Smt. D.sadhana

Prl District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar

Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex · Karimnagar · Telangana

Smt. D.SADHANA, Prl District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, is posted at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex, Karimnagar, Telangana, India. 785 court orders on record since 2023. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles MVOP, ARBEP, EP cases.

785

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/400037/2018

Thandavaram @ Chittampally Kavitha vs Vodnala Rajaiah

27 Feb 2026

Fair 1 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE CHAIRMAN, L.R.A.T – CUM -

II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AT : KARIMNAGAR

PRESENT: Smt D.SADHANA, Chairman, L.R.A.T–Cum- II Addl. District Judge, Karimnagar.

Friday, the 27th day of February, 2026

O.S No.37 of 2018

Between:-

Thandavaram @ Chittampally Kavitha, W/o.Shiva Krishna, Age: 33 years, Occ: Household, R/o.H.No.10-4-121/1, Meeseva Center, Bank Colony, Karimnagar. Plaintiff

AND

1)Vodnala Rajaiah (Died on 04.01.2021)

2)Vodnala Koteshwar, W/o.Rajaiah, Age: 39 years, Occ: Agriculture & Upa Sarpanch of Vallampahad village, R/o.H.No.1-23, Vallampahad village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

3)Thota Jalaja, W/o.Satyanarayana, Age: 50 years, Occ: Household, R/o.H.No.1-122, Yedlapalle village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

4)Penchala Anjali, W/o.Laxman, Age: 45 years, Occ: Household, R/o.H.No.6-87, Nagnoor village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

5)Gandla Nirmala, W/o.Narsinga Rao, Age: 43 years, Occ: Household, R/o.Kachapur village of Koheda Mandal of Siddipet District.

(The Defendants No.3 to 5 are brought on record as per the orders passed in I.A No.446/2022, dated 12.10.2022)

Defendants

Fair 2 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

This Suit is coming before me on 09-12-2025 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P.Hanmantha Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff, Sri P.Lachi Reddy, Advocate for Defendants No.2 to 5 and the suit against Defendant No.1 is abated, upon hearing the arguments of both sides, upon perusing the material papers on record and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:- :: J U D G M E N T ::

1.This suit is filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale

dated 16.02.2017 directing the defendants No.1 and 2 to execute

registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff with respect to the suit land i.e., an extent of Ac.0-04 guntas in Sy.No.152/A situated at

Vallampahad revenue village of Karimnagar Mandal and District or in alternative direct the defendants No.1 and 2 to return the advance amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) to the plaintiff along with interest @ of 24% per annum from the date of the agreement of sale till realization of the amount.

2.1.The brief averments of the plaint are that the defendant No.1 is the owner and possessor of the suit schedule agricultural dry land to an extent of Ac.0-04 guntas in Sy.No.152/A situated at Vallampahad revenue village of Karimnagar Mandal and District (hereinafter referred to as suit schedule land). Defendant No.2 is the son of

Fair 3 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 defendant No.1 and they both entered into an agreement of sale on 16.02.2017 with plaintiff to sell the suit schedule land for

Rs.4,40,000/- (Rupees four lakhs and forty thousand only) per gunta, thus for total sale consideration of Rs.17,60,000/- (Rupees seventeen lakhs and sixty thousand only). On the same day plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs ony) as advance to defendants No.1 and 2 for which the defendants No.1 and 2 executed agreement of sale and separate receipt in favour of plaintiff. The said agreement of sale and receipt are attested by S.Srinivas, T.Shiva

Krishna and A.Satyanarayana Reddy.

2.2.It is submitted that as per the agreement of sale the remaining sale consideration amount to be paid on 13.05.2017, 13.06.2017 and 30.06.2017 an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-, Rs.3,20,000/- and

Rs.4,40,000/- respectively. Further, as per the agreement of sale, the defendants No.1 and 2 promised to bring the daughters of defendant

No.1 and sisters of the defendant No.2 namely Penchala Anjali, Thota

Jalaja and Gandla Nirmala and execute registered sale deed by all of them in favour of plaintiff.

Fair 4 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 2.3.The plaintiff, as per the agreement of sale went to the house of the defendants and requested them to receive the amount on 13.05.2017, 13.06.2017 and 30.06.2017 but the defendants postponed the matter on false promise to survey and fix the boundaries by the Mandal Surveyor in Sy.No.152/A. Finally on 27.03.2018, plaintiff requested defendant Nos.1 and 2 to receive the balance sale consideration of Rs.12,60,000/- (Rupees twelve lakhs and sixty thousand only) but they refused to receive the said amount and execute registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff. On that, the plaintiff has deposited the said amount in her bank account bearing

No.91600078058111 in Axis Bank, Vavilalapally Branch, Karimnagar and in Account No.21860110010266 in UCO Bank, Karimnagar

Branch and she is ready to pay the same to the defendants when demanded. Plaintiff vexed over the attitude of the defendant Nos.1 and 2 got issued legal notice to them on 31.03.2018 to receive the remaining sale consideration and execute the registered sale deed.

The said legal notice was served on the defendants and a reply notice was sent on 13.04.2018 by defendant No.2 denying the agreement of sale and trying to alienate the suit schedule land to others to create multiplicity of proceedings and to cause loss to the plaintiff. Hence prayed to decree the suit.

Fair 5 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 3.1.Defendants No.1 and 2 filed written statement contending that the suit plot is originally owned and possessed by Penchala Anjali who is the second daughter of the defendant No.1, the same was informed to plaintiff that the suit land was given to his daughter, Penchala

Anjali under registered gift deed document No.11479/05 and defendants No.1 and 2 have no right over the suit plot. Inspite of knowing the said facts, the mediator namely, S.Srinivas insisted to enter into an agreement fixing sale price of Rs.4,40,000/- (Rupees four lakhs and forty thousand only) per gunta and an agreement is executed by defendant No.1 and 2 on 16.02.2017 at the instance of plaintiff and her mediator namely S.Srinivas.

3.2.It is submitted that plaintiff transferred amount of

Rs.5,00,000/- to the account of S.Srinivas and the said Srinivas in turn transferred only Rs.1,95,000/- (Rupees one lakh and ninety five thousand only) to the account of defendant No.1 on 17.02.2018.

The plaintiff and said Srinivas did not pay any amount of cash to the defendants. As per the agreement balance amount has to be paid in three installments but no amount is paid to the defendants. The plaintiff requesting defendants to receive entire sale consideration of

Rs.12,60,000/- (Rupees twelve lakhs and sixty thousand only) is false

Fair 6 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 and created for the purpose of this case and the defendants have no knowledge about keeping the money in the accounts of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff and S.Srinivas are in collusion and they have not paid

Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) to the defendants and the alleged cause of action is created basing on the unenforceable document.

3.3.It is submitted that, in fact, the defendant No.1 was the lawful owner of the land in Sy.No.152/A and out of the said land, road was formed and defendants gifted Ac.0-09 guntas to Gandla Nirmala, an extent of Ac.0-07 guntas is gifted to Penchala Anjali and an extent of

Ac.0-07 guntas of land is gifted to another daughter namely Thota

Jalaja. Thus, the defendants are left with no land in Sy.No.152/A to alienate the same and defendants No.1 and 2 have no legal right or interest over the suit plot, hence the alleged agreement dated 16.02.2017 is void and unenforceable under law.

3.4. Further, the suit plot with given boundaries claimed by the plaintiff is part of the land gifted to Penchala Anjali. The land abutting to 30 feet road on northern side and 15 feet road on western side to an extent of Ac.0-09 guntas in Sy.No.152/A is owned and possessed

Fair 7 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 by Gandla Nirmala. On its southern side an extent of Ac.0-03 guntas is sold by Penchala Anjali to Beeram Rama and Ac.0-02 guntas to other third party and also gifted Ac.0-02 guntas to her daughter,

Mounika at the at the time of her marriage in 2018 and they are in possession of the same and the said Penchala Anjali is left with no land with her. Thus the suit land with given boundaries is not owned or possessed by defendants No.1 and 2 and cannot perform the agreement of sale and the plaintiff is well aware of the same, as such, the plaintiff has no legal right to seek the relief of specific performance in respect of suit plot. Hence prayed to dismiss the suit with costs.

4.During the course of suit proceedings, the defendant No.1 died on 04.01.2021, hence the suit against defendant No.1 is abated. The legal heirs of defendant No.1 are brought on record as defendants

No.3 to 5 as per the orders passed in I.A No.446 of 2022 dated 12.10.2022. The defendants No.3 to 5 filed memo on 31.10.2022 adopting the written statement filed by the defendants No.1 and 2.

5.Basing on the rival pleadings, the following issues are framed:

1)Whether the plaintiff has paid Rs.5,00,000/- to defendants as part of sale consideration?

Fair 8 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

2)Whether the plaintiff is entitled for specific performance of contract?

3)To what relief?

6.To prove her case, the plaintiff examined herself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A16 and examined PW2 on her behalf. The defendant No.2 examined himself as DW1 and got marked Ex.B1 to

B7. Defendant No.4 examined herself as DW2.

7.Heard both Counsels and perused the record.

ISSUE No.1:

8.The plea of plaintiff is that defendant No.1 and 2 executed an agreement of sale in her favour with respect to suit schedule land on 16.02.2017 and she paid an advance sale consideration of

Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) for which a separate receipt is issued to her by defendant No.1 and 2.

9.On the other hand, the contention of defendant Nos.1 and 2 is plaintiff/PW1 transferred amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to the account of

S.Srinivas and the said Srinivas in turn transferred only

Fair 9 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

Rs.1,95,000/- on 17.02.2017 to the account of defendant No.1 and plaintiff did not pay any amount of cash to the defendants.

10.Plaintiff examined herself as PW1 and reiterated the plaint pleadings in her chief examination affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to

A16. Ex.A1 is the agreement of sale dated 16.02.2017. A perusal of

Ex.A1 shows defendant Nos.1 executed an agreement of sale on 16.02.2017 in favour of plaintiff stating that the extent Ac.0.04 guntas in Survey No.152/A is agreed to be sold for Rs.4,40,000/- per gunta and defendant No.2 also signed on the agreement of sale.

The suit schedule land is mentioned as 2nd bit from 30 feet road leading from T.G.Bhavan to Vallampahad and leaving 15 feet road from 1st bit and a rough sketch is also drawn in Ex.A1. The total sale consideration is to be paid in installments ie. Rs,5,00,000/- on 16.02.2017, Rs.5,00,000/- on 13.05.2017, Rs.3,20,000/- on 13.06.2017 and the remaining Rs.4,40,000/- by the end of 30th June and get the execution of the registered sale deed. It is agreed by defendant No.1and 2, at the time of registration, the daughters of defendant No.1 namely Vodnala Anjali, Thota Jalaja and Gandla

Nirmala will also be present at the time of registration and put their signatures and execute registered sale deed. The elders, S.Srinivas,

Fair 10 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

T.Shiva Krishna and A.Satyanarayana Reddy signed as witnesses.

Ex.A2 is the receipt dated 16.02.2017 issued by defendant No.1 and 2 for Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) received from plaintiff towards the first installment as per the agreement of sale/ExA1 and the said same elders signed as witnesses.

11.During cross examination, PW1 stated defendant No.1 has agreed to sell plot No.2 to her and executed agreement of sale on 16.02.2017 and the suit schedule land is mentioned and reflecting in

Ex.A1, she gave advance amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to defendant No.1 and 2 and denied the suggestion that she has not paid Rs.5,00,000/- to defendant No.1 and 2 and gave to Srinivas as advance and in turn

Srinivas gave only Rs.1,95,000/- to defendant No.1 through RTGS from his bank account on 17.02.2017 and further denied that she never gave Rs.5,00,000/- in cash to defendant No.1 and 2.

12.One of the attestors signed as witnesses to Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 is examined as PW2 and during his cross examination stated on 16.02.2017 plaintiff and her husband paid Rs.5,00,000/- to Srinivas and Defendant No.2 and after counting, they in turn handed over to defendant No.1. He denied the suggestion that plaintiff and her

Fair 11 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 husband not paid any amount in cash to defendant No.1 and that defendants No.1 and 2 have not received any advance sale consideration as stated in Ex.A2.

13.Defendant No.2 examined himself as DW1. During his cross examination admitted that himself and his father signed on Ex.A1 and

Ex.A2. The receipt/Ex.A2 is for Rs.5,00,000/- and no prudent person would sign on the receipt without receiving the amount that too huge amount of Rs.5,00,000/-. Further, defendants except pleading that said Srinivas transferred only Rs.1,95,000/- into the account of defendant No.1 on 17.02.2017, did not file any document showing the transfer of Rs.1,95,000/- only into the account of defendant No.1 by

S.Srinivas on 17.02.2017. From the evidence of PW1, PW2 and the admission of DW1 as to the signing on Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 by himself and his late father Vodnala Rajaiah/defendant No.1, it is obvious that defendant Nos.1 and 2 executed Ex.A1 and Ex.A2. Thus, all these circumstances improbabalise the case of defendants that

Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) is not received as advance sale consideration and probabalise the case of the plaintiff that defendant

No.1 and 2 has entered into an agreement of sale dated 16.02.2017/Ex.A1 in favour of plaintiff/PW1 agreeing to sell suit

Fair 12 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 schedule land at Rs.4,40,000/-per gunta and plaintiff has paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as part sale consideration to defendant

Nos.1 and 2 out of total sale consideration of Rs.17,60,000/- for which defendants No.1 and 2 has passed a separate receipt under

Ex.A2. Accordingly the issue is answered in favour of plaintiff and against defendants.

ISSUE No.2:

14.The case of the plaintiff is that she has verified the revenue records pertaining to the suit schedule land to ascertain the ownership of defendant No.1. Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 are the pahanies for the Fasli years 1426 and 1427 equivalent to the year 2016 and 2017 respectively dated 26.03.2018. A perusal of Ex.A3 and Ex.A4, shows total extent of Ac.0-30 guntas in Sy.No.152A of Vallampahad village, out of which, defendant No.1 is holding an extent of Ac.0-05 guntas, defendant No.3 is holding Ac.0-07 guntas, defendant No.5 is holding

Ac.0-09 guntas and defendant No.4 is holding Ac.0-09 guntas. Ex.A5 is the statement of encumbrance of the suit schedule land for the period from 01.01.1989 to 26.04.2018 shows gift settlement deeds executed by defendant No.1 and 2 in favour of defendant No.2 to 3.

Fair 13 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

On 27.03.2018, plaintiff finally requested defendants No.1 and 2 to receive the balance sale consideration of Rs.12,60,000/- (Rupees twelve lakhs and sixty thousand only) and execute registered sale deed in her favour but the defendants refused to receive the said amount. On 31.03.2018 got issued legal notice to defendant Nos.1 and 2. Ex.A6 is the office copy of the legal notice dated 31.03.2018.

Ex.A7 is the two original postal receipts. Ex.A12 is the original returned postal acknowledgment cards of defendant No.1 and 2.

The defendant No.2 issued reply notice. Ex.A11 is the reply notice

dated 13.04.2018.

15.On refusal to receive the balance sale consideration, plaintiff deposited the said amounts into joint account No.916010078058111 of Axis Bank Branch at Vavilalapally, Karimnagar and in Account

No.21860110010266 of UCO Bank, Branch Karimnagar. Ex.A8 to

Ex.A10, Ex.A13 and Ex.A15 are the attested copies of the statement of account of joint account of plaintiff and her husband in Axis Bank

Account No.916010078058111 pertaining to the period 01.04.2018 to 31.02.2019. Ex.A14 is the original deposit receipt of Axis Bank for

Rs.5,48,000/- (Rupees five lakhs and forty eight thousand only) dated 28.11.2018 in the name of plaintiff. Ex.A16 is the original deposit

Fair 14 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 receipt of the UCO Bank for Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only)

dated 12.12.2022 in the name of plaintiff.

16.The contention of defendants is defendant No.1 was the lawful owner of land in Sy.No.152/A and out of the said land, after road was formed, he gifted land to his daughters and left with no land in

Sy.No.152/A to alienate the same. Thus, defendants No.1 and 2 have no legal right or interest over the suit land, hence the alleged agreement of sale dated 16.02.2017/Ex.A1 is void and unenforceable under law. Ex.B1 to Ex.B3 are the gift settlement deeds documents bearing Nos.11477, 11478 and 11479 of 2005 dated 01.10.2005 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of his daughters i.e., Gandla

Nirmala/defendant No.5, Thota Jalaja/defendant No.3 and Penchala

Anjali/defendant No.4 to an extent of Ac.0-09 guntas, Ac.0-07 guntas and Ac.0-07 guntas in Sy.No.152/A respectively.

17.Further contended that the land abutting to 30 feet road on northern side and 15 feet road on western side to the extent of

Ac.0-09 guntas in Sy.No.152/A is owned and possessed by defendant

No.5 and on its southern side, an extent of Ac.0-03 is sold by defendant No.4 to Beera Rama who is in the possession of the same.

Fair 15 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

Ex.B4 is registered sale deed document bearing No.7081 of 2012

dated 20.10.2012 executed by defendant No.4 in favour of

Smt.Beeram Rama to an extent of 181.55 Sq.yards in Sy.No.152/A.

Another Ac.0-02 is sold to another third parties. Ex.B5 is the registered sale deed document bearing No.7082 of 2012 dated 20.10.2012 executed by defendant No.4 in favour of Smt.Bollam

Vasantha to an extent of 181.55 sq.yards in Sy.No.152/A. Ex.B6 is the registered sale deed document bearing No.7667 of 2018 dated 16.07.2018 executed by defendant No.4 in favour of Sri Veera

Sampath to an extent of 242 Sq.yards in Sy.No.152/A. Defendant

No.4 gifted Ac.0-02 guntas to her daughter namely Mounika. Ex.B7 is the gift settlement deed document bearing No.700 of 2019 dated 22.01.2019 executed by defendant No.4 in favour of Penchala @

Rachakonda Mounika to an extent of 242 Sq.yard in Sy.No.152/A.

Thus, defendant No.4 is left with no land and the suit plot with given boundaries claimed by plaintiff is part of the land gifted to defendant

No.4 and not owned or possessed by defendant Nos.1 and 2, as such cannot perform the agreement and the plaintiff has no legal right to seek relief of specific performance in respect of the suit plot.

Fair 16 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

18. Defendant No.4 examined herself as DW2 and it is admitted by her that extent of 30 guntas in Sy.No.152/A is a compact block at

Vallampahad Village is agricultural land, after execution of gift deeds/Ex.B1 to B3 by defendant Nos.1 and 2, the land is converted to residential plots, witness added that after formation of roads on the either side by defendant No.1 and 2, gift deeds/Ex.B1 to B3 were executed to an extent of 7 guntas in her name, 7 guntas for defendant

No.3 and 9 guntas for defendant No.5. DW2 denied the suggestions that Ex.B1 to B3 were executed prior to formation of roads, as such in

Ex.B1 to B3 schedules, roads were not shown and further denied as the name of her father is reflecting in the revenue records, her father and defendant No.2 entered into agreement of sale with PW1 to an extent of Ac.0-04 guntas of land in Sy.No.152/A and as the land value is increased avoiding for execution of registered sale deed.

19.The Counsel for plaintiff submitted that in the written statement of defendant Nos.1 and 2, the execution of Ex.A1 by defendant Nos.1 and 2 is admitted but in reply notice dated 13.04.2018/Ex.A11, it is denied by defendant No.2 that himself or his father never entered agreement of sale on 16.02.2017 or any other date to sell the suit schedule land.

Fair 17 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

20.The written statement of defendant Nos.1 and 2, in para 3 reads as “defendants informed them that the suit land was given to the daughter of defendant No.1 namely Penchala Anjali under registered gift deed Doc.No.11479/05. Inspite of knowing the fact, the mediator

Srinivas insisted to enter into an agreement fixing sale price

Rs.4,40,000/- per gunta and an agreement is executed by defendants

Nos.1 and 2 on 16.02.2017 at the instance of plaintiff and her mediator namely S.Srinivas”.

21.It is not in dispute regarding the gifting of lands by defendant

No.1 in favour of his daughters i.e., defendants Nos.3 to 5 in the year 2005. Agreement of sale/Ex.A1 is executed in 2017 with clearly mentioning the extent and the boundaries. As per Ex.A3 and A4, as on the date of Ex.A1, the suit schedule land stands in the name of defendant No.1. It is also an admitted fact by DW1 during his cross examination that his late father i.e., defendant No.1 was holding Ac.0- 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.152/A situated at Vallampahad Village and

Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 are signed by himself and his father. Therefore, defendant No.1 was having legal right to execute Ex.A1, as such it is valid and enforceable in law. As per Ex.A8 to Ex.A10, Ex.A13 to

Ex.A16 the plaintiff was having sufficient amount to pay the balance

Fair 18 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 sale consideration and ready and willing to perform her part of the agreement of sale/Ex.A1.

22.As held in issue No.1, defendant Nos.1 and 2 executed Ex.A1 and received an advance sale consideration of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) as per Ex.A2 but failed to receive the balance sale consideration and execute registered sale deed. Further, the boundaries of the suit schedule land is clearly mentioned in Ex.A1 with sketch and the boundaries mentioned in Ex.A1 and the land gifted to defendant No.4 under Ex.B3 are different and not forming part of the suit schedule land under Ex.A1 as contended by defendants. Thus, the plaintiff in all probabilities proved her case and entitled for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 16.02.2017. Accordingly the issue is answered in favour of plaintiff.

ISSUE No.3

23.The plaintiff, alternatively, sought a direction to the defendants

No.1 and 2 to return the advance amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) with interest thereon @ 24% per annum from the date of agreement of sale to realization of the amount in case the grant of specific performance is rejected. But, since it is held in issue No.2 that

Fair 19 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018 the plaintiff is entitled to the main relief of specific performance, there would be no need to grant this alternative relief of refund of advance amount.

24.In the result, the suit is decreed and the plaintiff is directed to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.12,60,000/- (Rupees twelve lakhs and sixty thousand only) into this Court to the credit of this suit within two months from today under intimation to the defendant Nos.2 to 5 and in turn the defendant Nos.2 to 5 shall execute and register a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff with respect to the suit schedule land in terms of the suit agreement of sale, dated 16.02.2017 and deliver the vacant possession of the said land to the plaintiff within one month from the date of such deposit of balance sale consideration by the plaintiff. If the defendants Nos.2 to 5 fail to do so, it shall be open to the plaintiff to obtain the sale deed by initiating appropriate proceedings. No order as to costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-II, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court on this the 27th day of February,

2026.

Chairman, LRAT-Cum- II Addl. District Judge, Karimnagar

Fair 20 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF:FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW1: Thandravaram @ ChittampallyDW1 – Vodnala Koteshwar Kavitha

PW2: Adavelly Satyanarayana Reddy DW2 – Penchala Anjali :EXHIBITS MARKED: FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1Agreement of Sale Deed, dated 16.02.2017.

Ex.A2Receipt, dated 16.02.2017.

Ex.A3Pahani for the year 2016.

Ex.A4Pahani for the year 2017.

Ex.A5Encumbrance Certificate.

Ex.A6Office copy of Legal Notice, dated 31.03.2018.

Ex.A7Postal Receipts.

Ex.A8Statement of Account from Axis Bank.

Ex.A9Attested copy of deposit receipt from UCO Bank for Rs.3,50,000/-.

Ex.A10Attested copy of UCO Bank Pass Book.

Ex.A11Reply Notice, dated 13.04.2018.

Ex.A12Postal Acknowledgments (2).

Ex.A13 Bank Statement from Axis Bank.

Ex.A14Deposit Rs.5,48,000/- from Axis Bank.

Ex.A15Attested copy of Account Ledger.

Ex.A16Deposit receipt for Rs.4,00,000/-.

FOR DEFENDANTS:

Ex.B1Certified Copy of Registered Gift Settlement Deed document No.11477/2005, dated 01.10.2005.

Ex.B2Certified Copy of Registered Gift Settlement Deed document No.11478/2005, dated 01.10.2005.

Fair 21 of 21 O.S No.37 of 2018

Ex.B3Certified Copy of Registered Gift Settlement Deed document No.11479/2005, dated 01.10.2005.

Ex.B4Certified Copy of Registered Sale Deed document No.7081/2012, dated 20.10.2012.

Ex.B5Certified Copy of Registered Sale Deed document No.7082/2012, dated 20.10.2012.

Ex.B6Certified Copy of Registered Sale Deed document No.7667/2018, dated 16.07.2018.

Ex.B7Certified Copy of Registered Gift Settlement Deed document No.700/2019, dated 22.10.2019.

Chairman, LRAT-Cum- II Addl. District Judge, Karimnagar

SC/189/2022 Acquitted

The State, Represented by Inspector of Police, PS, Karimnagar-II Town vs Gunda Venkati

09 Mar 2026

Fair 1 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

AT KARIMNAGAR.

PRESENT: Smt D.SADHANA, II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Monday, the 9th day of March, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.189 of 2022

Name of the ::The State through Inspector of complainant/StatePolice,PoliceStation, Karimnagar-II Town in Cr.No.450 of 2021.

Description of the ::Gunda Venkati, S/o.Lachaiah, accusedAge: 36 years, Caste: Mudiraj, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o.H.No.10- 7/20, Elagandal village, Kothapalli Mandal, Karimnagar.

Charges::Under Sections 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC.

Plea of the accused::Not guilty.

Finding of the Court::Not guilty.

Sentence or orderIn the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences under Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC and he is acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C and his bail bond shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.

Fair 2 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

Prosecution conducted by :Sri A.Ramulu, Addl. Public Prosecutor, Karimnagar.

Defense conducted by::Smt M.Thirumala Devi, Advocate, Karimnagar.

This Sessions Case is coming before me on 19.02.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri A.Ramulu, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-Complainant, Smt M.Thirumala Devi, Advocate for accused, upon hearing the arguments of both sides, upon perusing the material papers on record and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the following:

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

1.The Inspector of Police, Police Station, Karimnagar-II Town has laid the Charge Sheet in Crime No.450 of 2021 against the accused for the offences under Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC.

2.The brief facts of the Prosecution case are that on 12.11.2021 at 20:00 hours the complainant/victim women lodged complaint stating that she resides at Ramnagar, Karimnagar and working as attender at Elagandal High School. She hired auto of

Gunda Venkati/accused to go to school. The accused got acquainted with her, took phone number and stalking her in the name of love, started following her to marry him, took intimate

Fair 3 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 photos secretly without her knowledge and started blackmailing her with a demand to meet him physically or he would disclose the intimate photographs and used to follow her every day on her way from school. On 09.11.2021 at around 8:30 hours while she was going to school, accused wrongly restrained her at Ramnagar bus stop, abused her indiscriminately and forced her to get marry to him. When the victim refused to marry him, he threatened with dire-consequences to kill her. The said incident was witnessed by her elder daughter.

3.Basing on the complaint, LW15/Sub-Inspector of Police,

Karimnagar-II Town, Police Station has registered a case in

Cr.No.450/2021 under Section 354-D, 341, 290, 506 of IPC and took up investigation. The WASI/L3 recorded the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. On requisition, LW14/I Addl.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar recorded the

statement of the victim on 20.11.2021 under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

On 10.03.2023, LW16/Inspector of Police, Police Station,

Karimnagar-II town took up further investigation and obtained certified copy of Section 164 Cr.P.C statement of the victim in which victim women stated that the accused has committed rape forcibly on her without her consent. Accordingly added the

Fair 4 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

Section 376(2)(n) to Sections 354-D, 341, 209 and 506 of IPC and filed memo for adding the section. After completion of investigating and collection of documents, LW16 filed Charge

Sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under

Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC.

4.The case was registered as PRC No.17 of 2022 and committed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Spl. Mobile),

Karimnagar vide committal Order dated 31-05-2022.

5.The case was taken on file for the offences punishable under

Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC against the accused and made over to this Court for disposal according to law.

6.On appearance of accused, Charge for the offences under

Section 376 (2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC against the accused was framed, read-over and explained to him in telugu, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.To prove its case, the Prosecution has examined PW1 to

PW11 and got marked Ex.P1 to P14.

Fair 5 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

8.After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C with reference to the incriminating evidence appearing against him in the evidence of

Prosecution Witnesses to which the accused denied the same as false and reported no defense evidence on his behalf.

9. Now the point for determination is :-

Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

10.The case of the prosecution is that the accused having acquaintance with the victim women committed rape on her repeatedly without her consent, had been stalking her, wrongfully restrained the victim forcing to marry him by blackmailing to disclose the intimate photographs of the victim women with accused and threatened to kill her.

11. To prove the same, the prosecution has examined the complainant/victim as PW1 whodeposed that she secured a job as attender at Elagandal High School. On 22.01.2021 she engaged the auto of the accused to attend her duties and the accused got

Fair 6 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 acquaintance with her. After about three months one day accused took her to his house saying that he is intending to sell his house and she went to see the house, there was nobody in his house, then the accused tied her hands with red color cloth, closed her mouth and forcibly committed rape on her without her consent, took her semi-nude photographs and started blackmailing by showing the photographs and forcibly had sexual intercourse for three to four times. On 09.11.2021 at 8:30 A.M when she was at the Ramnagar bus stop, at that time accused came and asked her to marry him otherwise he will show the photographs to every body and threatened to kill her, at that time her elder daughter was present. On 12.11.2021 she lodged a complaint before the police. Ex.P1 is the complaint. One women police recorded her statement and she stated the same before the Magistrate.

12.PW2 is the elder daughter of PW1 and she deposed that on 09.11.2021 at about 8:30 A.M she along with her mother went to the Ramnagar bus stop and at that time accused came and asked her mother to marry him otherwise threatened to kill her.

After the incident at the bus stop her mother told her that accused is blackmailing her by showing photographs.

Fair 7 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

13.PW3 is the Women ASI of Police, Women Police Station,

Karimnagar who recorded the statement of PW1 deposed that on 12.11.2021 as per the directions of LW15 she recorded the statement of PW1 at 8:30 P.M under the videography of LW4.

On 16.03.2022 as per the instructions of LW16 she recorded the statement of the victim in the evening at 4:00 P.M under the videography of LW4, read over to the deponent/victim and she admitted to be correct and after obtaining her signature she signed.

14.PW4 is the circumstantial witness who deposed that PW1 joined in their school as attender in the month of January 2018 and she used to come along with PW1 up and down some times by sharing in the auto of the accused. She further deposed that

PW1 informed her that accused got acquaintance with her and took photographs when she was close with the accused and started blackmailing her by showing the photographs and on 27.05.2018 accused committed sexual intercourse without her consent. PW1 also informed her that she also had sexual intercourse with the accused for some times. Accused posted the photographs in the face book account and every body saw the photographs in the school.

Fair 8 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

15.PW5 is the photographer who deposed that on 16.03.2022 at about 4:00 P.M Circle Inspector of Police, Karimnagar-II Town called him to the police station for videography of recording the statement of the victim. PW3/Women Sub-Inspector of Police recorded the statement of the victim and he videographed it, uploaded in the CD and handed over to the police. Ex.P2 is the

CD. Ex.P3 is the 65-B Certificate.

16.PW6 is the panch witness to the first crime detail form and he deposed that on 13.11.2022 at about 6.00 A.M he was going from Geetha Bhavan Hotel to Chintakunta village, at that time

Karimnagar-II Town police stopped him near Rajasthan hotel,

Ramnagar and conducted panchanama before him and drawn rough sketch map before him and at that time one lady was also present. Ex.P4 is his signature on CDF-1 dated 13.11.2022.

17.PW7 is the doctor who examined victim/PW1 and gave final opinion deposed that on 16.03.2022 she received a requisition to examine PW1 through WPC-1354 and at about 8:30 P.M she examined PW1 and took the samples of two vaginal swabs, three cotton swabs and two vaginal collection normal seline and handed over to the WPC-1354 for examination and report. No external

Fair 9 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 injuries were noted. Ex.P5 is the report of examination and collection of samples dated 16.03.2022. After receiving RFSL report she gave final opinion that though semen spermatozoa are not detected in FSL report, it cannot be said that the rape has not occurred. Ex.P6 is final opinion dated 06.04.2022.

[

18.PW8 is the panch witness for the second crime detail form who deposed that in the year 2021 he went to Karimnagar-II Town police station on some work at that time police obtained signature on some printed papers and he do not know the contents of the said papers. Ex.P7 is his signature on crime detail form-II.

The learned additional public prosecutor declared the witnesses hostile and sought permission to cross examine the witness, accordingly the permission is accorded. Nothing contrary is elicited during his cross examination.

19.PW9 is the doctor who examined the accused and issued potency certificate and he deposed that on 21.03.2022 he received requisition from Inspector of police, Karimnagar-II Town to examine the accused and on the same day he examined the accused/Gunta Venkati and issued potency certificate. Ex.P8 is the Potency Certificate.

Fair 10 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

20.PW10 is the Investigating Officer who deposed that on 12.11.2021 at 20:00 hours he received complaint and issued

FIR in Cr.No.450 of 2021 for the offence under Section 354-D, 341, 290, 506 of IPC and took up investigation. Ex.P9 is the First

Information Report. On the same day, he addressed a letter to the

Inspector of Police, WPS Karimnagar with a request to depute

Women ASI for recording the statement of the victim. Accordingly

PW3 recorded the statement of the victim under Section 161

Cr.P.C on 13.11.2021. He visited the scene of offence at 9:00 hours and conducted scene of offence panchanama/crime detail form-I and drawn rough sketch map in the presence of LW8 and PW6.

Ex.P10 is the crime detail form-I. He examined and recorded the statement of PW2, PW3 and PW5. On 19.11.2021 he filed the requisition before the LW14 for recording the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Accordingly LW14 recorded the statement of the victim on 20.11.2021. Ex.P11 is the requisition

dated 19.11.2021. Ex.P12 is the statement of the victim under

Section 164 Cr.P.C. On 10.03.2022 he handed over the CD file to

LW16 for further investigation.

Fair 11 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

21.PW11 is the investigating officer who filed Charge Sheet and he deposed that on 10.03.2022 received CD file from PW10, verified the investigation done by PW10 and found it to be on correct lines. On 10.03.2022 obtained the certified copy of 164

Cr.P.C statement of the victim/PW1 who stated before LW14 that she was forcibly raped without her consent by accused and basing on the statement of the victim he added the section of law 376(2)

(n) and filed section alternation memo. Ex.P13 is the section alteration memo dated 10.03.2022. On 16.03.2022 he addressed a requisition to the inspector of police, WPS, Karimnagar to depute

Women ASI to record the statement of the victim/PW1 under 161

Cr.P.C Statement. Accordingly PW3 recorded the statement of the victim under the videography of PW5. On the same day he examined and recorded the statements of PW3 and PW5 and at 17:00 hours visited the second scene of offence i.e., house of accused at Chinthakunta village in the presence of PW8 and LW11 observed the scene and prepared rough sketch incorporated the details in the crime detail form. Ex.P14 is the crime detail form-II.

Later referred PW1 to Government Hospital for examination and report, accordingly PW7 examined the victim, preserved the material object for analysis and report. Later he secured the presence of witnesses PW4, LW6 and LW7 examined and recorded

Fair 12 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 their statements. On 21.03.2022 at 9:00 hours he apprehended the accused at Ramnagar Chowrasta, the accused confessed to have committed the offence and he was sent to PW9 for potency test. Accordingly PW9 examined and gave potency certificate of accused. On 25.03.2022 he forwarded the material objects to

RFSL, Karimnagar and received RFSL Report. After completion of investigation and collection of all documents he filed Charge Sheet against the accused for the offences under Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC.

22.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of LWs.6 to 8, 11 and 14.

23.As per the complaint/Ex.P1, the victim/PW1 engaged the auto of accused to go to Elagandala High School where she is working as an attender. Accused got acquaintance with her and started following her. On 09.11.2021 at about 08:30 hours when she was at Ramnagar bus stand to go to school, at that time accused stopped her from proceeding, started abusing her in filthy language forcing to marry him and when she refused, accused threatened to kill her. The said incident was witnessed by her

Fair 13 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 elder daughter Krishnanjali and the delay for lodging Ex.P1 is due to the fear of accused.

24.The victim/PW1 in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C on 20.11.2021 recorded by the Magistrate/LW14 stated that in the month of May, one day accused saying that he is intending to sell the house, took her to his house to see the house for purchase and had sexual intercourse with her forcibly, took photographs and threatened her to come as and when he calls her, otherwise he will show the photographs to everyone. Fearing the same, she had sexual intercourse with the accused 2 or 3 times and also went three times with accused to parks and for cinemas.

Afterwards when she refused to listen to his words, he got angry and posted their photographs in the Facebook and started saying everyone that she willingly had sexual intercourse with him and that she has taken money from him and threatening to kill her if she refuses to marry him. Basing on the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C, memo filed for alteration of section and

Section 376(2)(n) was added.

25.It is admitted by PW1 that she has not stated in her complaint/Ex.P1 as she stated in her chief and in her Section 164

Fair 14 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

Cr.P.C statement. PW1 stated that she cannot say the date on which the accused committed rape on her at his house and she has not lodged any complaint immediately after rape and denied the suggestion that her statement before the Magistrate is an after thought. It is denied that even though the accused is younger in age to her, due to acquaintance she asked the accused to marry her and as the accused refused to marry her she filed a false complaint against the accused and further denied that accused never took her semi-nude photographs and never blackmailed her by showing those photographs.

26.As per PW3/the WASI who recorded the statement of the victim stated that the statements of the victim dated 12.11.2021 and 16.03.2022 is not scribed by her. Witness added that she has written the statement roughly and statement dated 12.11.2021 is handed over to the Sub-Inspector and the statement dated 16.03.2021 is handed over to the Circle Inspector of Police and the statements were fairly written by Station House Officer,

Karimnagar-II Town Police Station. The first Investigating

Officer/PW10 and WASI/PW3 who recorded the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C also admitted that PW1 has not

Fair 15 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 stated before them as she stated in her Section 164 Cr.P.C statement before the Magistrate/LW14.

27.PW4 who is the circumstantial witness working in the same school and sometimes used to share the auto of the accused with

PW1. PW4 stated that all the school staff saw the closed photographs of the accused and PW1 which were posted by the accused in face book. It is admitted by PWs.10 and 11 that the alleged semi nude photographs were not collected and the cell phone of the accused is not seized and no call data record is collected from the service provider of both cell phones of the victim/PW1 and accused. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the said allegation that accused is blackmailing the victim to disclose the intimate photographs and followed her. It is admitted that she has not stated before the police that PW1 engaged auto of the accused and some times she used to share the auto along with PW1. It is further admitted that she has not stated before the police that they all in the school saw the closed photographs of the accused and PW1 which were posted by the accused in face book.

Fair 16 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

28.It is admitted by PW1 that public was present at the bus stop

Ramnagar and the accused threatened her for about fifteen minutes and she has not taken the help the public present at the bus stop and also not called the police by dialing 100. It is further admitted that her elder daughter will not come along with her to the bus stop daily and on that day her elder came along with her to drop her at the bus stop and denied the suggestion that her elder daughter was not along with her on that day and only to create as a witness she is deposing false that her elder daughter was present with her on the date of alleged incident i.e., 09.11.2021.

29.PW2 is the elder daughter of PW1 who witnessed the alleged incident occurred on 09.11.2021 admitted that she has never seen the accused before the date of the alleged incident at the bus stop and she has not stated before the police that after the alleged incident dated 09.11.2021 her mother informed her about the accused blackmailing her by showing some photographs. During her cross examination, stated that she used to accompany her mother to the bus stop now and then and not daily. PW10 admitted that PW2 not stated in her statement that after the alleged incident dated 09.11.2021 her mother informed her about

Fair 17 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 the accused blackmailing her by showing some photographs and it is admitted that they have not inquired about the details of the

PW2 regarding her education, college timings and the mode of conveyance to her college daily. The evidence PW2, who is the eye witness creates any amount of doubt as to the occurrence of the alleged incident on 09.11.2021 and she witnessed the said incident as she stated that she cannot say whether there was a public at the bus stop on the date of the incident and admitted that she has not taken the help of any body present at the bus stop and she has not seen whether her mother has taken the help of anybody present at the bus stop even though she was along with her. It is admitted by PW10 that no independent eye witness to the alleged incident dated 09.11.2021 was examined other than the PW2/elder daughter of the victim.

30.From the evidence of PWs.1 to 4, 10 and 11, it is evident that there are several omissions and improvements in the evidence of

PWs.1 to PW4. Since the omissions and the improvements are major and material, the same would not render their testimony credible. Further, the evidence of PW1 remained uncorroborated by any other evidence. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt

Fair 18 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022 for the offences alleged against the accused and hence the accused to be acquitted of the offences with which he is charged.

Accordingly the point is answered.

POINT No.2:

31.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences under Section 376(2)(n), 354-D, 341, 290 and 506 of IPC and he is acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C and his bail bond shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-II, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 9th day of March, 2026.

II Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: PW1: Kondu Kusumarani - Nil - PW2: K.Krishnjali PW3: T.Vijayamani PW4: Chiliveri Umadevi PW5: Gaddam Srinivas PW6: Mohammad Omar Farooq PW7: Dr.Nishchala PW8: Gajavelli Sarangapani PW9: Mohd. Sameer Ali PW10: T.Mahesh PW11: T.Lakshmi Babu

Fair 19 of 19 S.C No.189 of 2022

EXHIBITS MARKED: FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1Complaint. Ex.P2CD. Ex.P365-B Certificate. Ex.P4Signature of PW6 on Crime Detail Form-1. Ex.P5Report of examination and collection of samples. Ex.P6Final opinion. Ex.P7Signature of PW8 on Crime Detail Form-2. Ex.P8Potency Certificate. Ex.P9First Information Report. Ex.P10Crime Detail Form No.1. Ex.P11Requisition. Ex.P12Statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Ex.P13Alteration memo. Ex.P14Crime Detail Form No.2.

FOR DEFENCE: - Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS: - Nil -

II Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

SC/36/2022 Acquitted

The State through SHO Karimnagar I Town PS vs Mohammed Imtiaz Ali

10 Mar 2026

Fair 1 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

AT KARIMNAGAR

PRESENT: Smt D.SADHANA, II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Tuesday, the 10th day of March, 2026

SESSIONS CASE N O . 36 OF 2022

Name of the ::The State through Station House complainant/StateOfficer,PoliceStation, Karimnagar-I Town (Cr.No.423 of 2020).

Description of the :: A1MohammadImtiazAli, accusedS/o.Mumtaz Ali, Age: 20 years, Occ: Driver, Caste: Muslim, R/o.H.No.23-1-15,65DA, Bellampalli now at H.No.3-2-63, Sawaran Street, Karimnagar.

A2ThivitlaSandeep, S/o.Laxminarayana, Age:26 years, Occ: Business, Caste: SC Mala,R/o.H.No.6-1-416, Ashoknagar, Karimnagar.

A3MdShujauddin,S/o.Ahmed Moizuddin, Age: 22 years, Caste: Muslim,R/o.H.No.1-5-501/1/A, Ameernagar,Karimnagar.

(Case against A.3 was split-up and numbered as S.C No.59 of 2025, hence this case is proceeded against A.1 and A.2 only)

Fair 2 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

Charges::Under Sections 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act against A.1.

Under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act against A.2.

Plea of the accused::Not guilty.

Finding of the Court::Not guilty.

Sentence or orderIn the result, the A.1 is found not guilty for the offences under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and A.2 is found not guilty for the offences under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act and they are acquitted under Section 235 (1) of Cr.P.C and their bail bonds shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.

Prosecution conducted by :Sri A.Ramulu, Addl. Public Prosecutor, Karimnagar.

Defense conducted by::Sri Raju Nunavath, Advocate, Karimnagar.

This Session Case came before me on 03.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri A.Ramulu, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-complainant and Sri Raju Nunavath, Advocate for Accused No.1 and 2, upon hearing the arguments and upon perusing the material papers on record and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:

Fair 3 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

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

1.The Station House Officer, Police Station, Karimnagar-I Town has laid the Charge Sheet in Crime No.423 of 2020 against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of

IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V

Act.

2.The brief facts of the Prosecution case are that on 27.12.2020 at 20:45 hours the complainant by name Doke Ramesh lodged a complaint stating that on the same day at about 6.00 P.M his son-in-law by name Junagari Suman made a phone call to him and informed that at about 17:30 hours he was on the road at IT Tower,

Bypass Road Sircilla, his cousin by name Bogiri Rajesham was going towards NTR Statue in his auto bearing No.AP-15-W-2632 along with passengers, at that time the driver of the Swift desire Car bearing

No.AP-15-AQ-2727 drove the car in rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed the auto from back side, as a result, auto turned turtle on the road and Bogiri Rajesham fell down in the middle of the road and received severe bleeding injuries to his face and head. He immediately rushed to the spot and found his cousin died on the spot and the passengers received injuries.

Fair 4 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

3.Basing on the said complaint LW22/Inspector of Police, Police

Station, Karimnagar I Town registered a case in Cr.No.423 of 2020 for the offences under Section 304-A, 337 of IPC and took up investigating. During the course of investigating recorded the statement of LW1 and due to night hours he could not conduct inquest over the dead body of the deceased. On next day morning i.e., 28.12.2020 LW22 visited Government Civil Hospital,

Karimnagar, secure the presence of LW17 and LW18 observed the dead body, noted down the features and photographed the dead body with the help of LW7 and held inquest over the dead body of the deceased. During inquest, examined and recorded the statements of LWs2 to LW7. Later filed a requisition to LW19 for conducting postmortem examination to know the actual cause of the death of the deceased. Later L.W.22 has visited the scene of offence observed the scene by securing the same panchas LW17 and LW18 incorporated the details in crime detail form by drawing rough sketch map. The injured were getting treatment at Govt.

Hospital, Karimnagar and he examined and recorded the statements of LW8 to LW13. Later brought the crime vehicle and kept in City Police Training Center, Karimnagar premises for inspection and addressed a letter to LW21 for inspection of crime vehicle and report.

Fair 5 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

4.Basing on the statements of eye witnesses to the incident, and

LW5 who was standing at IT Tower Karimnagar at the time of the offence saw the accused drove the crime vehicle in rash and negligent manner with high speed dashed the auto from back side, due to which the deceased sustained sever injures and died on the spot and the passengers sustained injuries and he identified the accused. Basing on the statement of eye witness/LW5 the section of law is added from 304-A, 337 of IPC to 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of

IPC.

5.On 10.01.2021, at 11:30 hours, A.1 came to the Police and surrendered before LW.22 and on interrogation A.1 confessed to have committed this offence and on enquiry he failed to produce the Dricing Licence, did not produce the the documents of the crime vehicle i.e., car and there was no insurance to the crime vehicle and he further confessed that A.3 hypothecated the car from A.2 who gave car to A.1, the friend of A.3. During the course of further investigation, L.W.22 has issued notice to A.2 and 3 under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., instructing them to appear before the Court on receipt of summons. On the requisition of Police, L.W.21 (M.V.I.), has inspected the crime vehicle and issued report and L.W.20 (Medical

Officer) has examined L.Ws.6, 8, 11 and 13 and one Alisha and

Fair 6 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022 issued Medical Certificates opining the injuries sustained by them as “simple in nature”. After completion of investigation and collection of documents, L.W.22 has filed Charge Sheet against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V

Act.

6.The learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Karimnagar before whom the Charge Sheet was filed had taken the case on file against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of

M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under

Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act, numbered the case as

P.R.C No.33 of 2021, complied the provisions of Section 209 of

Cr.P.C., and committed the case to the Court of Sessions,

Karimnagar vide committal order, dated 21-12-2021.

7.On appearance of A.1 to 3, charges against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V

Fair 7 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

Act were framed, read-over and explained to them in Telugu and

Hindi, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

8.At this stage, as NBW was pending against A.3, case against

A.3 was split-up and numbered as S.C No.59 of 2025 on the file of this Court, hence this case is proceeded against A.1 and 2 only and the case was posted for trial.

9.To prove its case, the Prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 10 and got marked Ex.P1 to P17.

10.After closure of prosecution evidence, A.1 and 2 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C with reference to the incriminating evidence appearing against them in the evidence of

Prosecution Witnesses to which they denied the same as false and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.

11.Now the point for consideration is :-

Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of accused No.1 for the offences under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337, 279 of IPC, Section 3 r/w 181, 196 of M.V Act and against accused No.2 for the offences under Section 3 r/w 180, 190 of M.V Act beyond all reasonable doubt?

Fair 8 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

P O I N T:

12.The case of the prosecution is that A.1 drove the car in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the said car to the Auto resulting which the driver i.e., deceased sustained severe injuries and succumbed to the injuries and that the said act i.e., drove the car in a rash and negligent manner knowing and having knowledge that such accident may result in the death of a person and that A.1 drove the car without possessing valid Driving License and that

A.2 handed-over the said vehicle to A.1 having knowledge that said car is not validly insured.

13.To prove the same, the Prosecution has examined the complainant as PW1 and he deposed that on 27.12.2020 he went to Karimnagar I Town police station on some personal work at that time police obtained his signatures on some white papers and he do not know anything about the facts of the case. Ex.P1 is his signature on the complaint. The Learned Additional Public

Prosecutor declared the witness as hostile and sought permission of the Court to cross examine PW1, accordingly permission accorded.

PW1 during cross examination denied the suggestion as he stated in his 161 Cr.P.C statement before the police and nothing is elicited in

Fair 9 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022 support of the case of the prosecution. Ex.P2 is the 161 Cr.P.C

Statement.

14.PW2 is the mother of the deceased, PW3 is the son in law of the deceased and they both deposed that they do not know about the facts of the case and police not examined them and not recorded their statement. As PW2 and PW3 have not supported the case of the prosecution, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor declared them as hostile and sought permission of the Court to cross examine them, accordingly permission accorded and even at the time of cross examination PW2 and PW3 denied the suggestions as they stated before police in their Section 161 Cr.P.C statements.

Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 are Section 161 Cr.P.C Statements of PW2 &PW3 respectively.

15.PW4 is the eye witnessand PW5 to PW9 are the injured and eye witnesses to the incident. PW7 and PW8 are the minors and after ascertaining their capability to understand the questions and give a cogent answers recorded their evidence. PW4 to PW9 in one voice deposed that they do not know anything about the facts of the case. The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor declared them hostile and requested permission to cross examine the witnesses,

Fair 10 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022 accordingly permission is accorded. Even during the cross examination, PW4 to PW9 denied the suggestions as they stated

before the police in their 161 Cr.P.C statement. Ex.P5 to Ex.P10

are their 161 Cr.P.C statements respectively.

16.PW10isthe investigating officer who deposed that on 27.12.2020 he received a complaint from PW1 and registered a case in Cr.No.423/2020 for the offences under Section 304-A, 337 of IPC and issued FIR. Ex.P11 is the Complaint. Ex.P12 is First

Information Report. During the course of investigation he examined and recorded the statements of PW1 to PW5, LW3 and LW7.

On 28.12.2020 he visited Government Civil Hospital, Karimnagar secured the presence of LW17 and LW18, conducted inquest panchanama and got photographed the dead body of the deceased with the help of LW7 and filed requisition to LW19 to conduct postmortem examination. Ex.P13 are photographs (five in number) along with C.D. Ex.P14 is the Postmortem Examination Report.

Later visited the scene of offence secured LW17 and LW18, observed minutely and incorporated the details in Crime Detail

Form by drawing rough sketch map. Ex.P15 is the crime detail form. He examined and recorded the statement of PW6 to PW9, LW9 and LW10. On the same day shifted the crime vehicle to City Police

Fair 11 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

Centre, Karimnagar for inspection and filed requisition before LW21 for inspection of crime vehicle who inspected the crime vehicle and gave MVI Report. Ex.P16 is the Motor Vehicle Inspector Report.

PW5 to PW9 sustained simple injuries. Ex.P17 are injury certificate (five in number) issued by LW20. Basing on the statement of the eye witness/PW4 he added the section of law to 304-II, 304-A, 337, 279 of IPC. On 10.01.2021 at 11:30 hours accused No.1 surrendered

before him and on interrogation confessed to have committed the

offence and he was not having driving license and did not produce crime vehicle documents and insurance documents. The crime vehicle is hypothecated from accused No.2 and knowingly that accused No.1 is not holding the driving license gave the crime vehicle to accused No.1. After completion of investigation and collection of documents, he filed the Charge Sheet against accused

No.1 for the offences under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337, 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181, 196 of M.V Act and against accused No.2 for the offences under Section 3 r/w 180, 190 of M.V Act. During the cross examination he denied the suggestions that PW1 never lodged the complaint/Ex.P11 before him and PW2 to PW9 never stated before him as in their 161 Cr.P.C statements and he never visited the scene of offence. Further denied that accused No.1 & 2 are not connected with this case and they are falsely implicated in

Fair 12 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022 this case and PW1 filed a false case for extorting compensation and that he has not conducted the investigation properly and filed a false Charges Sheet against accused No.1 & 2.

17.As the material witnesses turned hostile, the Learned

Additional Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of LW3, LW7,

LW9, LW10, LW14 to LW21 since no useful purpose would be served by examining them. Even if said witnesses are examined before the

Court, they at best will depose the role played by them respectively in this case, but as they are not eye witnesses to the incident, their evidence will not improve the case in the absence of any direct evidence to connect the accused with the offences alleged against them.

18.PW1 is the complainant, PW2 is the mother, and PW3 is the son-in-law of the deceased, PW4 is the eye witness to the incident,

PW5 to PW9 are the injured and eye witnesses to the incident.

The evidence of PW1 to PW9 in one voice is that they do not know anything about the facts of the case and turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. The remaining evidence before the Court is the evidence of investigating officer i.e., PW10 and his evidence at best helps the investigation conducted by him.

Fair 13 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

As stated above as PW1 to PW9 did not supported the case of the prosecution at all, there is absolutely no evidence before the Court to connect the accused No.1 and 2 for the offence alleged against them. Therefore, it can be safely held that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused No.1 and 2 beyond all reasonable doubt for the offences alleged against them, hence the accused No.1 and 2 are entitled for acquittal.

Accordingly, the point is answered.

19.In the result, the accused No.1 is found not guilty for the offences under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337, 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181, 196 of M.V Act and accused No.2 is found not guilty for the offences under Section 3 r/w 180, 190 of M.V Act and they are acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C and their bail bonds shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-II, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 10th day of March,

2026.

II Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Fair 14 of 14 S.C No.36 of 2022

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: PW1 : Doke Ramesh - Nil - PW2 : Bogiri Lachamma PW3 : Ch.Narayana PW4 : J.Suman PW5 : Nuzath Begum PW6 : Ruksana Begum PW7 : Md.Sharan PW8 : Adhina Iqra PW9 : Arusanaaz PW10 : G.Vijay Kumar

EXHIBITS MARKED: FOR PROSECUTION: Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on complaint Ex.P2161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW1 Ex.P3161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW2 Ex.P4161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW3 Ex.P5161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW4 Ex.P6161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW5 Ex.P7161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW6 Ex.P8161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW7 Ex.P9161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW8 Ex.P10161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW9 Ex.P11Complaint Ex.P12First Information Report Ex.P13Photographs along with C.D (5 in number) Ex.P14Postmortem Examination Report Ex.P15Crime Detail Form Ex.P16Motor Vehicle Inspector Report Ex.P17Injury Certificates (5 in number) issued by LW20 (Dr P.Sai Prasad, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Karimnagar)

FOR DEFENCE: - Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS: - Nil -

II Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

SC/59/2025 Acquitted

State of Telangana through SHO PS Karimnagar I Town vs MD Sajauddin

10 Mar 2026

Fair 1 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

AT KARIMNAGAR.

PRESENT: Smt D.SADHANA, II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Tuesday, the 10th day of March, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.59 of 2025

(Split up case from S.C No.36 of 2022)

Name of the ::The State through Station House complainant/StateOfficer, Police Station, Karimnagar I Town (Cr.No.423 of 2020).

Description of the :: A3MdShujauddin,S/o.Ahmed accusedMoizuddin, Age: 22 years, Caste: Muslim,R/o.H.No.1-5-501/1/A, Ameernagar,Karimnagar.

Charges::Under Section 3 r/w 180, 190 of M.V Act against accused No.3.

Plea of the accused::Not guilty.

Finding of the Court::Not guilty.

Sentence or orderIn the result, the accused No.3 is found not guilty for the offences under Section 3 r/w 180, 190 of M.V Act and he is acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C and his bail bonds shall stand cancelled. The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.

Fair 2 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025

Prosecution conducted by :Sri A.Ramulu, Addl. Public Prosecutor, Karimnagar.

Defense conducted by::Sri Raju Nunavath, Advocate, Karimnagar.

This Session Case is coming before me on 03.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri A.Ramulu, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-complainant and Sri Raju Nunavath, Advocate for the Accused No.3, upon hearing the arguments and upon perusing the material papers on record and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

1.Originally, the Station House Officer, Police Station,

Karimnagar-I Town has laid the Charge Sheet in Crime No.423 of 2020 against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act.

Bypass Road Sircilla, his cousin by name Bogiri Rajesham was going

Fair 3 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 towards NTR Statue in his auto bearing No.AP-15-W-2632 along with passengers, at that time the driver of the Swift desire Car bearing

3.Basing on the said complaint LW22/Inspector of Police, Police

Karimnagar, secured the presence of LW17 and LW18 observed the dead body, noted down the features and photographed the dead body with the help of LW7 and held inquest over the dead body of the deceased. During inquest, examined and recorded the statements of LWs2 to LW7. Later filed a requisition to LW19 for conducting postmortem examination to know the actual cause of

Fair 4 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 the death of the deceased. Later L.W.22 visited the scene of offence observed the scene by securing the same panchas LW17 and LW18 incorporated the details in crime detail form by drawing rough sketch map. The injured were getting treatment at Government

4.Basing on the statements of eye witnesses to the incident, and

IPC.

5.On 10.01.2021, at 11:30 hours, A.1 came to the Police and surrendered before LW.22 and on interrogation A.1 confessed to have committed this offence and on enquiry he failed to produce

Fair 5 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 the Driving License, did not produce the the documents of the crime vehicle i.e., car and there was no insurance to the crime vehicle and he further confessed that A.3 hypothecated the car from A.2 who gave car to A.1, the friend of A.3. During the course of further investigation, L.W.22 has issued notice to A.2 and 3 under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., instructing them to appear before the Court on receipt of summons. On the requisition of Police, L.W.21 (M.V.I.), has inspected the crime vehicle and issued report and L.W.20 (Medical Officer) has examined L.Ws.6, 8, 11 and 13 and one Alisha and issued Medical Certificates opining the injuries sustained by them as “simple in nature”. After completion of investigation and collection of documents, L.W.22 has filed Charge Sheet against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act.

6.The learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Karimnagar before whom the Charge Sheet was filed had taken the case on file against A.1 for the offences punishable under

Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable

Fair 6 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act, numbered the case as

P.R.C No.33 of 2021, complied the provisions of Section 209 of

Cr.P.C., and committed the case to the Court of Sessions,

Karimnagar vide committal order, dated 21-12-2021.

7.On appearance of A.1 to 3, charges against against A.1 for the offences punishable under Section 304-II, 304-A, 337 and 279 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 181 and 196 of M.V Act and against A.2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act were framed, read-over and explained to them in Telugu and Hindi, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

8.At this stage, as A.3 herein remained absent and NBW was pending for long time, case against A.3 herein was split-up from the main case i.e., S.C No.36 of 2022 and numbered as this S.C., i.e., S.C No.59 of 2025 on the file of this Court.

9.When S.C No.36 of 2022 on the file of this Court was coming-up for trial, A.3 herein was produced before this Court on execution of NBW and the re-call petition filed by A.3 was allowed with observation to try both the cases i.e., S.C No.36 of 2022 and

S.C No.59 of 2025 together as both the cases arise out of same crime. Thereafter, evidence in both the cases was recorded in

Fair 7 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025

S.C No.36 of 2022 on the file of this Court and said evidence is adopted in S.C No.59 of 2025 on the file of this Court with consent of both learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the Counsel for A.3.

10.During the course of trial, to prove its case, the Prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 10 and got marked Ex.P1 to P17 in

S.C No.36 of 2022 on the file of this Court and same is adopted in this case.

11.After closure of prosecution evidence, A.3 was examined under

Section 313 Cr.P.C with reference to the incriminating evidence appearing against him in the evidence of Prosecution Witnesses to which he denied the same as false and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.

12.Now the point for consideration is :-

Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of A.3 for the offences under Section 3 r/w 180 and 190 of M.V Act beyond all reasonable doubt?

P O I N T:

13.The case of the prosecution is that A.3 herein along with A.2 handed-over the crime vehicle i.e., car to A.1 knowing that it was not validly insured and thereafter A.1 drove the car in a rash and

Fair 8 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 negligent manner and dashed the said car to the Auto resulting which the driver i.e., deceased sustained severe injuries and succumbed to the injuries and that the said act i.e., drove the car in a rash and negligent manner knowing and having knowledge that such accident may result in the death of a person and that A.1 drove the car without possessing valid Driving License.

14.To prove the same, the Prosecution has examined the complainant as PW1 and he deposed that on 27.12.2020 he went to Karimnagar I Town police station on some personal work at that time police obtained his signatures on some white papers and he do not know anything about the facts of the case. Ex.P1 is his signature on the complaint. The Learned Additional Public

Prosecutor declared the witness as hostile and sought permission of the Court to cross examine PW1, accordingly permission accorded.

PW1 during cross examination denied the suggestion as he stated in his 161 Cr.P.C statement before the police and nothing is elicited in support of the case of the prosecution. Ex.P2 is the 161 Cr.P.C

Statement.

15.PW2 is the mother of the deceased, PW3 is the son-in-law of the deceased and they both deposed that they do not know about the facts of the case and police not examined them and not

Fair 9 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 recorded their statement. As PW2 and PW3 have not supported the case of the prosecution, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor declared them as hostile and sought permission of the Court to cross examine them, accordingly permission accorded and even at the time of cross examination PW2 and PW3 denied the suggestions as they stated before police in their Section 161 Cr.P.C statements.

Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 are Section 161 Cr.P.C Statements of PW2 &PW3 respectively.

16.PW4 is the eye witnessand PW5 to PW9 are the injured and eye witnesses to the incident. PW7 and PW8 are the minors and after ascertaining their capability to understand the questions and give a cogent answers recorded their evidence. PW4 to PW9 in one voice deposed that they do not know anything about the facts of the case. The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor declared them hostile and requested permission to cross examine the witnesses, accordingly permission is accorded. Even during the cross examination, PW4 to PW9 denied the suggestions as they stated

before the police in their 161 Cr.P.C statement. Ex.P5 to Ex.P10

are their 161 Cr.P.C statements respectively.

Fair 10 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025

17.PW10 isthe Investigating Officer and in his evidence he deposed about the investigation conducted in this case and in his evidence he got marked Ex.P11 to Ex.P17.

18.As the material witnesses turned hostile, the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of LW3, LW7,

LW9, LW10, LW14 to LW21 since no useful purpose would be served by examining them. Even if said witnesses are examined before the

19.PW1 is the complainant, PW2 is the mother, PW3 is the son-in-law of the deceased, PW4 is an eye witness to the incident,

PW5 to PW9 are the injured and eye witnesses to the incident.

The evidence of PW1 to PW9 in one voice is that they do not know anything about the facts of the case and thereby did not support the case of the prosecution. The remaining evidence before the

Court is the evidence of Investigating Officer i.e., PW10 and his evidence at best helps the investigation conducted by him. As stated above, since PW1 to PW9 did not supported the case of the prosecution at all, there is absolutely no evidence before the Court

Fair 11 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025 to connect the accused No.3 for the offence alleged against him.

Therefore, it can be safely held that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused No.3 beyond all reasonable doubt for the offences alleged against him and thereby he is entitled for acquittal. Accordingly, the point is answered.

20.In the result, A.3 is found not guilty for the offences under

Section 3 r/w 180, 190 of M.V Act and he is acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C and his bail bonds shall stand cancelled.

The unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-II, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 10th day of March,

2026.

II Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

Fair 12 of 12 S.C No.59 of 2025

EXHIBITS MARKED:

FOR PROSECUTION: Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on complaint Ex.P2161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW1 Ex.P3161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW2 Ex.P4161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW3 Ex.P5161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW4 Ex.P6161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW5 Ex.P7161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW6 Ex.P8161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW7 Ex.P9161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW8 Ex.P10161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW9 Ex.P11Complaint Ex.P12First Information Report Ex.P13Photographs along with C.D (5 in number) Ex.P14Postmortem Examination Report Ex.P15Crime Details Form Ex.P16Motor Vehicle Inspector Report Ex.P17Injury Certificates (5 in number) issued by LW20 (Dr P.Sai Prasad, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Karimnagar)

FOR DEFENCE: - Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS: - Nil -

II Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

CRLA/2/2022 Convicted

Bonala Kanukaiah vs Bonala Ajay @ Ajay Kumar

11 Mar 2026

Fair 1 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

AT: KARIMNAGAR

PRESENT: Smt D.SADHANA, II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Wednesday,the 11th day of March, 2026

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2 OF 2022

Between:

Bonala Kanakaiah, S/o.B.Pochaiah, Age: 58 years, Occ: Agriculture, Caste: Munnurukapu, R/o.Elagandula village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

Appellant/PW1-Defacto-Complainant

AND

1)Bonala Ajay @ Ajay Kumar, S/o.Mallaiah @ Mallesham, Now Age: 30 years, Caste: Munnurukapu, R/o.Bonalapalli h/o Elagandal village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

2)Bonala Mahender, S/o.Pochaiah @ Pedda Pochaiah, Now Age: 41 years, Caste: Munnurukapu, R/o.Bonalapalli h/o Elagandal village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

Respondents/Accused No.1 & 2

3)The State through Police Station, Karimnagar Rural (Cr.No.262/2014) Represented by Public Prosecutor, Prl. Sessions Court, Karimnagar.

Respondent/Complainant

Fair 2 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

On Appeal against the Judgment passed by the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar in C.C No.783 of 2014, dated 01.12.2021.

Between:

The State through Station House Officer, Police Station, Karimnagar Rural (Cr.No.262 of 2014) Complainant

AND

1)Bonala Ajay @ Ajay Kumar, S/o.Mallaiah @ Mallesham, Age: 22 years, Caste: Munnurukapu, R/o.Bonalapalli h/o Elagandal village of Karimnagar Mandal and District.

2)Bonala Mahender, S/o.Pochaiah @ Pedda Pochaiah, Age: 33 years, Caste: Munnurukapu, R/o.Bonalapalli h/o Elagandal village of Karimnagar Mandal and District. Accused No.1 and 2

This Criminal Appeal coming before me for final hearing on 02.03.2026 in the presence of Sri T.Thirupathi, Advocate for the Appellant and Sri Tanuku Mahesh, Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2 and Sri A.Ramulu, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing State/Respondent No.3, upon hearing both sides, upon perusing the material available on record and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

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

1.This appeal is preferred under Section 372 of Criminal procedure

Code (in short Cr.P.C) aggrieved of the judgment passed in C.C No.783 of 2014 dated 01.12.2021 by the learned I Additional Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar.

Fair 3 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

2.For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred to as they were referred before the learned trial Court i.e., the ‘Complainant’ and the ‘Accused No.1 and 2’.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE PROSECUTION CASE :-

3.On 09.05.2014 at 20.00 hours the complainant by name Bonala

Kanakaiah lodged a complaint stating that on 08.05.2014 after completing his personal work at Karimnagar, he got down at Bavupet bus stage and while going to his house, his villagers namely Akula

Jagan and Bonala Mogili came by motor cycle. He took lift and when they reached near Adavi Masjid at the outskirts of Bavupet village, at that time Bonala Ajay/A1 and Bonala Mahender/A2 stopped them and attacked the complainant by beating with stones and fisted hands, due to which he sustained bleeding injuries on his head near left eye and back. The said attacked is due to land disputes between them.

4.Basing on the complaint a case is registered in Crime No.262 of 2014 by Police Station, Karimnagar Rural for the offences under

Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, Police filed

Fair 4 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022 final report against accused No.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC.

5.The Charge was framed against accused No.1 and 2 for the offence under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC, read over and explained to them in Telugu to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.The learned Trial Court framed the following point for determination:-

Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?

7.To prove its case the prosecution has examined PW1 to PW9 and got marked Ex.P1 to P9. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused No.1 and 2 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C explaining the incriminating evidence appearing against them in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses to which they denied the same as false and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.

Fair 5 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

8.The learned Trial Court after considering the evidence adduced by the prosecution found accused No.1 and 2 not guilty for the offence under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC, but found guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced to pay fine

Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) each. In default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each for the offence under Section 323 of IPC.

9.Aggrieved by the judgment, the appellant/complainant preferred this appeal.

10.The learned Counsel for the appellant/complainant submitted that the learned Trial Court came to a wrong conclusion without proper appreciation of the evidence of PW1, PW6 to PW9 and the documents of the medical certificate and other material available on record and imposed fine only which is bad in law and perverse to the facts and circumstances of the case. The finding of the learned

Trial Court is erroneous and liable to be set aside. Hence prayed to allow the appeal.

Fair 6 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

11.Notice of the Appeal is served on the respondents

No.1 and 2/accused. The Counsel for the respondents/accused submitted that the learned Trial Court has passed the judgment after considering the evidence and there is no erroneous on the part of the

Learned Trial Court judgment. Hence prayed to dismiss the appeal.

12.No additional evidence is adduced by both sides.

13.Heard both sides and perused the record.

14.Now the point that arise for determination is:-

1)Whether the impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Court suffers from any infirmity/irregularity? And if so, the same is liable to be set aside as prayed for by the Appellant/Complainant?

2)To what result?

POINT No.1:

15.This Court being the Court of appeal has to scrutinize the evidence on record and to determine whether the learned Trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence on record or not. Therefore, it is necessary for this Court to appreciate the evidence on record.

Fair 7 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

16.To prove the case the prosecution has examined the complainant as PW1 who deposed that at about six years back when he was going towards his house by taking lift on the bike of LW2 and LW3 and when they reached Adavi Masjid, at that time accused Nos.1 and 2 coming in the opposite direction on bike obstructed their way and bet him with a stone on his head and eye and also injured him with blows and fist boring a grudge against him as he filed civil case against accused No.1 and 2 regarding to his agricultural land. Ex.P1 is his complaint.

17.PW2, PW3 and PW4 are the eye witnesses to the incident.

PW2 and PW3 deposed that about seven to eight years back on one day in the evening hours, they were asked to come to Bavupet road and they do not know any facts of case. PW4 deposed that he do not know anything about the facts of the case. The learned Additional Public

Prosecutor requested to declare the witnesses as hostile and sought permission to cross examine the witnesses, accordingly permission accorded. During cross examination of PW2 to PW4, they denied the suggestion that accused No.1 and 2 voluntarily caused head injury and on other parts of the body to PW1, due to galata between them regarding land disputes. Ex.P2 to Ex.P4 are Section 161 Cr.P.C

Fair 8 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022 statements of PW2 to PW4 respectively. Nothing contrary is elicited from PWs.2 to 4 during their cross examination.

18.PW5 and PW7 are panch witnesses for the crime detail form.

PW5 deposed that on the instance of the police he signed on written papers and he do not know anything about the facts of this case.

Ex.P5 is his signature. PW7 deposed that on 09.05.2014 at morning hours on request of the son of PW1 he appended his signatures on white papers without disclosing the facts. Ex.P7 is his signature.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor requested to declare the witnesses as hostile and permission to cross examine the witnesses, permission accorded. During cross examination PW5 and PW7 denied the suggestion that on 09.05.2014 police conducted scene of offence at

Bavupeta.

19.PW6 is the doctor who treated the injured/PW1. She deposed that on 09.05.2014, injured/B.Kanakaiah came to the hospital for medication. On examination she found abrasion on back and lacerations on the neck, near left eye and the said injuries are simple in nature. The injured was admitted in the hospital on 09.05.2014

Fair 9 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022 to 15.05.2014. After examination issued medical certificate. Ex.P6 is the Medical certificate.

20.PW8 is first investigating officer who deposed that on 09.05.2021

PW1 lodged Ex.P1 basing on which he registered a case in Cr.No.262 of 2014 for the offence under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC. Ex.P8 is the

First Information Report. During the course of investigation, he recorded the statement of PW1 and referred him to Govt hospital for medication. On the same day he visited the scene of offence, secured

PW5 and PW7, conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch. Ex.P9 is the Crime Detail Form. On the same day, he examined PW2 to PW4 at the scene of offence and handed over the

CD file to LW9 for further investigation.

21.PW9 is the investigating officer who filed Charge Sheet and he deposed that on 12.05.2014 he received CD file from PW8 for further investigation and found the investigation done by PW8 on proper lines. On 12.05.2014 at 10.00 hours he apprehended accused No.1 and 2 and on interrogation they confessed the guilt and also stated that after commission of offence they throwed the weapon

Fair 10 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022 of offence and the same was not recovered. After completion of arrest formalities, on completion of investigation and after receipt of medical certificate of PW1, he filed Charge Sheet.

22.The learned Trial Court considering the evidence of PW1 and

Ex.P6 observed that though there is no specific overt act of accused

No.1 and 2, PW1 consistently stated that accused Nos.1 and 2 caused injury to him with stone. The land disputes between PW1 and accused

No.1 is successfully elicited by the defence Counsel establishes the motive of accused No.1 and 2 to commit the offence. Except PW1 who is the victim and eye witness to the incident none of the prosecution witnesses supported the case. On the basis of the defence Counsel eliciting the evidence regarding the enmity between PW1 and accused came to a conclusion that PW1’s testimony is trustworthy coupled with

Ex.P6 and held that the prosecution has successfully established that accused Nos.1 and 2 have voluntarily caused simple injury to PW1.

23.PW1 during his cross examination admitted that his father and the father of the accused is one and the same. After the death of his mother, his father got married with Chilukamma and the accused is

Fair 11 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022 born out of the wedlock of his father and Chilukamma. It is further admitted that there is a civil case pending since many years regarding the land disputes between himself and accused. He was admitted as inpatient in the Govt. Hospital, Karimnagar and denied the suggestion that he filed a false complaint against the accused by boring the grudge due to civil disputes between them and he sustained injuries by falling down on the hard surface.

24.It is admitted by PW6 that medical certificate/Ex.P6 does not bear the time of examination. The injures may or may not be sustained if fallen from vehicle. Even though said injuries are simple in nature, they advise the injured to be admitted in the hospital. She has not advised for X-ray of the injured and denied the suggestion that neither the injured admitted in the hospital nor examined and Ex.P6 is issued only at the instance of police.

25.PW8 and PW9 who are the investigating officer admitted that there are land disputes between PW1 and accused. The road from

Bavupet to Bonalapally, there are granite cutting companies and there will be flow of employees of the company. It is admitted by PW8 that on

Fair 12 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022 the date of the incident PW1 along with two inmates proceedings on the bike i.e., PW2 and PW3. He examined the surrounding employee i.e., PW4 and not examined any employee of Eshwar Granite Company.

It is admitted by PW9 that there are land disputes between PW1 and accused and he has not inquired regrading the land disputes and denied that neither accused No.1 and 2 have confessed the guilt nor disclosed that the weapon of the offence is throwed from the scene of offence.

26.As seen from the medical certificate/Ex.P6, the injures sustained by PW1 are simple in nature. As alleged by the PW1 the weapon used is stone. The evidence of PW9 is that on interrogation, accused No.1 and 2 confessed the guilt and throwed the weapon of offence and same was not recovered. It is admitted fact that there are lands disputes between PW1 and accused since long time. As stated by PW1 that he was going on bike along with PW2 and PW3 who are the eye witnesses to the incident. PW4 is the another eye witness. All the eye witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. PW5 and PW7 who are the panch witness for the crime detail form also turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution.

Fair 13 of 13 Crl. Appeal No.2 of 2022

27.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Trial Court came to a correct conclusion and there are no sufficient ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned Trail

Court and the same needs to be upheld. Accordingly the point is answered.

POINT No.2:

28.As held in point No.1, the Criminal Appeal has to be dismissed.

In the result, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment passed by learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Karimnagar in C.C No.783 of 2014, dated 01.12.2021.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11th day of March, 2026.

II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Appendix of Evidence - Nil -

II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Order Record 766 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
MVOP/385/2025	Nallagonda Ellaiah vs Munisri Vastava	10 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
AS/39/2020	Ravanaveni Thirupathi vs Bodlapatla Raji reddy	08 Apr 2026	OTHER	—
MVOP/32/2025	THIKKA SANDEEP vs MODANI HARINARAYANA	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/128/2025	Kekkarla Karthikeya vs Thokala Madhukar	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/206/2025	SIKANDAR MANDAL vs THADURI PADMA	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/207/2025	Pulakit Ray vs Thaduri Padma	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/227/2025	Bandi Malla Reddy vs Kale Yadagiri	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/308/2025	Koudagani Kishan Rao vs Ellandula Kanukaiah	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/425/2025	Abbaraveni Alias Abraboina Laxmi vs Anoop Kumar Patel	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/471/2025	Ponnam Sammaiah vs Anoop Kumar Patel	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/489/2025	Mohammed shafik Pasha vs Githa Shiva Kumar	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/551/2025	Pittala Sharada Devi vs Karee Pradeep	08 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
ARBEP/47/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Kondapathi Ajay Kumar	08 Apr 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/78/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Ambigalla Raj Kumar	07 Apr 2026	ORDER	—
MVOP/89/2025	DASARI ANIL vs UMESH KUMAR	06 Apr 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/29/2025	RAMTENKI SHANKARAIAH vs VINOD SHANKAR MAMIDWAR	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/86/2025	ABDUL RAHEEM vs KUMBALA SURESH	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/134/2025	CHITYALA NAGAIAH vs DONAKATI THIRINESH	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/347/2025	Dughyala Arun Kumar vs Siliveru alias Siluveru Akshay Kumar	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/350/2025	Seegiri Suresh vs Erugurala Laxman	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/355/2025	Chityala Kishore vs Shanigarapu Chanti alias Shaanigaram Chanti	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/424/2025	Mallam Madhunamma vs Anoop Kumar Patel	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/433/2025	Medaveni Kanaka Raju vs Anoop Kumar Patel	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/434/2025	Polaveni Ilaiah vs Anoop Kumar Patel	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/571/2025	Medi Vinay vs Rammanohar Kevat	31 Mar 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
CMA/3/2022	Gaddam Sathanarayana vs Nandigottu Sarojana Sarojana	23 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
G.W.O.P/12/2022	Shanigaram Rajitha @ Asraf Arhath vs Shanigaram Koteshwar	13 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/9/2024	M/s. Shriram Finance Limited vs Moutam Punnam Chander	13 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/26/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Neruvatla Raju	12 Mar 2026	ORDER	—
CRLA/2/2022	Bonala Kanukaiah vs Bonala Ajay @ Ajay Kumar	11 Mar 2026	JUDGMENT	Convicted
ARBEP/67/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Arikilla Shankaraiah	11 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
SC/36/2022	The State through SHO Karimnagar I Town PS vs Mohammed Imtiaz Ali	10 Mar 2026	JUDGMENT	Acquitted
SC/59/2025	State of Telangana through SHO PS Karimnagar I Town vs MD Sajauddin	10 Mar 2026	JUDGMENT	Acquitted
SC/100308/2018	Devaraveni Rajamallu @ Rayamallu vs A3. Sarla Laxmi @ Lachavva	10 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
SC/189/2022	The State, Represented by Inspector of Police, PS, Karimnagar-II Town vs Gunda Venkati	09 Mar 2026	JUDGMENT	Acquitted
ARBEP/41/2022	M/s.Shriram Transport Finance company limited Karimnagar, R/by its GPA Holder Sandeep Kandula vs Suresh Penchala	02 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/185/2022	M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Limited, vs KADE KARTHIK	02 Mar 2026	OTHER	—
OS/400037/2018	Thandavaram @ Chittampally Kavitha vs Vodnala Rajaiah	27 Feb 2026	JUDGMENT	—
ARBEP/197/2022	M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Limited, vs KANCHANAPLLI SANTHOSH KRISHNA	27 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
EP/22/2025	Jagati Srinivas vs A.Swamy reddy	25 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
CRLA/252/2019	Dyava Annapurna vs Dyava Kishan Reddy	23 Feb 2026	JUDGMENT	—
CMA/12/2022	Pesaru Mallaiah vs Dasari Komuraiah	20 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
EP/162/2021	Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Karimnagar I Branch Rep by A.Mallikharjun vs Narla Santhosh	20 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/72/2025	Shriram City Union Finance Limited, Karimnagar I Branch R/by its Mr. A. Kumara Swamy vs Boda Rajinikanth	20 Feb 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/97/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Vadluri Srikar	20 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/52/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Mohammad Mujeeboddin	19 Feb 2026	ORDER	—
EP/212/2021	Dursetti Sadaiah vs Kankanala Venugopal	17 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
EP/163/2021	Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Karimnagar I Branch Rep by A.Mallikharjun vs Balasani Ashwin	12 Feb 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/109/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Manala Babu	12 Feb 2026	ORDER	—
EP/170/2021	Shriram City Union Finance Limited, Karimnagar-I Branch vs Mohd. Saleem	10 Feb 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/56/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Katta Shiva Shankara Chary	10 Feb 2026	ORDER	—
CRLRP/22/2024	K. Maniraj vs Nunavath Rajam	09 Feb 2026	ORDER	—
MVOP/28/2025	KETHIREDDY BHARATHI vs KALIKOTA KIRAN	07 Feb 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
OS/17/2025	Bikkumalla Avinash vs Bikkumalla Satyanarayana	07 Feb 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
ARBEP/31/2023	Shriram Finance Limited vs Bollam Srikanth	29 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/36/2023	M/s. Manappuram Finance Ltd. vs Medipalli Srinivas Reddy	29 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/177/2022	M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Limited, vs NAGESH SONNAITENKAM	28 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
AS/54/2023	Yalla Shakunthala (Died) vs Chennadi Venkat Reddy	27 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/30/2024	M/s Shriram Finance Limited vs Namindla Rajeshwar Rao	27 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/134/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Chakravarthi Boure	27 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/39/2023	Shriram Finance Limited vs Balusani Ravi Kumar	21 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
EP/9/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Finance Limited, Siricilla branch, r/by its Attorney holder A.Mallikarjun vs Thirupathi Singadasari	20 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/25/2025	Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd vs Javaji Raju	20 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/35/2023	M/s Five Star Business Finance Limited vs Kummari Eshwari	20 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/10/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Srinivas Gouda	19 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/71/2023	Shriram Finance Limited vs Surishetty Sathish Kumar	19 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
MVOP/121/2025	MASU PUSHPA vs THOTA RAKESH	09 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
MVOP/137/2025	Kashipaka Ilaiah alias Ailaiah vs Guda Sai Chander	09 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
MVOP/177/2025	Ponnam alias Punnam venu vs Ash Mohd	09 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
CRLA/251/2019	Dyava Annapurna vs Dyava Malla Reddy	09 Jan 2026	JUDGMENT	—
ARBEP/24/2024	M/s Shriram Finance Limited. vs Dubba Mahender	09 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/26/2024	M/s. Shriram Finance Limited vs Srinivas Uppera	09 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
MVOP/26/2025	NAREDLA RAJESHWARI vs AZMIRA PAVAN KUMAR ALIAS PAVAN	08 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/27/2025	NAREDLA ANUSHA vs AZMIRA PAVAN KUMAR ALIAS PAVAN	08 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/264/2025	Burki Ramulu vs Nazeem Khan alias Nasim Khan	08 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
ARBEP/32/2024	M/s. Shriram Finance Limited vs Thirupathi Rachapalli	08 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/33/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Myla Raj Kumar	08 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
MVOP/99/2025	MOHD SOHEL vs VAIDA PRASAD	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/133/2025	CHIRUTHA VIJAYA vs UPPUNUTI SATYNARAYANA	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/160/2025	CHIRUTHA LINGAIAH vs UPPUNUTI SATYNARAYANA	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/173/2024	Gadhe @ Rachakonda Umarani vs Tula Venkataramana Rao	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/234/2025	Gugulothu Lakpathi Naik vs Kallepally Komuraiah	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/235/2025	XXXXX vs Dumpala Vamshidhar Reddy alias Vamshidhar	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/258/2025	Sabbani Gajanan vs Kothireddy Sampath Reddy	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/261/2025	Akula Laxmi vs Mandala Gopinath Reddy	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/276/2024	Varukolu Praveen vs Naredla Rajesham	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
MVOP/365/2025	Durgam Papaiah vs Bairneni Prudhvi Raj	07 Jan 2026	Lokadalat Award	—
ARBEP/88/2024	M/s. Shriram Finance Limited vs Boosarapu Vineeth	07 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/96/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Syed Ahmed	07 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/98/2024	Shriram Finance Limited vs Margam Swamy	07 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/15/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Moola Srinivas	06 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/58/2025	Shriram Finance Limited, Karimnagar-I Branch vs Ponagani Sagar	06 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/78/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Finance Limited, Karimnagar-I Branch, Rep by Mr. A. Mallikharjun vs Bujugundla Ramesh	06 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/4/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Chelikani Srinivas	05 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
ARBEP/23/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Surender Reddy Enukonda	05 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/64/2023	Shriram Finance Limited vs Myakala Naveen	05 Jan 2026	ORDER	—
ARBEP/87/2024	M/s. Mahaveer Finance India Limited vs Rajakumar D	05 Jan 2026	OTHER	—
OS/2000042/2016	P SAROJA vs V KANAKA LAXMI	31 Dec 2025	JUDGMENT	—
ARBEP/19/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs PARASHARAMULU BANDI	31 Dec 2025	OTHER	—
ARBEP/28/2025	Shriram Finance Limited vs Ranjith Singh Sardar	31 Dec 2025	ORDER	—

Showing 100 of 766 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2026		24
Mar 2026		22
Feb 2026		17
Jan 2026		43
Dec 2025		96
Nov 2025		22
Oct 2025		23
Sep 2025		15
Aug 2025		10
Jul 2025		28
Jun 2025		30
May 2025		4

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt. D.SADHANA handled?

Smt. D.SADHANA has handled 785 court orders since 2023 at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 30 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt. D.SADHANA hear?

Based on available records, Smt. D.SADHANA primarily handles Motor Accident matters (Motor Accident Claims) and Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Original Suits) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases, Criminal Appeals) at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Smt. D.SADHANA currently posted?

Smt. D.SADHANA is posted as Prl District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex, Karimnagar, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt. D.SADHANA available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by Smt. D.SADHANA are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt. D.SADHANA dispose cases?

Smt. D.SADHANA disposes approximately 30 cases per month, based on 785 orders handled over their tenure at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Smt. D.SADHANA serving?

Smt. D.SADHANA has been serving at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex since 2023.

Case Types

MVOP 33%

ARBEP 24%

EP 20%

SC 11%

CRLA 4%

OS 3%

AS 3%

CRLRP 2%

Posting History

Apr 2025 — Apr 2025

Prl District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar
Feb 2024 — Apr 2026

Chairman LRAT- cum -II Addl District and Sessions Judge · 713 orders
May 2023 — Nov 2023

Spl Judge for Trial of cases under SCs and STs Act Cum III Addl District and Sessions Judge · 72 orders
Feb 2023 — Feb 2023

Spl Judge for Trial of cases under SCs and STs Act Cum III Addl District and Sessions Judge

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 8

Convicted 1

Other Judges at this Court

Mr. S Shiva Kumar

Prl District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar

154 orders

Sri D. Venkatesh

I Addl District and Sessions Judge

753 orders

Smt.C.Pavani

Chairman LRAT- cum -II Addl District and Sessions...

8 orders

Smt. A. Neeraja

Spl Judge for Trial of cases under SCs and STs Act...

580 orders

J.Kavitha

Judge Family Court cum IV Addl District and Sessio...

474 orders

Mr. Yashwant Singh Chauhan

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate...

0 orders

Ms. Damerla Preethi

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional...

1,206 orders

Sri Chirag Mehta

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class Mobile...

717 orders

Sri Banothu Rajeshwar

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Tra...

437 orders

Sri. Jamana Venkata Satya Raj Kiran

II Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- II Addition...

579 orders

Smt K Rani

Senior Civil Judge Karimnagar

40 orders

Nama Santosh Kumar

Spl Judge for Trail of SPE and ACB Cases -cum- VI...

7 orders

← View all judges at Karimnagar, PDJ Court Complex