is taken cognizance for the offence U/Sec.

306 R/w. 34 I.P.C against both the accused. On appearance of accused, the copies of the charge sheet and other documents were furnished on the accused U/Sec.207

Cr.P.C and their committal bonds are obtained.

4.Heard both sides. The record prima facie shows a case for the offence

U/Sec.306 R/w. 34 I.P.C against all the accused. As the offence U/Sec.306 I.P.C is exclusively triable by the Court of Hon’ble Sessions Judge, I, therefore, commit the case to the said Court U/Sec.209(a) Cr.P.C.

5.The accused who are already released on bail, are directed to appear

before the Hon’ble Sessions Court on 24.06.2015.

6.The entire case record and properties, if any shall be submitted to the

Hon’ble Sessions Court, U/Sec.209(c)Cr.P.C.

7.The Public prosecutor concerned, be informed about the commitment of the case to the Hon’ble Sessions Court U/Sec.209(d) Cr.P.C.

4 Of 4P.R.C.No. 27 of 2015

8.When questioned, the accused stated that they got means to engage counsel in the Court of the Sessions.

9. In the result, the case is committed to the Court of Sessions U/Sec.

209 Cr.P.C.

Typed by Sri.B.Sham Kumar, Typist., on my dictation, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court, this the 20th day of May, 2015.

JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE

ANDOLE at JOGIPET

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL

JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE

ANDOLE at JOGIPET

TSSN060003272015

Presented on : 18-05-2015 Registered on : 18-05-2015 Decided on : 18-05-2015 Duration : 0 years, 0 months, 0 days

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

AT ANDOLE

STC/86/2015

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION): T. Vijay Rao SI of Police Jogipet Through Police Station Officer Siddipet I Town 31, Station house officer of PS Jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

T. Vijay Rao SI of Police Jogipet VERSUS : Alluri Murali Age: 0 Occupation : Ro Rajampet Village of Sangareddy Mandal, Medak District. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: , Advocate for appearing for Alluri Murali Advocate appearing for , respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 185M.V.Act1985 of MOTOR

VEHICLES ACT,

of , of , of ,

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 18-05-2015)

ORDER

Accused is produced through P.C.No. 521 of PS Jogipet and he is examined U/Sec 251 Cr.P.C and the accusation for the offence U/Sec. 185 M.V.Act is read over and explained to him, for which he voluntarily pleaded guilty and submitted that he is doing private job and having the burden to maintain wife and two children and sought to take a lenient view in imposing sentence. \ Since the accused admitted his guilt voluntarily and in view of the facts and the circumstances of the case, I found the plea of the accused a voluntary one and in my view it is a fit case to take a lenient view in imposing sentence. \ In the result, I found the accused guilty for the offence U/Sec. 185 M.V.Act and is convicted U/Sec. 252 Cr.P.C and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) for the said offence and in default of payment of fine, he shall suffer a simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the said offence. Total fine of Rs. 2000/-

Date : 18-05-2015 Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

Junior Civil

Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

TSSN060007492014

Presented on : 17-12-2014 Registered on : 17-12-2014 Decided on : 20-05-2015 Duration : 0 years, 5 months, 3 days

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

AT ANDOLE

DVC/2/2014

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION): M. Swaroopa Through Police Station Officer , Ro Andole Village and Mandal, Medak District.

ANDOLE MEDAK

M. Swaroopa VERSUS : Mora Venkamma Age: 0 Occupation : Ro H.No. 3-63 Chinna Gahanapuram Village of Kolcharam Mandal.

2:Mora Krishna Age: 0 Occupation : Ro H.No. 3-63 Chinna Ghanapur Village of Kolcharam Mandal 3:Swapna Age: 0 Occupation : Ro Variguntham Village of Kolcharam Mandal 4:Lalitha Age: 0

Occupation : Ro Variguntham Village of Kolcharam Manda ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: , Advocate for appearing for Mora Venkamma Advocate , , appearing for , , , 2, 3, 4 respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 18,19,20,21and22ofPWDVAct,2005 of

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE,

of , of , of ,

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 20-05-2015)

ORDER

Petitioner and R2 present. Petitioner and Respondent filed a Joint memo stating that they are living together and thus the Petitioner is with drawing the petition and the contents of said memo are explained to the petitioner and Respondent and they consented for the same. Hence this memo is recorded and the petition is dismissed as with drawn. No costs.

Date : 20-05-2015 Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

Junior Civil

Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

TSSN060004132014

Presented on : 16-08-2014 Registered on : 16-08-2014 Decided on : 30-05-2015 Duration : 0 years, 9 months, 14 days

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

AT ANDOLE ,MEDAK

(Presided Over by Mr. MOHAMMAD ASADULLA SHAREEF)

CC/324/2014

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION): Sallapally Deevena Through Police Station Officer Thoguta 90, Ro Narsingi village of Papannapet Mandal.

ANDOLE MEDAK

Sallapally Deevena VERSUS : Sallapally Sanjeevulu Age: 0 Occupation : Ro Karampally village of Tekmal Mandal.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: , Advocate for S.Krishna reddy appearing for Sallapally Sanjeevulu Advocate appearing for , respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 498AIPC of INDIAN PENAL CODE, of , of , of ,

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 30-05-2015)

ORDER

Accused and Victim/Lw1 present. They were already permitted to compound the offence U/Sec 498-A IPC on 24-2-2015. The parties stated that they compromised the matter amicably. Hence the compromise is recorded at Lok adalat. In the result, the accused is acquitted U/sec 320 (8) Cr.P.C for the offence U/Sec 498-A IPC and their bail bonds shall stands cancelled and they are shall stands cancelled and they are shall be set at liberty.

Date : 30-05-2015 Junior

Civil Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at jogipet