Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R

II Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Malkajgiri

Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex · Medchal Malkajgiri · Telangana

Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R, II Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Malkajgiri, is posted at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex, Medchal Malkajgiri, Telangana, India. 241 court orders on record since 2022. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC, EP cases.

241

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

CC/1333/2020 Acquitted

PS KUSHAIGUDA vs KAKARLAPUDI KRISHNA KIRAN

26 Sep 2023

Page 1 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

AT MALKAJGIRI.

PRESENT: SRI. S.R. DILIP KUMAR NAIK II Addl. Junior Civil Judge cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Tuesday, thisthe 26 thday of September, 2023.

CALENDER CASE NO.1333 of 2020

Between:

The State of Telangana, through Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Neredmet, Rachakonda.

……..Complainant.

A N D

Kakarlapudi Krishna Kiran, S/o. KGK Raju, age: 37 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.8-55, Gowtham Nagar, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. Aadhaar No.4846 7254 9407.

......Accused.

This case came before me on 11.09.2023 for final hearing in the presence of the Learned Assistant Public Persecutor and T. Radhakishan Rao, Advocate for accused, upon hearing the arguments of both sides and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Kushaiguda has filed

Charge Sheet against the above named accused in Crime No.687 of 2019 for the offences punishable under sections 285, 287, 338, 304 (A) of IPC.

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

i)On 12.10.2019 at 14:15 hrs the defacto complainant /PW-1/Gallam Lingaiah @ Ramalingaiah lodged report before

Kushaiguda Police Station stating that his wife namely Gallam

Parvathi, is working in Seven Hills Soft gel Pvt. Ltd Company since 3 years. As usually on 11.10.2019 at about 09:00 hrs she went to

Page 2 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

her regular work in company and at about 16:30 hrs while she was doing work in the company room all of a sudden fire was caught to her and she sustained severe burn injuries over her hands, legs, head and other parts of the body and her co-workers viz. Saritha,

Age: 35 yrs, Dinesh, Age: 22 yrs and Amit, Age: 21 yrs also caught fire and sustained severe burning injuries. In this regard the same was informed to PW-1 by the company management and when he reached the company and found that all the persons were shifted to APEX Hospital, Medipally and then shifted to Yashoda Hospital,

Malakpet for treatment. Further, they are all shifted to Apollo

Hospital, DRDO for better treatment and they are undergoing treatment.

ii)Further PW-1 stated that due to not providing the safety measures by the Seven Hills Soft gel Pvt. Ltd Management in which the flames were came out from the machinery of manufacturing tablet and capsules or electricity flames. Hence he requested for taking necessary action.

3.Basing on the contents of above report, the LW-25/K.

Chandra Shekar, Inspector of Police, PS Kushaiguda, registered a case in Crime No.687/2019 for the offence punishable U/Sec.285, 287, 338, 304-A IPC and entrusted the investigation to PW-13/B.

Sreenu. During the course of investigation, PW-13 has examined the PW-1 and recorded his detailed statement. Later PW-13 visited the scene of offence, issued crime detail form in the presence of panch witnesses LW-11/Sirimalla Raju and LW-12/Nammumla

Ramesh. PW-13 also examined the witnesses LW-2 & LW-3 who are the employees of the said company. Later, PW-13 visited to

Page 3 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

Apollo Hospital, DRDO and recorded the statement of injured persons i.e., Lws 4 and deceased D1, D2, D3 and recorded their statements.

4.During the further course of investigation, the PW-13 made requisition before the LW-23 to know the defects of the electricity supply and accordingly the LW-23 has deputed his senior line inspector Sri P. Suresh, to inspect the premises and hence the location was inspected on 14-10-2019 in presence of Sri.

H. Sambashiva Rao, Addl. Asst. Engineer (Cherlapalli IDA-I) and found that electrical HT Trivector energy meter along with 20/5A

CTPT set are found OK at the point of incoming supply. Where as in the outgoing side there may be problem and fire might have taken place.

5.While the investigation is in progress, on 18.10.2019 the PW-13 was received information from DRDO, Apollo Hospital that the injured/deceased Smt. Chityala Saritha was succumbed in the hospital with burn injuries while undergoing treatment, duly shifted the dead body from DRDO Hospital to Gandhi Mortuary and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the secured mediators viz Lws 13 & 14. Examined and read over the statement of the Witnesses i.e., LWs 4 & 5, duly the dead body was subjected for held autopsy over the corps of the deceased Smt. Ch. Saritha, by PW-10/Dr. G. Mahender, Asst.

Professor, Dept of Forensic Medicine, Gandhi Medical College, who conducted the PME over the corps and opined that the cause of death is due to ‘burns’. After postmortem, the dead body was handed over to the blood relatives for final rites.

Page 4 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

6.While the investigation is in progress, on 26.10.2019 the PW-13 was received information from DRDO, Apollo Hospital that the injured/deceased Amit Kumar was succumbed in the hospital with burn injuries while undergoing treatment, duly shifted the dead body from DRDO Hospital to Gandhi Mortuary and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the Lws 15 & 16. Examined and read over the statement of the Witnesses i.e., LWs 7 & 8, duly the dead body was subjected for held autopsy over the corps of the deceased Amit

Kumar, by PW-15/Dr. B. Vasanth Naik, Asst. Professor, Dept of

Forensic Medicine, Gandhi Medical College, who conducted the

PME over the corps and opined that the cause of death is due to ‘burns’. After postmortem, the dead body was handed over to the blood relatives for final rites.

7.While the investigation is in progress, on 27.10.2019 the PW-13 was received information from DRDO, Apollo Hospital that the injured/deceased Smt. Gallam Parvathi was succumbed in the hospital with burn injuries while undergoing treatment, duly shifted the dead body from DRDO Hospital to Gandhi Mortuary and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the secured mediators viz Lws 17 & 18. Examined and read over the statement of the Witnesses i.e., LWs 9 & 10, duly the dead body was subjected for held autopsy over the corps of the deceased Smt. Gallam Parvathi, by PW-10/Dr. G. Mahender, Asst.

Professor, Dept of Forensic Medicine, Gandhi Medical College, who conducted the PME over the corps and opined that the cause

Page 5 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

of death is due to ‘burns’. After postmortem, the dead body was handed over to the blood relatives for final rites.

8.LW-25 took up the investigation since the incident was grave in nature. LW-25 has collected the Medical Certificate of injured/LW-4 from LW-21 wherein he opined that the injuries grievous in nature. Later LW-26 took up the investigation since the

LW-25 was transferred from Kushaiguda PS. LW-26 has collected the Dying Declarations from the LW-22 and verified.

9.On 30-12-2019 the accused was arrested and released on bail after furnishing sufficient sureties. After completion of investigation, LW-25 and LW-26 filed the charge sheet against accused.

10.This court took cognizance for the offence punishable under section 285, 287, 338, 304-A IPC against Accused.

11.On appearance of the accused, copies of the documents as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., are furnished to him and were examined U/Sec.251 of Cr.P.C., the allegations explained to him. The accused denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

12.To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 16 and got marked Exs.P1 to P22. The evidence of LWs 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 21, and 25 is given up by learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

13.After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused is examined U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses,

Page 6 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

for which the accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.

14.Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused.

15.P oint for determination is : “whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 285, 287, 338, 304-A IPC beyond reasonable doubt”?

16.Point: To prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt, prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 16 and marked Exs.P1 to Ex.P22. PW-1 is the Complainant. PW-2, 4 and 11 are the

Witness. PW-3 is the injured. PW-5 is the Witness and husband of

Deceased D-1. PW-6 is the Witness and Coworker of the deceased

D-2. PW-7 is the Panch for inquest of the deceased D-2. PWs 8 and 9 are the Panch for inquest of the deceased D-3. PW-10 is conducted autopsy over D1 & D3. PW-12 is inspected the scene and furnished his report. PW-13 is the 1st Investigating Officer.

PW-14 is Recorded the DD of injured & Deceased. PW-15 is the

Conducted autopsy over D2. PW-16 is the 3rd Investigating Officer.

Ex.P1 is the Report of PW-1. Ex.P2 to P7 are the 161 Cr.P.C.

Statements of PWs 1 to 6. Ex.P8 is the Signature of PW-8 on inquest Panchanama of Deceased D-3. Ex.P9 is the Signature of

PW-9 on inquest Panchanama of Deceased D-3. Ex.P10 is the PME

Report of Deceased D-1. Ex.P11 is the PME Report of Deceased D-

3. Ex.P12 is the 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-11. Ex.P13 is the

Inspection Report of TSSPDCL. Ex.P14 is the Rough Sketch.

Ex.P15 is the Inquest Panchanama. Ex.P16 is the First Information

Page 7 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

Report. Ex.P17 is the Requisition from SHO PS. Ex.P18 to P21 are the Dying Declarations. Ex.P22 is the PME Report of D2.

17.The wife of PW-1 was working at 7 Hills company as a labour. Through 7 Hills Softgen Pvt Ltd., since 3 years and on 11/10/2019 at about 9:00 AM she went to work at about 4:30 PM as she was doing her work in the company room suddenly fire was caught due to which his wife sustained severe burn injuries over hand legs head and other parts of the body and along with her one

Saritha, Dinesh, Amith caught the fire and sustained severe burning injuries. PW-1 by knowing about the said incident as he informed the same to the company management and as he reached all the persons were shifted to Apex Hospital, Medipally and then to Yashoda Hospital, Malakpet and for better treatment at Apollo DRDO.

18.It is the allegation of the PW-1 as per his Ex.P1 is that the company management had not provided the safety measures due to which the flange which came out of the machinery of manufacturing tablets and capsules are electricity flames had taken place.

19.Later due to the death of PW-1 PS Kushaiguda had filed requisition to alter the section of law from 285, 287, 338 IPC to 285, 287, 304(A) IPC and the cognizance was taken for the same against the accused.

20.PW-1 to PW-9, PW-11 turned hostile, did not support the case of the prosecution.

Page 8 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

21.PW-10 is the doctor to conducted Adopsy over the body of the Deceased D1 and D3. Ex.P10 and Ex.P11 are marked which shows that the deceased D1 and D3 succumbed to death due to the burns on their face, neck, limbs and genetiles due to 70 and 90% of burns over total body surface area of D1 and D3 and it was concluded that D1 and D3 died due to burns.

22.PW-4 is the assistant engineer who inspected the premises and furnished the report whether there was any problem in the supply of the power and in his report in Ex.P13 he reported that on 14-10-2019 he along with one P. Suresh senior line inspector inspected and found that the electrical HT trivector energy meter along with 20/5A CTPT set are found ok at the point of incoming and the outside their might be problem and fire might have taken place.

23.PW-12 in his cross examination admitted that in his report i.e., Ex.P13 he did not specify the reason that due to the internal wiring the accident had been caused.

24.PW-13 the first I.O had investigated in to the matter admitted that he did not file any document to show that the accused was the incharge of the said company and no document was filed to show that the accused is connected with this case.

Though, a suggestion was made to him that during their investigation none of the witnesses had stated that the accused had commited the said offence for which he denied the same. PW- 14 is the Hon’ble VI Addl. C.M.M., Hyderabad, marked Ex.P17 to

Ex.P21 which are Dying Declarations of the respective victims.

Page 9 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

25.PW-14 is the Magistrate who recorded the Dying

Declaration of injured and the deceased. As per PW-14 Hon’ble

Magistrate had recorded the Dying Declarations of four persons by

name Saritha, Parvathi, Dinesh and Amith PW-3 who is the injured whose Dying Declaration was recorded Ex.P20 and the Ex.P18,

Ex.P19 and Ex.P21 are the dying declarations of the deceased.

The dying declarations was recorded in accordance with the procedure prescribed. As per the Ex.P18, Ex.P19 and Ex.P21 of the respective deceased they reported all three of the deceased reported the same that at about 4 to 5:00 pm a blast had taken place at the machine in the factory and they do not know what has happened they did not state about any person or any cause due to which act or omission the said accident had been caused in such circumstances and in corroboration with PW-15 the doctor who gave the PME report of D2 the reason of the death that the deceased had died due to the burn injuries.

26.As per PW-16 the I.O who had filed the charge sheet except that he did not made any investigation in view of section of 285, 287, 338 and 304(A) IPC when seen with the evidence available on record there is nothing to prove that due to some person or companys negligence or any act due to which the fire or combustible matter was the resultant out of the act or with any machinery or failure to exercise the reasonable and proper care and done any act rashly or negligently due to which it endangered the life of the deceased or the injury caused to the injured victim despite knowing the consequence or any overhasty act and act

Page 10 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

without due thought and caution or due to the un awareness of the consequence, breach of duty and commission or omission. In this case the deceased had given their statement on the death bed and which is clear that they did not state the name of any person by stating that such person or by way of his act in a rash and negligent manner and without his proper care and precaution the accident had taken place and due to which they had sustained the said injuries. Even as per the report of the electricity official no cause was specifically specified to show that due to the rash and negligence or without exercise of the safeguard against the injuries that might not have been caused if such precaution would have taken by the accused. The I.O’s in this case did not file any document admittedly that the accused had worked in that company and he was the incharge during the time of the said accident and moreover there is nothing on record to show that due to the rash and negligence of the accused or any of his act without reasonable and proper care out of which resultantly the accident had taken place.

27.Upon considering the above and all other material evi- dences available on record there is nothing to prove that the ac- cused had committed the alleged offence. Hence the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts.

28. From the above discussed evidence on record, it is seen that there is no direct evidence who can say what was the negligent act done by the accused. The manner in which the

Page 11 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

alleged incident occurred is not disclosed. Therefore, by relying on the evidence of PWs 1 to 16, it is unsafe to convict the accused under Section of 285, 287, 338, 304-A IPC. Therefore, this court upon considering the same it is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences charged. Hence the accused entitled for acquittal and accord- ingly, this point is answered in favour of accused and against prosecution.

29.In the result, accused found not guilty for the offence under Sections 285, 287, 338, 304-A of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted for the said offence under Section 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused if any stands cancelled. After expiry of the appeal time, subject to section 437A Cr.P.C.

Typed on my dictation by Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 26 thday of September, 2023.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PROSECUTION:-

PW-1: Gallam Lingaiah @ Ramalingaiah PW-2:Manoj Kumar Singh PW-3:Dinesh Kumar PW-4:M. Venkataiah Goud PW-5:Chityala Parushuramulu PW-6:Doddi Rajeshwari PW-7:K. Kumara Swamy PW-8:R. Vijaya Lakshmi PW-9:B. Srinivas PW-10:G. Mahender PW-11:CK. Murthy PW-12 :Sambashiva Rao PW-13:B. Sreenu

Page 12 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

PW-14:Harisha PW-15:B. Vasanth Naik PW-16:A. Manmohan DEFENCE:-None.

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1:Report of PW-1 Ex.P2:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-1. Ex.P3:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-2. Ex.P4:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-3. Ex.P5:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-4. Ex.P6:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-5 Ex.P7:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-6. Ex.P8:Signature of PW-8 on inquest Panchanama of Deceased D-3. Ex.P9:Signature of PW-9 on inquest Panchanama of Deceased D-3 Ex.P10:PME Report of Deceased D-1

Ex.P11:PME Report of Deceased D-3

Ex.P12:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-11

Ex.P13:Inspection Report of TSSPDCL Ex.P14:Rough Sketch Ex.P15 :Inquest Panchanama Ex.P16:First Information Report Ex.P17 :Requisition from SHO PS Ex.P18 :Dying Declaration Ex.P19 :Dying Declaration Ex.P20 :Dying Declaration Ex.P21 :Dying Declaration Ex.P22:PME Report of D2

DEFENCE:-Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR

PROSECUTION:-Nil-

DEFENCE: -Nil-

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Page 13 of 13

CC No. 1333/2020

II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

FORM NO. 71

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

District : Medchal-Malkajgiri District. II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Calendar of Case tried by Sri. S.R. Dilip Kumar Naik II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

1. Date of offence:12.10.2019

2. Date of report or complaint: 12.10.2019

3. Date of apprehension of accused: 30.12.2019

4. Date of commencement of trial:10.04.2023

5. Date of closure of trial: 03.08.2023

5. Date of Judgment: 26.09.2023

6. Explanation of delay and remarks: Due to non-production of prosecution witness.

7.Judgment in Calendar case No.: C.C. No.1333 of 2020.

8. Complainant:Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Kushaiguda.

Name of the accused person:

Kakarlapudi Krishna Kiran, S/o. KGK Raju, age: 37 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.8-55, Gowtham Nagar, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. Aadhaar No.4846 7254 9407.

Result: In the result, accused found not guilty for the offence under Sections 285, 287, 338, 304-A of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted for the said offence under Section 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused if any stands cancelled. After expiry of the appeal time, subject to section 437A Cr.P.C.

Copy submitted to: The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

Lr. Dis. No. .

Date: _____________

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

CC/1241/2019 Acquitted

PS KUSHAIGUDA vs VARAGANTI SURENDER

27 Sep 2023

Page 1 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

AT MALKAJGIRI.

PRESENT: SRI. S.R. DILIP KUMAR NAIK II Addl. Junior Civil Judge cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Wednesday, this the 27 thday of September, 2023.

CALENDER CASE NO.1241 of 2019

Between:

The State of Telangana through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kushaiguda Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate.

……..Complainant.

A N D

Varaganti Surender, S/o. Sattaiah, age: 37 years, Occ: RTC Driver, Cherlapally Depot, Route No.250-C, Caste: Gouds, R/o. H.No.1-52, Jiyapalli (V) Bibinagar, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri Dist.

......Accused.

This case came before me on 19-09-2023 for final hearing in the presence of the Learned Assistant Public Persecutor and Sri. Jillala Ranga Reddy, Advocate for accused, upon hearing the arguments of both sides and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

The accused stood charged for the offence punishable under sections 304 (A) of IPC in Crime No.116/2019 of P.S.

Kushaiguda.

2.The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 21-02-2019 at 18.30 hrs the defacto complainant/LW-1/Rohit Singh lodged a complaint before Kushaiguda Police Station stating that his brother Rajan Singh, staying at B.N. Reddy Nagar, Cherlapally and working as Fitter in KH Systems. On 20-02-2019 at about

Page 2 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

20.00 hrs. LW-1 brother on company’s work proceeding to EC

Nagar to Cherlapally on his two wheeler i.e., Bajaj Pulsar bearing

No.AP-10-AH-8902, on the way at EC Nagar Community Hall the accused driver of RTC bus bearing No.AP-28-Z-0025 Cherlapally

Depot, Rout No.250-C, drove his vehicle in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the LW-1 brother vehicle from back side resulting which his brother fell down on the ground and the front tyre of the bus went over his head and he died on the spot and due to rash and negligent driving of accused, LW-1 brother died.

3.Basing on the above report, the LW-9/K.

Chandrasekhar, Inspector of Police, PS Kushaiguda, registered a case in Crime No.116/2019 for the offence punishable U/Sec.304-A

IPC and entrusted the investigation to PW-5. During the course of investigation, PW-5 examined LW1, PW1, PW2 and LW4 and recorded their statements and visited the scene of offence, PW5 visited Gandhi Hospital Mortuary, Secunderabad, where he secured the presence of LW-4/Gudija Singh before whom he conducted the inquest panchanama over the dead body of the deceased and then subjected for postmortem examination. LW- 9/K. Chandrasekhar conducted PME of deceased and obtained

PME report from LW-8/Dr Ch. Laxman Rao, Assistant Professor,

Dept of Forensic Medicine and issued opinion that the cause of death of the deceased due to “Head injury”. After postmortem, the dead body was handed over to the blood relatives for conducing final rites.

4.During the course of investigation PW5 sent a requisition to LW7 Motor Vehicle Inspector, RTA, Uppal Medchal

Page 3 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

for deputing MVI for inspection of the crime Vehicle RTC bus bearing No.AP28 Z 0025 and furnished his opinion as ‘the accident occurred was not due to any mechanical defects’.

5.On 22-02-2019 accused was arrested and on the same day issued a notice U/s.41-A Cr.P.C. to accused. On completion of investigation, PW-5 filed charge sheet against accused.

6.The Court took cognizance for the offence U/Sec.304-A of IPC against accused. On appearance of the accused, copies of the documents as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., are furnished to him.

7.The accused is examined U/Sec.239 Cr.P.C. for the offence U/s.304-A of IPC, by explaining the substance of accusation to him in his vernacular language, for which he denied the same and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

8.To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P1 to P6. The evidence of LWs 1, 4, 7, 8, and 9 is given up by learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor.

9.After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused is examined U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which the accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.

10.Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused.

Page 4 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

11.P oint for determination is : “whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under

Section 304-A of IPC beyond reasonable doubts”?

12.Point: To prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 5 and marked Exs.P1 to Ex.P6. PWs 1 and 2 are Eye Witness. PW-3 and PW-4 are the panch witness for inquest panchanama. PW-5 is the investigation officer. Ex.P1 is the 161 Cr.P.C. statements of PW-2. Ex.P2 is the signature of PW-3 on the scene of offence panchanama. Ex.P3 is the signature of PW-3 on PME Report, Ex.P4 is the signature of

PW-4 on the scene of offence panchanama, Ex.P5 is the signature of PW4 on PME Report. Ex.P6 is the first information report.

13. The facts of the case is that Rajansingh is the resident of B.N.Reddy Nagar, Cherlapally and he is working in a company who is the deceased in this case. On 20/02/2019 at about 8.00 pm on his work he was going from EC Nagar to cherlapally, in the mid way at EC Nagar function hall an RTC Bus bearing No.AP28Z0025 had dashed him from behind the said crime vehicle belonged to

Chengicherla Depo route No.250C and the driver who drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner hit the deceased bike and due to which the deceased fell down from his bike and the bus tyre went on the head of the deceased and due to severe injuries the deceased succumbed to death.

14. As per PW-1 he is the complainant and he admitted that he do not know the contents of his 161 statement. Though he stated that he was half kilometer away behind the bus he did not

Page 5 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

state his bike number on which he was coming and no where he has mentioned that he was present at the time of accident and he had witnessed it nor the mode and manner which the accident took place was deposed.

15.PW-1 in his chief examination stated that he does not remember the bus number and moreover, he stated that he does not know the bike number on which the deceased was going. PW-2 is the Eye witness in this case had turned hostile. PW-3 is the panch witness for scene of offence cum inquest panchanama and he admitted that he did not visit or go to the scene of offence and the same has been stated by PW-4 who is another panch witness for scene of offence cum inquest panchanama. PW-5 is the I.O in this case. Though he stated that he conducted the scene of offence panchanama cum inquest panchanama in the presence of PW-3 and PW-4 whereas PW3 and PW4 stated that they did not visit the scene of offence.

16.As the Eye witnessess and the panch for scene of of- fence cum inquest panchanama had turned hostile and their state- ments are contradictory without any corroboration. Though PW-5 stated that the crime vehicle was sent for the inspection by MVI i.e., Motor Vehicle inspector, no such report is brought on record and LW-7 who is the Motor vehicle inspector who have alleged to have inspected the crime vehicle was not examined.

17.Upon considering the above nowhere the accused has been identified by PW1 and PW2 who are the eye witness in this case. The depo manager of Chengicherla was not examined neighther the bus conductor nor the passengers of the said bus

Page 6 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

were examined nor the trip sheet of the alleged crime vehicle has been filed. The mode and manner how the accident has occurred has not been established to show that the accused had driven the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner.

18. From the above discussed evidence on record, it is seen that there is no direct evidence who can say what was the negligent act or what was the rash act done by the accused. The manner in which the alleged incident occurred is not disclosed.

Therefore, by relying on the evidence of PW-5, it is unsafe to con- vict the accused under Section 304 (A) of IPC. Therefore, this court upon considering the same it is of the view that the prosecu- tion has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences charged. Hence the accused entitled for acquittal and accord- ingly, this point is answered in favour of accused and against prosecution.

19.In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence under section 304-A of IPC and he is acquitted for the said offence u/sec.248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused if any stands cancelled. After expiry of the appeal time, subject to section 437A Cr.P.C.

Typed on my dictation by Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27 thday of September, 2023.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Page 7 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PROSECUTION:-

PW-1: Anjay Kumar Shah

PW-2:Yarra Raji Reddy

PW-3:Sama Srinivas

PW-4:Gogikar Surya Kiran

PW-5:B. Sreenu

DEFENCE:-None.

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1:161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-2.

Ex.P2:Signature of PW3 on the scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P3:Signature of PW3 on PME Report

Ex.P4:Signature of PW4 on the Scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P5:Signature of PW4 on PME Report

Ex.P6:First Information Report

DEFENCE:-Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR

PROSECUTION:-Nil-

DEFENCE: -Nil-

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Page 8 of 8 C.C. No.1241/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

FORM NO. 71

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

District : Medchal-Malkajgiri District. II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Calendar of Case tried by Sri. S.R. Dilip Kumar Naik, II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

1. Date of offence:21.02.2019

2. Date of report or complaint: 21.02.2019

3. Date of apprehension of accused: 22.02.2019

4. Date of commencement of trial:25.03.2022

5. Date of closure of trial: 28.08.2023

5. Date of Judgment: 27.09.2023

6. Explanation of delay and remarks: Due to non-production of prosecution witness.

7.Judgment in Calendar case No.: C.C. No.1241 of 2019.

8. Complainant:Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Kushaiguda.

Name of the accused person:

Varaganti Surender, S/o. Sattaiah, age: 37 years, Occ: RTC Driver, Cherlapally Depot, Route No.250-C, Caste: Gouds, R/o. H.No.1-52, Jiyapalli (V) Bibinagar, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri Dist.

Result:In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence under section 304-A of IPC and he is acquitted for the said offence u/sec.248 (1) of Cr.p.C the bonds and bail bonds of the accused if any stands cancelled. After expiry of the appeal time, subject to section 437A Cr.P.C.

The accused who was under judicial custody shall be released forthwith, if he is not required for any other criminal case(s).

Copy submitted to: The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

Lr. Dis. No. .

Date: _____________

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

CC/1524/2019 Acquitted

PS KUSHAIGUDA vs HATH VALI RAVI

27 Sep 2023

Page 1 of 6CC No.1524/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

AT MALKAJGIRI.

PRESENT: SRI S.R.DILIP KUMAR NAIK II Addl. Junior Civil Judge cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Wednesday, this the 27 th day of September, 2023.

CALENDER CASE NO.1524 of 2019

Between:

The State of Telangana through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kushaiguda Police Station Rachakonda Commissionerate.

… Complainant

A N D

A1) Hath Vali Ravi, S/o. Late Babu Rao, aged 30 years, Occ: Kirana Shop, Caste: SC (Mangari), R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad, N/o. Shanthi Nagar Colony, Nanded of Maharastra.

A2) Kamble Aakash @ jubba, S/o. Late. Anil Raj, aged 22 years, Occ: Scooter Mechanic, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad, N/o Shanthi Nagar Colony, Nanded of Maharastra.

A3) Kamble Karan @ Giddiya, S/o. Late Shankar, aged 20 years, Occ: Labour, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad.

A4) Hath Galli Karan @ Chinna, S/o. Kaiheen, Aged 22 years, Occ: Labour, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad.

A5) Kamble Laxman @ Shanur, S/o. Daslambari, aged 19 years, Occ: Band Player, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad.

… Accused

This case came before me on 13-09-2023 for final hearing in the presence of the Learned Assistant Public Persecutor and Rajgopal Laddad Advocate for Accused No.1 to 5 upon hearing the arguments of both sides and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

Page 2 of 6CC No.1524/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

J U D G M E N T

The Accused No.1 to 5 stood charged for offence U/s.379 IPC in

Crime No.838/2018 of P.S. Kushaiguda.

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

On 14-11-2018 at 16:00 hrs the LW-1/Rayyari Anuradha, filed complaint against Accused No.1 to 5 alleging that on 05.11.2018 at around 14:00 hrs the LW1 left the office at Gachibowli and reached to Saheb Nagar, burial ground to attend funerals. After attending funerals the LW1 returned to home in her colleague car and got down at L.B. Nagar Cross roads at 16:30 hrs. Later on the

LW1 boarded RTC bus at L.B. Nagar and got down at Tarnaka bus stop and again boarded RTC bus route no.17S and got down at ECIL bus stand. After getting down at ECIL bus stand the LW1 found one pair of gold ear rings, wg. About 18 grams and net cash of

Rs.20,000/- from the hand bag. When the LW1 was travelling in RTC bus Accused no.1 to 5 have committed theft of gold ear rings and net cash from the LW1 hand bag. That as such, they have committed the offence punishable under section 379 IPC.

3. Basing on the above report, LW-4/Sri. K. Chandra Sekhar,

Inspector of Police, P.S. Kushaiguda has been registered a case in crime no.838/2018 for the offence U/s.379 IPC and entrusted the investigation to LW-5/M. Vijay Krishna Murthy. LW5 examined and recorded the statement of LW1. Visited the scene of offence. Secured two mediators i.e., Lws 2 & 3 and drafted scene of offence observation panchanama before the mediators.

4.Accused A1 to A5 were arrested on 29.05.2019 and produced before the Hon’ble Court for Judicial custody and released

Page 3 of 6CC No.1524/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

on furnishing sufficient sureties. After completion of investigation,

LW-6/G. Srikanth Goud, filed the charge sheet against accused

No.A1 to A5.

5. The Court took cognizance for the offence U/s.379 IPC against the accused A1 to A5.

6. On appearance of the accused A1 to A5, copies of the documents as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., are furnished to them and were examined U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C., the allegations in person explained to them. The accused A1 to A5 denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. Since there is no incriminating material available against the accused no.A1 to A5 and their Sec.313 Cr.P.C examination is dispensed.

8. Now the point for determination is:

“W hether prosecution has established the guilt of accused No.A1 to A5 for the offence under section 379 of IPC, beyond reasonable doubts?

9. Point:

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused no.A1 to A5 beyond all reasonable doubts. In this regard as stated above to prove its case the prosecution did not produce any witness before this court and turned Hostile.

10.Upon perusal of the record it shows that despite of many conditional orders and several opportunities given to the prosecution to produce the witnesses to prove their case, but the prosecution and the police did not produce any witness before this court nor had taken any interest to proceed in this matter. The evidence of all the witnesses i.e., LW-1 to LW-6 were closed for non production despite

Page 4 of 6CC No.1524/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

of many conditional orders. As there is not even one witness examined by prosecution. As such there is no incriminating evidence on record to connect the accused with this case. Therefore, this court upon considering the same it is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence charged. Hence the accused No.A1 to A5 entitled for acquittal and accordingly, this point is answered in favour of accused

No.A1 to A5 and against prosecution.

11.In view of the above reasons, as there is no cogent evidence against the accused No.A1 to A5. As such, this court is of opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused

A1 to A5 for the offences punishable under sections 379 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubts. As such, accused no.A1 to A5 are entitled for acquittal, hence this point is answered in favour of the accused No.A1 to A5 and against the prosecution. Accordingly, the point is answered.

12.IN THE RESULT, Accused no.A1 to A5 are found not guilty for the offence under section 379 of IPC and they are acquitted

U/Sec.248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled subject to section 437A Cr.P.C. Sureties are discharged after expiry of appeal period. The Case property deposited vide CPR No.76/2019 shall be returned to its owner on proper identification and acknowledgment after appeal time is over.

Typed on my dictation by Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27 th day of September, 2023.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Page 5 of 6CC No.1524/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PROSECUTION:

-NIL-

DEFENCE:

-NIL-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

-NIL-

FOR DEFENCE:

-NIL-

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:

-NIL-

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Page 6 of 6CC No.1524/2019 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

FORM NO. 71

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

District : Medchal-Malkajgiri District.II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri. Calendar of Case tried bySri. S.R. Dilip Kumar Naik II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

1.Date of offence:14.11.2018

2.Date of report or complaint: 14.11.2018

3.Date of apprehension of accused : 29.05.2019

4.Date of commencement of trial:30.12.2019

5.Date of closure of trial: 06.09.2023

6.Date of Judgment: 27.09.2023

7.Explanation of delay and remarks: Due to non-production of prosecution witness.

8. Judgment in Calendar case No.: C.C. No.1524 of 2019.

9.Complainant:SI of Police, PS Kushaiguda. Name of the accused person: A1) Hath Vali Ravi, S/o. Late Babu Rao, aged 30 years, Occ: Kirana Shop, Caste: SC (Mangari), R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad, N/o. Shanthi Nagar Colony, Nanded of Maharastra.

A2) Kamble Aakash @ jubba, S/o. Late. Anil Raj, aged 22 years, Occ: Scooter Mechanic, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad, N/o Shanthi Nagar Colony, Nanded of Maharastra.

A3) Kamble Karan @ Giddiya, S/o. Late Shankar, aged 20 years, Occ: Labour, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Manari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad.

A4) Hath Galli Karan @ Chinna, S/o. Kaiheen, Aged 22 years, Occ: Labour, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad.

A5) Kamble Laxman @ Shanur, S/o. Daslambari, aged 19 years, Occ: Band Player, Caste: SC (Mangari) R/o. Mangari Basthi, Mallepally, Hyderabad.

Result:IN THE RESULT, Accused no.A1 to A5 are found not guilty for the offence under section 379 of IPC and they are acquitted U/Sec.248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled subject to section 437A Cr.P.C. Sureties are discharged after expiry of appeal period. The Case property deposited vide CPR No.76/2019 shall be returned to its owner on proper identification and acknowledgment after appeal time is over.

Copy submitted to: The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. Lr. Dis. No. .

Date: _____________ II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

CC/962/2020 Acquitted

PS KUSHAIGUDA vs THATIPALLY VEERENDER

26 Sep 2023

Page 1 of 6CC No.962/2020 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

AT MALKAJGIRI.

PRESENT: SRI S.R.DILIP KUMAR NAIK II Addl. Junior Civil Judge cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Tuesday, this the 26 th day of September, 2023.

CALENDER CASE NO.962 of 2020

Between:

The State of Telangana through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kushaiguda Police Station Rachakonda Commissionerate.

… Complainant

A N D

A1) Thatipally Veerender, S/o. Sahadeva. Age: 39 years, Occ: Kirana Shop, R/o. Plot No.126, Saipuri Colony, Sainikpuri, Kapra.

A2) Mahesh Singh Raj Purohit, (Quashed) S/o. Late. Gopal Singh Raj Purohit, age: 40 years, Occ: Business, Caste: Marwadi, R/o. H.No.23-88/3, RK Nagar, Malkajgiri, Medchal District. … Accused (Proceedings against accused No.2, is quashed vide CRLP

No.1107 of 2021, dated 22.02.2021 before the Hon’ble High

Court)

This case came before me on 25-09-2023 for final hearing in the presence of the Learned Assistant Public Persecutor and M/s. K. Ravikanth and P. Ajay Kumar Yadav, Advocate for Accused No.1 and M/s. O.H. Narasimham, Advocate for Accused no.A2, (Proceedings against accused

No.2 is quashed vide CRLP No.1107 of 2021, dated 22.02.2021

before the Hon’ble High Court) upon hearing the arguments of

both sides and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Accused No.1 and 2 stood charged for offence U/s.272, 273, 188 of IPC and Sec 20(2) of COTPA Act in Crime No.335/2020 of P.S. Kushaiguda.

Page 2 of 6CC No.962/2020 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

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

On 04.05.2020 at 15:00 hrs the LW-5/V. Madan Lal, Sub-

Inspector of Police PS Kushaiguda filed charge sheet against

Accused No.1 and 2 alleging that Accused No.1 is running Sri

Srinivasa Kirana Store, Plot No.126, Saipuri Colony, Sainikpuri. That he used to selling of banned Gutkha & Tobacco products illegally to the customers from his shop. That as such, he has committed the offences punishable under section 272, 273, 188 IPC and Sec 20(2) of Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act.

3. Basing on the above report, LW5/V. Madan Lal, Sub-

Inspector of Police, P.S. Kushaiguda registered a case in crime no.

335/2020 for the offence U/s.272, 273, 188 of IPC and Sec 20(2) of

Cotpa Act and took up the investigation. LW5 examined and recorded the statement of LW1 and LW2.

4.On 04.05.2020 at 18:15 hrs, accused A1 was arrested and produced before the Hon’ble Court for Judicial custody and on 26.06.2020 the Accused A2 Mahesh Singh Raj Purohit himself came to PS and appeared before LW-5, while enquiring he disclosed his name and address, the LW-5 issued notice U/Sec.41 (A) Cr.P.C. to

Accused A2 for his representation. After completion of investigation,

LW-5/V. Madan Lal, filed the charge sheet against accused No.A1 and A2.

5. The Court took cognizance for the offence U/s.272, 273, 188 of IPC and Sec 20(2) of Cotpa Act against the accused no.1 and 2.

6. On appearance of the accused No.1 copies of the documents as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., are furnished to him and were examined U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C., the allegations in

Page 3 of 6CC No.962/2020 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

person explained to him. The accused denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.Prosecution has examined PW1 and PW2 and got marked

Ex.P1 and P2. Since there is no incriminating material available against the accused No.A1 and his Sec.313 Cr.P.C examination is dispensed.

8. Heard arguments on both sides and perused the record.

9. Now the point for determination is:

“W hether prosecution proved guilt of accused No.1 for the offences under section 272, 273, 188 of IPC

and Sec. 20(2) of Cigarettes and Other Tobacco

Products Act, beyond reasonable doubt?

10. Point:

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. In this regard as stated above to prove its case the prosecution has examined PW-1 and PW-2 and marked Exs.P1 and P2. PW-1 and PW-2 are the Panch

Witnesses and not supported the case of the prosecution and turned

Hostile.

11.Upon perusal it shows that other witnesses i.e., LW-3 to

LW-5 did not support the case of prosecution as such the learned

APP given up the other witnesses. As such there is no incriminating material evidence on record to connect the accused with this case.

Therefore this court upon considering the same it is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences charged. Hence the accused entitled for acquittal and accordingly, this point is answered in favour of accused and against prosecution.

Page 4 of 6CC No.962/2020 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

12.In view of the above reasons, as there is no cogent evidence against the accused No.A1. As such, this court is of opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused A1 for the offences under sections 272, 273, 188 of IPC and Sec. 20(2) of

Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act beyond all reasonable doubt. As such, accused A1 is entitled for acquittal, hence this point is answered in favour of the accused No.1 and against the prosecution. Accordingly, the point is answered.

13.IN THE RESULT, Accused no.A1 is found not guilty for the offence under section 272, 273, 188 of IPC and Sec. 20(2) of

Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act and he is acquitted

U/Sec.248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled subject to section 437A Cr.P.C. Sureties are discharged after expiry of appeal period. As the property has not been produced no orders with regard to property is given.

Typed on my dictation by Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 26 th day of September, 2023.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PROSECUTION:

PW1 : Eega Suresh

PW2: N. Gopal

DEFENCE:

-NIL-

Page 5 of 6CC No.962/2020 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1 : Signature of PW-1 on Confession cum Seizure

Panchanama.

Ex.P2: Signature of PW-2 on Confession cum Seizure

Panchanama.

FOR DEFENCE:

Nil

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:

Nil

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Page 6 of 6CC No.962/2020 II AJCJ-cum-II AMM.

FORM NO. 71

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

1.Date of offence:04.05.2020

2.Date of report or complaint: 04.05.2020

3.Date of apprehension of accused: 05.05.2020 (A1) 41(A) Cr.P.C (A2)

4.Date of commencement of trial:12.06.2023

5.Date of closure of trial: 20.09.2023

6.Date of Judgment: 26.09.2023

7.Explanation of delay and remarks: Due to non-production of prosecution witness.

8. Judgment in Calendar case No.: C.C. No.962 of 2020.

9.Complainant:SI of Police, PS Kushaiguda. Name of the accused person: A1) Thatipally Veerender, S/o. Sahadeva. Age: 39 years, Occ: Kirana Shop, R/o. Plot No.126, Saipuri Colony, Sainikpuri, Kapra.

A2) Mahesh Singh Raj Purohit, (Quashed) S/o. Late. Gopal Singh Raj Purohit, age: 40 years, Occ: Business, Caste: Marwadi, R/o. H.No.23-88/3, RK Nagar, Malkajgiri, Medchal District.

Result:IN THE RESULT, Accused no.A1 is found not guilty for the offence under section 272, 273, 188 of IPC and Sec. 20(2) of Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act and he is acquitted U/Sec.248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled subject to section 437A Cr.P.C. Sureties are discharged after expiry of appeal period. As the property has not been produced no orders with regard to property is given.

The accused who was under judicial custody shall be released forthwith, if he is not required for any other criminal case(s). Copy submitted to: The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

Lr. Dis. No. .

Date: _____________

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

CC/300889/2015 Acquitted

PS Kushaiguda vs Kemisaram Venkatesh

26 Sep 2023

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM

II ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MALKAJGIRI.

PRESENT : S.R. DILIP KUMAR NAIK II Addl. Junior Civil Judge cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

Tuesday, this the 26 th day of September, 2023

C.C. No. 889 of 2015

Between: The State of Telangana, through P.S. Kushaiguda, Rachakonda.

..... Complainant

AND

A1:Kemisaram Venkatesh, S/o. Yellaiah, (Abated) Aged about: 32 years, caste: Yerukala, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o: PlotNo. 79, Viratnagar, Kapra.

A2: Yellaiah, S/o. Enkaiah (Abated) Aged about: 32 years, caste: Yerukala, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o: PlotNo. 79, Viratnagar, Kapra.

A3: Smt Pochamma, W/o. Yellaiah Aged about: 72 years, caste: Yerukala, Occ: Household,

R/o: PlotNo. 79, Viratnagar, Kapra. ..... Accused

This case has come up before me on 19.09.2023 for final hearing

in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and S Venkataramana,

Learned Counsel for having stood over for consideration till this day, the

Court delivered the Accused and following:

J U D G M E N T

1. The de-facto complainant / Smt. Kemisaram Renuka has lodged the present with allegation on 30.05.2014 at 11:00 hours stating that her marriage was performed with accused no. A1, 15 years ago in the presence of the bothside elders. At the time of marriage as per the demand of her husband, her parents were given vehicle, 4 tulas gold and household articles as dowry.

During their conjgual life she blessed two sons, she looked after well for certain period. Since few days she was suffering from ill health and admitted in

Hospital. After that from 26.05.2014 onwards her husband daily comes to house in an inebriated condition and harassing her both physically and mentally and her in-laws i.e A2 and A3 supporting her husband i.e., A1 and they continued the harassment for want of additional dowry. Hence she requested to take necessary action.

2. Basing on this complaint police, Kushaiguda/Lw-5 K.Chandra Shekar registered a case in Crime No. 396 of 2014 and the matter was investigated into. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused for the offence under section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code and sec 3,4 of DP

Act.

3. This Court had taken cognizance against accused under section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3.4 of DP Act. summons were issued to the accused A1 to A3. The case against A1 and A2 is abated on 01-12-2017.

4.On appearance, accused no. A3 copies of the documents as contemplated U/sec. 207 Cr.P.C are furnished to her and was examined under section 239 Cr.P.C., the allegations in person explainted to her. The accused denied the allegations pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The case againt A1 and A2 are abated.

5. Prosecution examined PW-1 and Pw2 witnesses on its behalf and got marked 2 documents i.e., Ex.P1 and P2. The learned APP has given up the evidence of LW2 to LW-4. After completion of prosecution evidence, accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. She reported no defense evidence.

6.Heard arguments on both sides and perused the record.

7. Now the point to be determination is:

“Whether prosecution proved guilt of accused no. A3 for the

offence under section 498-A of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3,4 of DP Act

beyond reasonable doubt?

8. Point:

P2. Pw-1 is the de-facto complainant and victim. Pw-2 is Investigating Officer.

LW2 to Lw-4 was given up.

9.Upon perusal it shows, that PW1 chief was eschewed. As Pw1 did not turn up for cross examination, despite several opportunities and other witnesses i.e., LW-2 to LW-4 did not support the case of prosecution as such the learned APP given up the other witnesses. As such there is no incriminating material evidence on record to connect the accused with this case. Therefore this court upon considering the same it is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences charged. Hence the accused entitle for acquittal and accordingly, the point is answered in favour of accused and against the prosecution.

10.In view of the above reasons, as there is no cogent evidence against the accused No.A3. As such, this court is of opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused A3 for the offences under Sections 498-A of IPC and Sec.3,4 of DP Act beyond all reasonable doubt. As such, accused no. A3 is entitle for acquittal, hence this point is answered in favour of the accused no. A3 and against the prosecution. Accordingly, the point is answered.

11. IN THE RESULT, accused no. A3 is found not guilty for the offence under section 498-A, of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3,4 of DP Act and accordingly she is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. Bail bonds of accused if any shall stand cancelled after expiry of appeal period and as no property was produced in this any case. Hence no order as to property.

Typed on my dictation by stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court on this the 26 th Day of September 2023.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::

WITNESSES EXAMINED

Prosecution :

PW1 : Smt.K.Renuka

PW2 : K.Chandra Shekar, SI of Police

Defence :

Nil

EXHIBITS MARKED

Prosecution :

Ex.P1 : Report.

Ex.P2: First Information Report

For Defence:

Nil

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

Nil

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

Form No. 71

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

District : Medchal-Malkajgiri District. II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

Calendar of Case tried by Sri. S.R. Dilip Kumar Naik II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, At Malkajgiri.

1. Date of Offence:30.05.2014

2. Date of report or complaint:29.05.2014

3. Date of apprehension of accused:31.05.2014

4. Date of commencement of trial:13.07.2022

5. Date of closure of trial:14.09.2023

6. Date of Judgment:26.09.2023

7. Explanation of delay and remarks:Due to non-production of prosecution witness.

8. Judgment in Calendar Case No.: CC No.889 of 2015

9.Complainant:SI of Police, PS Kushaiguda.

10. Name of the accused person(s):

A1: Kemisaram Venkatesh, S/o. Yellaiah, (Abated), Aged about: 32 years, caste: Yerukala, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o: PlotNo. 79, Viratnagar, Kapra.

A2: Yellaiah, S/o. Enkaiah (Abated)

A3: Smt Pochamma, W/o. Yellaiah, Aged about: 72 years, caste: Yerukala, Occ: Household, R/o: PlotNo. 79, Viratnagar, Kapra.

11. Result: In the result, the accused No.3 is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Sec.498-A of IPC and Sec.3,4 of DP Act. Accordingly, accused no.3 is acquitted U/Sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled subject to section 437A of Cr.P.C.

The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

Lr. Dis. No. /2023. Date:_____________ II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate At Malkajgiri.

Order Record 240 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/1241/2019	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs VARAGANTI SURENDER	27 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	Acquitted
CC/1524/2019	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs HATH VALI RAVI	27 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	Acquitted
CC/962/2020	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs THATIPALLY VEERENDER	26 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	Acquitted
CC/1333/2020	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs KAKARLAPUDI KRISHNA KIRAN	26 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	Acquitted
CC/300889/2015	PS Kushaiguda vs Kemisaram Venkatesh	26 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	Acquitted
OS/35/2022	P. Rama vs Chintala Balakrishna and others	25 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/1310/2019	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs MOHAMAD YAGOUB	25 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/1587/2019	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs KANDADI GOWTHAM REDDY	22 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/127/2018	PS Kushaiguda vs Angalakudithi Sarath Babu	21 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/301516/2015	PS Kushaiguda vs D. Raja	21 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/873/2020	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs SALENDRI CHANDRASHEKAR	20 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/889/2022	S.JYOTHI REDDY vs V.RAJI REDDY	19 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/229/2020	Shaik Umar vs Mohd.Abdul Hadi Afroze	14 Sep 2023	Order	—
OS/254/2023	SMT.BATHULA ARUNA AND OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ANOTHER	14 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/406/2023	CHINNA NARAYANA AND OTHERS vs THE ALL CONCERNED	13 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/999/2020	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs BOLLU RAMESH BABU	13 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/199/2023	ARCHANA JHA AND 2 OTHERS vs THE T AHSILDAR AND ANOTHER	12 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/253/2023	SMT.KAVURI VIJAYA LAKSHMI AND 2 OTHERS vs MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER AND ANOTHER	12 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/352/2023	MUTYALA RAVI KUMAR AND OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	12 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/1186/2021	KUSHAIGUDA PS vs BANDARU SOMASHEKARA RAO	12 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/301359/2015	PS Kushaiguda vs A Ganesh	12 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/186/2023	M SHOBHA RANI ANDOTHERS vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ALLCONCERNED	11 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/2221/2018	PS Kushaiguda vs V.Rajendra Chary	11 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/284/2023	K. MADHAVI LATHA vs K. ANIL KUMAR	08 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/413/2020	S.Narsing Rao vs Kamineni Nagendra Krishna	08 Sep 2023	Order	—
OS/673/2020	D.Kalavathi vs V.Raju	08 Sep 2023	Order	—
OS/834/2022	Amerchinta Parimala Bai vs The Thasildar, Malkajgiri	08 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/783/2022	YANNAMAL RAJU AND ANOTHER vs THE TAHSILDAR AND ALL CONCERNED	06 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/3/2019	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs Syed Amjad Ali	06 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/514/2023	State of Telangana P S Kushaiguda vs A3 Mohd Shafiuddin	06 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/300997/2014	PS Kushaiguda vs Bedidha Ramu	06 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/251/2023	B.VENKATA RAMA RAO AND OTHERS vs TAHSILDHAR AND ANOTHER	05 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/376/2023	A. NAVITHA vs C DHANLAXMI AND OTHERS	05 Sep 2023	Order	—
OS/742/2022	C Leonard vs S Geetha Devi and another	04 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/21/2023	YARRA CHANDRAKALA vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	01 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/41/2023	ZAHIRA BEE AND 11 OTHERS vs MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER AND ALL CONCERNED	01 Sep 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/836/2022	RHEA BEJU vs THE TAHSILDHAR , THE COMMISSIONER AND ALL CONCERNED	30 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/218/2020	Thirchigalla Sudhir Kumar vs Machana Manavitha	29 Aug 2023	Order	—
OS/195/2020	CH. MALLESH vs PONAGANTI RAVINDER	28 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/958/2022	GUJJA RAJANI vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	23 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/527/2020	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs GUDIWADA RAMANLAL	23 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/1918/2019	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs MUSIBOINA SRIHARI RAO	23 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/37/2023	YAKKALA NAGA SATISH vs YAKKALA SUBBA LAXMI AND 2 OTHERS	22 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/588/2022	Vanitha Ben Patel and 4 others vs The Tahasildar (MRO),	22 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/235/2023	A.VIVEKANANDAN AND 3 OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR	18 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/323/2023	KRISHNA BHAVAN PRAMILA DEVI AND OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	17 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/381/2022	Enugu Dhanamma vs M/s.Sai Sri Nilayam Properties a partnership firm, rp. by Kadakanchi Srinivas	17 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/650/2020	E.Srinivas vs C.C.Naidu	17 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/609/2020	State Bank of India SME Cherlapally, Rep. By its Manager, V.L.N.Srinivasa Murthy, vs Ravi Guda	11 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/611/2020	State Bank of India SME Cherlapally, Rep. By its Manager, V.L.N.Srinivasa Murthy vs Vattikota Dhana Laxmi	11 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/613/2020	State Bank of India SME Cherlapally, Rep. By its Manager, V.L.N.Srinivasa Murthy vs Shaik Noorjahan	11 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/631/2020	State Bank of India SME Cherlapally,Rep. By its Manager, V.L.N.Srinivasa Murthy vs Syed Imtiyaz	11 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/712/2020	State Bank of India SME Cherlapally, Rep. By its Manager, V.L.N.Srinivasa Murthy vs Panku Ravindra Babu	11 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/211/2023	G.N. ANTHONY vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	10 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/489/2022	The Defence Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, rep by K.Prakash Reddy.Treasuer vs S.V.Raju	10 Aug 2023	Order	—
OS/505/2020	Barla Ramya Madhuri vs MRo Malkajgiri	10 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/152/2023	SMT.P.VASUNDARA AND OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND TWO OTHERS	07 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/210/2020	Machana Amrutha vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Malkajgiri Circle	07 Aug 2023	Order	—
OS/216/2020	K.Ramu vs The Municipal Commissioner	05 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/384/2020	Punnam Ashok vs L.Suguna	03 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/648/2022	SRI YADAVALLY SREEDHAR PHANI KUMAR AND ANOTHER vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	03 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/622/2018	PS Kushaiguda vs M. Sithram	03 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/112/2020	R.VIJAYA LAKSHMI vs V.KAMESHWARA RAO	01 Aug 2023	Order	—
OS/892/2022	VAJRAPANI PRAVEEN KUMAR vs SRIKANTH AND ANOTHER	01 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
CC/1215/2022	PS Kushaiguda vs GOPPARAJU KRISHNA	01 Aug 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/378/2020	M.Sattaiah vs G.Shivaramulu Goud	27 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/479/2022	Vellanki Hemalatha vs The Tahasildar, Kapra Mandal	27 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/238/2020	Chevvuri Rama Devi vs Neha Tenkani	26 Jul 2023	Order	—
CC/573/2020	PS KUSHAIGUDA vs AKIREDDY HAREESH	26 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/706/2022	Kolipaka Pallavi and 2 others vs The Tahsildar Malkajgiri Mandal and others	25 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/100/2020	D.S.S.SASTRY vs CR LAKSHMI	24 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/229/2023	TARA DEVI AND OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	24 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/554/2022	N.V.CHANDAN vs NETHIKAR RAMJEE AND 3 OTHERS	18 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/230/2022	Katikala Shivanand and others vs K. Hemalatha	10 Jul 2023	Order	—
OS/22/2023	KANDALA BHANU PRIYA vs MRO KEESARA	05 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/343/2020	Thammareddy Nagendra Prasad vs Mohd. Saleem	05 Jul 2023	Order	—
EP/114/2022	M N Krishna vs B Prameela	04 Jul 2023	Order	—
OS/568/2020	B.Ravi vs B.Satyanarayana	04 Jul 2023	Order	—
OS/574/2020	Goruganthula Sreedeepthi vs Kotha Chandra Shekar	04 Jul 2023	Order	—
OS/888/2022	DOOLAPALLY RAMADEVI AND 2 OTHERS vs LIC HOUSING FINANCE AND ANOTHER	04 Jul 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/475/2022	Bakkani Narsing Rao vs Smt.Yadam Lavanya	30 Jun 2023	Order	—
EP/42/2023	MARGADARSHI CHIT FUNDS vs M SUNITHA	28 Jun 2023	Order	—
OS/502/2020	Pasumarti Shrinivas vs B Hanumanna	28 Jun 2023	Order	—
OS/49/2023	BARLAPATI SUKKAMMA AND 4 OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR AND ALL CONCERNED	27 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/896/2022	Yelejala Laxmi vs The Tahasildar MRO Keesara	27 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/509/2020	State Bank of India, rep by its Chief Manager, K.G.S.S.Prasad vs Bernadine Sophia Dcruz	23 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/510/2020	State Bank of India vs Praneeth Joshi	23 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/512/2020	State Bank of India, Rep by its Chief Manager, K.G.S.S.Prasad vs Prayaga Pavani	23 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/531/2020	State Bank of India formerly State Bank of Hyderabad RACPC, Moula Ali Rep. K.G.S.S.Prasad vs Appicatca Ravi	23 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/533/2020	State Bank of India formerly State Bank of Hyderabad RACPC, Moula Ali Rep. K.G.S.S.Prasad vs Prasanna Nirmal	23 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/153/2020	Dadhi Dharmender Reddy vs K.Ananda Bai	21 Jun 2023	Order	—
OS/13/2022	Canara Bank, Sanikipuri branch rep by its branch manager Vempati VNS Vamsi Krishna vs Renuka water plant rep by its partners D. Suguna and D. Jethuram and others	19 Jun 2023	Order	—
OS/524/2020	GVNR Krishna Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Rep by Vamsee Krishna Chava vs Poulomi Hospital rep. by its CMD and authorized signatory Dr.Ch.Parthasaradhi Rao	15 Jun 2023	Order	—
OS/659/2020	J.Ramdhari Agarwal vs Mamidi Laxminarayana Reddy	15 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/763/2022	Racha Sandhya Rani and 2 others vs The Tahsildar, Malkajgiri Mandal	15 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/72/2020	BANK OF INDIA REP BY Y.RAMBABU vs SHAJAHA BEGUM	09 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/74/2020	BANK OF INDIA, REP BY Y.RAMBABU vs V.SANTHOSH KUMARI	09 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/75/2020	BANK OF INDIA, REP BY Y.RAMBABU vs A.HAMSA	09 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/76/2020	BANK OF INDIA REP BY Y.RAMBABU vs G.MADHAVI	09 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—
OS/78/2020	BANK OF INDIA, REP BY Y.RAMBABU vs SATHAR BEE	09 Jun 2023	Judgment-1	—

Showing 100 of 240 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Sep 2023		36
Aug 2023		29
Jul 2023		15
Jun 2023		38
May 2023		1
Apr 2023		10
Mar 2023		10
Feb 2023		34
Jan 2023		28
Dec 2022		7
Nov 2022		13
Oct 2022		2

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R handled?

Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R has handled 241 court orders since 2022 at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 19 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R hear?

Based on available records, Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R currently posted?

Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R is posted as II Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Malkajgiri at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex, Medchal Malkajgiri, Telangana.

Are judgments by Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R dispose cases?

Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R disposes approximately 19 cases per month, based on 241 orders handled over their tenure at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R serving?

Sri. Dilip Kumar Naik S.R has been serving at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex since 2022.

Case Types

OS 89%

CC 10%

EP 1%

Posting History

Sep 2022 — Sep 2023

II Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Malkajgiri · 241 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 5

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. G.harika

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistra...

244 orders

Sri L.Raju

I Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Addl Judicial Magi...

54 orders

Smt. J.prasanthi

II Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl Judicial Ma...

350 orders

Smt. Potedar Sarala Rekha

III Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-III Addl Judicial...

27 orders

Sri. V.Bala Bhaskar Rao

Principal District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family C...

17 orders

Smt. Chittibomma Ashalatha

Fast Track Special Judge for expeditious trial and...

145 orders

Sri. B.Tirupathi

I Addl.District and Sessions Judge-cum-Addl.Family...

853 orders

Sri. D.kiran Kumar

IV Additional District and Sessions Judge

956 orders

Ms. N. Amaravathi

II ADJ-Cum- I Addl MSJ -cum- II Spl Sessions Judge...

140 orders

Smt Rachapudi Sreedevi

Principal Family Court

0 orders

Smt. K. Uma Devi

Additional Family Court

0 orders

Sri. Sattu Ravinder

I Addl.Senior Civil Judge-cum-Addl. Chief Judicial...

43 orders

← View all judges at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex