Smt Devi Manasa Panthagada

1

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

PRESENT: Smt. Devi Manasa Panthagada

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet

FRIDAY, THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2017

C.C.No. 129 OF 2016

Between:-

The State through., Prohibition and Excise Station, Andole at Jogipet. …Prosecution A N D

Kalali Ashok Goud S/o. Sathya Goud, Age: 40 years, Occupation: Toddy seller, R/o: Gatpally Village, Alladurg Mandal.

… Accused

This case is coming for final hearing before me on 19-04-2017 in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and of Sri R. Eshwaraiah, Advocate for the accused, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a charge sheet filed by the Prohibition & Excise

Sub-Inspector, Excise Station, against sole accused for the offence

U/Sec.34(a) of A.P. Excise Act 1968.

2.The brief facts of the case are that on 13-05-2015 on receipt of reliable information about the illegal possession and sale of toddy near the 'X' roads at the outskirts of Gatpally Village, the Prohibition & Excise

Sub-Inspector along with his staff by securing two panch witness by name

P.G. Kumar (LW1) and sangaiah Swamy (LW2), proceeded to the spot. At 2 the spot they found the accused conducting sales of toddy and on seeing the Excise officials, the accused tried to ran away. On search they found (3) plastic cans each containing (20) litres of toddy, thus total (60) litres of toddy. Later conducted spot test and found that the toddy is free from chloral Hydrate. Later drawn two samples of toddy each 350 ml under cover of panchanama and destroyed the remaining toddy in the presence of panch witness. On enquriy with the local people, the descriptive particulars of the accused are revealed.

3. Basing on the material collected, the Investigating Officer registered a case in Cr.No. 114/15-16, Dt: 13-05-2015 U/Sec.34(a) of A.P.

Excise Act, 1968 and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, examined and recorded the statements of witness. Later, deposited one sample bottle before Hon'ble Court and sent another sample to Govt. Chemical Examiner for Proh.. & Excise, Nizamabad for analysis. On 20-05-2015, effected the arrest of the accused and produced

before the Hon'ble Court for judicial custody. Basing on the material

collected and after receipt of C.E. Report filed charge sheet against the accused.

4.This case was taken on file for the offence U/Sec.34(a) of A.P.

Excise Act 1968, against the accused and numbered as CC.No.129/2016.

On appearance of accused, copies of documents were furnished to him.

5.The accused was examined U/Sec.239 Cr.P.C., and a charge for the offence punishable U/Sec.34(a) of A.P. Excise Act 1968, was framed, read over and explained to the accused, for which, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3

6.During the course of trail, on behalf of prosecution PW-1 and 2 were examined and got marked, Ex.P-1 to P-4.

7.The panchas turned hostile, as such the learned APPO given up the evidence of other prosecution witness which includes the

Investigating Officer. On perusal of the prosecution evidence, it was found that there was no incriminating material against the accused. As such examination of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C was dispensed with by this Court.

8.Now, the point that arises for determination is whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence

U/Sec.34(a) of A.P. Excise Act 1968 beyond reasonable doubt ?

9.POINT:- The simple case of the prosecution is that accused indulged in illegal possession of sale of toddy at 'X' roads at the outskirts of

Gatpally Village. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined the panch witnesses as PW1 and PW2 and further marked Ex.P.1 and

Ex.P.2 as portion of signatures on panchanama of PW1 and Ex.P.3 and

Ex.P.4 as portion of signatures on panchanama of PW2.

10.PW1 and PW2 deposed that they do not know anything about the case. Further, they testified that Police obtained his signature on blank paper and they do not know the contents of the paper which contains their signatures.

11.The panchas turned hostile as such the learned APPO given up the evidence of other prosecution evidence which includes Investigating

Officer.

4

12.On perusal of prosecution evidence, it was found that there was no incriminating material against the accused. In the present case, there is nothing on record to connect the accused with the crime alleged to have been committed by him is sufficient to say that prosecution failed to prove the offence much less the guilt of the accused with which he stood charge.

13.In view of aforesaid discussion, for the lack of corroborative evidence this court holds that the prosecution is failed to establish that accused was in possession and conducting of sales of toddy at 'X' roads at watpally village. Therefore, this court holds that prosecution is failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of accused and against the accused.

14.In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec.34(a) of A.P. Excise Act 1968 and accordingly, accused is acquitted for the same U/Sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused are stands cancelled subject to Sec.437-A Cr.P.C. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 21st day of April, 2017.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet 5

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined on behalf of

PROSECUTION:DEFENCE:

PW1 P.G. Kumar -NIL- PW2 Sangaiah Swamy

Exhibits marked for

PROSECUTION:DEFENCE:

Ex.P1 Portion of Signature on panchanama - NIL- by PW1 Ex.P2 Portion of Signature on panchanama by PW1 Ex.P3 Portion of Signature on panchanama by PW2 Ex.P4 Portion of Signature on panchanama by PW2

Material Objects marked for -NIL-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet

1

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

PRESENT: Smt. Devi Manasa Panthagada

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet

FRIDAY, THIS THE 21st DAY OF APRIL, 2017

C.C.No. 97 OF 2015

Between:-

The State through., Prohibition and Excise Station, Andole at Jogipet. …Prosecution A N D

Palthya Ravi Naik S/o. Jangya Naik, Age: 37 years, Occupation: ID Liquor seller, R/o:Medikunda Thanda Village, Regode Mandal.

… Accused

This case is coming for final hearing before me on 19-04-2017 in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and of Sri R. Eshwaraiah, Advocate for the accused, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a charge sheet filed by the Prohibition & Excise

Sub-Inspector, Excise Station, against sole accused for the offence

U/Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of A.P.Prohibition Act 1995.

2.The brief facts of the case are that on 05-05-2014 on receipt of reliable information about the illegal possession and sale of ID Liquor by the accused at his house situated at Medikunda Thanda Village, the

Prohibition & Excise Sub-Inspector along with his staff by securing two panch witness by name K. Srinivas Goud (LW1) and B. Sailu (LW2), 2 proceeded to the Thanda. They found the accused conducting sales of toddy and on seeing the Excise officials, the accused tried to ran away.

Later the Prohibition & Excise Sub-Inspector issued search memo and on search they found (10) litres capacity of plastic can containing (10) litres of

ID Liquor and the same was seized by collecting two samples each 180 ml under cover of panchanama in the presence of two mediators. On enquriy with the local people, the descriptive particulars of the accused are revealed.

3. Basing on the material collected, the Investigating Officer registered a case in Cr.No. 110/14-15, Dt: 05-05-2014 U/Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995 and took up investigation. During the course of investigation deposited one sample bottle before Hon'ble Court and sent another sample to Govt. Chemical Examiner for Prohibition & Excise,

Nizamabad for analysis. On 30-06-2014, the accused voluntarily surrendered before the Hon'ble Court and later effected his arrest and sent to judicial custody. Basing on the material collected and after receipt of

C.E. Report filed charge sheet against the accused.

4.This case was taken on file for the offence U/Sec.34(a) of A.P.

Excise Act 1968, against the accused and numbered as CC.No.97/2015.

On appearance of accused, copies of documents were furnished to him.

5.The accused was examined U/Sec.239 Cr.P.C., and a charge for the offence punishable U/Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995 was framed, read over and explained to the accused, for which, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3

6.During the course of trail, on behalf of prosecution PW-1 and 2 were examined and got marked, Ex.P-1 to P-4.

7.The panchas turned hostile, as such the learned APPO given up the evidence of other prosecution witness which includes the

Investigating Officer. On perusal of the prosecution evidence, it was found that there was no incriminating material against the accused. As such examination of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C was dispensed with by this Court.

8.Now, the point that arises for determination is whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995 beyond reasonable doubt ?

9.POINT:- The simple case of the prosecution is that accused indulged in illegal possession of sale of toddy at his house situated at

Medikunda Thanda. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined the panch witnesses as PW1 and PW2 and further marked

Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2 as portion of signatures on panchanama of PW1 and

Ex.P.3 and Ex.P.4 as portion of signatures on panchanama of PW2.

10.PW1 and PW2 deposed that they do not know anything about the case. Further, they testified that Police obtained his signature on blank paper and they do not know the contents of the paper which contains their signatures.

11.The panchas turned hostile as such the learned APPO given up the evidence of other prosecution evidence which includes Investigating

Officer.

4

12.On perusal of prosecution evidence, it was found that there was no incriminating material against the accused. In the present case, there is nothing on record to connect the accused with the crime alleged to have been committed by him is sufficient to say that prosecution failed to prove the offence much less the guilt of the accused with which he stood charge.

13.In view of aforesaid discussion, for the lack of corroborative evidence this court holds that the prosecution is failed to establish that accused was in possession and conducting of sales of toddy at his house at Medikunda village. Therefore, this court holds that prosecution is failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of accused and against the accused.

14.In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995 and accordingly, accused is acquitted for the same U/Sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused are stands canceled subject to Sec.437-A Cr.P.C.

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

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 21st day of April, 2017.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet 5

Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined on behalf of

PROSECUTION:DEFENCE:

PW1 K. Srinivas Goud -NIL- PW2 Sai Baba

Exhibits marked for

PROSECUTION:DEFENCE:

Ex.P1 Portion of Signature on panchanama - NIL- by PW1 Ex.P2 Portion of Signature on panchanama by PW1 Ex.P3 Portion of Signature on panchanama by PW2 Ex.P4 Portion of Signature on panchanama by PW2

Material Objects marked for -NIL-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet

-1-

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ANDOLE AT JOGIPET

PRESENT: Smt. Devi Manasa Panthagada

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Andole at Jogipet

WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017

P.R.C.No.8 of 2017

Between:-

The State of Telangana through, P.S. Alladurg … Complainant A N D

Baikadi @ Chakali Veeramma W/o. Late Bethaiah, Aged about: 45 years, Occupation: Coolie, R/o. Alladurg Village & Mandal, Medak District. … Accused

This case is coming up before me on this day 26-04-2017 for hearing in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant and Sri S. Krishna Reddy, counsel for the accused, upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing both sides, this court made the following:-

COMMITTAL ORDER

1.This is a Charge Sheet filed by Circle Inspector of Police, Jogipet, against the Accused for the offence U/Sec. 302 of Indian Penal Code, for short hereinafter referred to as I.P.C.

2.The allegations in brief leveled against the accused are that :

The deceased Chakali Sangameshwar was the step-son of the accused. The accused by name Chakali Veeramma had no issues, therefore her husband performed second marriage with one Bethamma. Later the said

Bethamma was blessed with Sangameshwar. About one year back the husband of the accused was died, therefore, accused alongwith Bethamma and the -2- deceased are residing in the village. As Bethamma is deaf and dumb, the deceased was brought up by the accused. On 11-05-2015, Bethamma alongwith sangameshwar left to agricultural fields while the accused left to washing clothes and she returned home by 12.00 PM, by that time Bethamma and the deceased also returned home. Again at 2.00 PM, accused left to wash clothes in the village while the deceased was present in the house and when she returned home after her work, she could not find the deceased and therefore searched for him. At about 5.30 PM one Mekalakadi Geetha informed the accused that the deceased

Sangameshwar was sleeping in the house, upon which the accused alongwith some other villagers came to the house and noticed the deceased dead.

3.Basing on the report, the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Alladurg, registered case in Cr.No.75/15 U/Sec.174 Cr.P.C, issued FIR and took up the investigation.

On 12-07-2015, the Sub-Inspector of Police visited the scene of offence, secured the presence of panch witnesses, and conducted the scene of offence panchanama. Later visited Govt.Hospital, Jogipet, examined and recorded the statement of other witnesses and conducted inquest over dead body of the deceased in the presence of two witnesses and subjected the dead body for

Post Mortem Examination. The Medical Officer, after conducting Autopsy opined that “ death due to asphyxia and venous congestion due to strangulation”. After receipt of PME Report, the Sub-Inspector of Police altered the section of law from section 174 Cr.P.C to Section 302 IPC. Later, the Circle Inspector of Police took up further investigation and visited the scene of offence and examined the witnesses.

On 26-11-2015, B. Balram (LW7) and S. Narsimulu(LW8) appeared before the Circle Inspector of Police and stated that the accused confessed her guilt to them. On 27-11-2015, on the instructions of the Circle Inspector of Police, the -3- SHO apprehended the accused at her house and on interrogation she confessed that the deceased got habituated with bad vices and in order to fullfill his desires he committed thefts. The accused warned the deceased to change his attitude but the deceased did not heed her. On 11-07-2015, when the accused returned home from the village and enquired the deceased about his involvement in the commission of a theft in the village, upon which the deceased picked up quarrel with the accused and tried to beat her. Therefore, the accused vexed with the behaviour of the deceased strangulated him with a cell phone charger. Later the

Circle Inspector of Police, secured the presence of witnesses and conducted confession panchanama and seized one cell phone charger from the possession of accused. Later Accused was arrested and produced before Hon'ble Court for judicial custody. Basing on the material collected filed charge sheet against the accused.

4.The case was taken on file for the offence U/s. 302 of IPC, against the Accused.

5.On appearance of the accused, copies of all the documents were furnished to her U/s 207 Cr.P.C.

6.Heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel

for Accused and perused the record.

7.The record prima facie reveals a case U/Sec. 302 of IPC, which is exclusively triable by a Court of Session. Hence, the case is committed to the

Hon’ble Sessions Court, Medak at Sangareddy, U/Sec.209(a) Cr.P.C.

-4-

8.The entire case record and property shall be submitted to the

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

9.The Public Prosecutor concerned, informed about the commitment of the case to Hon’ble Sessions Judge’s Court, Medak at Sangareddy U/Sec.

209 (d) Cr.P.C.

10.The accused has been informed about free legal aid at Court of

Session and accused submitted that she has means to engage counsel at Court of Session.

11.In the result, the case is committed to Hon’ble Prl. Sessions Court,

Medak at Sangareddy and accused is directed to appear before the Hon’ble Prl.

Sessions Court, Medak at Sangareddy on 09-06-2017.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 26th day of April, 2017.

Judicial Magistrate of Frist Class,

Andole at Jogipet.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

- NIL -

Judicial Magistrate of Frist Class,

Andole at Jogipet.

-5-

TSSN060002142016

Presented on : 26-04-2016 Registered on : 26-04-2016 Decided on : 01-05-2017 Duration : 1 years, 0 months, 5 days

IN THE COURT OF

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

AT ANDOLE

PRC/20/2016

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION): The State of Telangana Rep by Drugs InspectorMedak Through Police Station Officer , The drugs Inspector Medak.

ANDOLE MEDAK

The State of Telangana Rep by Drugs InspectorMedak VERSUS : Vanguard Laboratories Age: 0 Occupation : E-75 Industrial Area, Selaqui Dehradun 248197 U.K Represented by KVV Chowdary.

2:KVV Chowdary Age: 0 Occupation : GPA holders of Ms Vanguard Laboratories E-75 Industrial Area Selaqui Dehradun ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: , Advocate for appearing for Vanguard Laboratories Advocate appearing for , 2 respectively.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under :

U/Sec18a1r/

wSec27ofDrugsandcosmeticsAct1940 of

DRUGS AND COSMETICS ACT,

of , of , of ,

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 01-05-2017)

ORDER

A2 being the Managing Partner of A1 is resent and his committal bonds furnished. Heard and perused the record. The record prima facie shows a case against A2 for the offence under section 18 (a)(i) punishable under section 27(d) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. As the section 18(a)(i) punishable under section 27 (d) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 is exclusively triable by Hon\''ble Sessions Court, hence the case is committed to the Hon\''ble Sessions Court vide separate committal order under section 209 Cr.P.C. Accused is directed to appear before the Hon\''ble Prl.Sessions Court on 14-06-2017. the entire case record and properties, if any shall be submitted to the Hon\''ble Sessions Court.

Date : 01-05-2017 Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

(Mr. MOHAMMAD ASADULLA SHAREEF)Junior

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

ANDOLE MEDAK

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

TSSN060000662015

Presented on : 29-01-2015 Registered on : 29-01-2015 Decided on : 01-05-2017 Duration : 2 years, 3 months, 3 days

IN THE COURT OF

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

AT ANDOLE

CC/36/2015

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION): Pulugam Ramesh Through Police Station Officer Siddipet I Town 203, Ro Pochamma temple, Jogipet Village of Andole Mandal.

ANDOLE MEDAK

Pulugam Ramesh VERSUS : Vadla Brahmama Age: 0 Occupation : Ro Thimmapur Village of Kowdipally Mandal Medak District. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: , Advocate for appearing for Vadla Brahmama Advocate appearing for , respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 379IPC of INDIAN PENAL CODE, of , of , of ,

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 01-05-2017)

ORDER

Accused is produced on warrant by p.C No. 2505 of PS Jogipet heard the quantum of sentence accused is sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence U/Sec 411 IPC and in default of payment of fine he shall under simple imprisonment for aperiod of one the remand of accused i.e., from 03-12-2017 to 14-03-2015 shall be set off U/Sec 428 Cr.P.C the accused is appraised of his right to prefer appeal against the judgment and sentence passed by this court. The office is directed to furnish a copy of judgment to the accused forthwith.

Date : 01-05-2017 Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Andole at jogipet

ANDOLE MEDAK

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

Junior Civil

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

ANDOLE MEDAK

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