Smt. G.anusha

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ::

ZAHEERABAD

PRESENT: Smt. G. Anusha,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

MONDAY, DATED THIS THE 23 rd DAY OF MAY, 2022.

C.C.No. 287 of 2016.

Between:-

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

Peddagolla. Laxmaiah, S/o. Mallappa, Age: 53 years, Caste: Golla, Occ: Agriculture and Dealer, R/o. Bidekanne Village, of Jharasangam Mandal.

… Accused.

This case is coming for final hearing before me on 11-05-2022 in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for prosecution and Sri. S. Chandra Shekar Patil, Advocate for Accused, upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing both sides, this Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T.

1. This is a charge sheet filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Jharasangam against the accused for the offence under sections 324, 504 Indian Penal code for short here in after referred to as IPC.

2. The allegations in brief leveled against the accused in the charge sheet are :- 1 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

The LW-1/ Defacto complainant and the accused No.1 belongs to

Bidekanne Village, the husband of defacto complainant is having agricultural land bearing Sy.No. 139 to an extent of Ac. 5-20 gts., in the limits of Bidekanne village, and the accused is also having agricultural land which is located besides the complainant’s land. Previously both of them quarrelled on the issue of path way which leads from complainant’s land to the land of the accused. On 03-07-2016 at about 05:00 P.M, while the PW-1 and her son PW-2 were working in their soya crop field, the accused came there on bike and went into the complainant’s soya fields. At that time PW-1 told the accused to go by walk, and if he goes on bike their soya crop will be damaged. Then accused replied adamantly that, he will proceed on bike and abused them in filthy language and also beat with axe stick on her left hand and caused simple injuries. At that time PW-2 tried to intervene, then the accused caught hold of his throat and pushed him on the ground.

Soonafter, PW-3 came from their sugarcane fields and rescued them. Thus PW.1 lodged complaint and requested to take necessary action.

3.Basing on the report lodged by the defacto complainant, the Sub-Inspector of

Police / PW-6, registered a case in Cr.No. 49 of 2016 for the offences U/Sec. 324, 504 of IPC and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, the Sub-

Inspector of Police examined and recorded the statement of the defacto complainant. Later, PW-6 visited scene of offence situated at Bidekanne village and examined and recorded the statements of eye witnesses and conducted scene of 2 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

offence panchanama and seized one axe stick in the presence of two panchas.

On 11-07-2016 at 15:00 hrs, the accused voluntarily surrendered before the Sub-

Inspector of Police and on interrogation the accused confessed to have committed the offence. Later affected the arrest of the accused and produced him before the

Hon’ble Court for judicial custody. After completion of investigation filed charge

sheet against the accused.

4. The cognizance was taken for the offence under sections 324, 504 IPC by this court and numbered as C.C.No.287 of 2016. The summons were served on the accused and he appeared before this court. Subsequently Accused were examined under section 239 Cr.P.C by explaining the accusations leveled against him and he denied the same. Later a charge for offence punishable under sections 324, 504 of IPC were framed, read over and explained to Accused for which he denied the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined PW1 to

PW6 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P6.

6. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material appeared against him for which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard the learned Assistant Public prosecutor and learned counsel for accused and perused the record. 3 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

8. Now the point that arise for determination is:

Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for the

offence under sections 324,504 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?

9. POINT:- The simple case of the prosecution is that Accused criminally trespassed into the land of defacto complainant and bet her with a Axe stick and further abused them in filthy language Hence, Accused is liable for the offence under sections 324, and 504 of IPC.

10.PW1 deposed that, at about three years back, on one day at 05:00 P.M.

when she was in her agricultural fields, where soya crop was being cultivated and she was working in her field you accused came on his motorcycle and entered into her agricultural field and driving the vehicle over the soya crop, then she obstructed you accused and on questioning as why he was driving the vehicle inside her agricultural field and the crop will be damaged. Upon which you accused became aggressive and high handedly abused her in filthy language and picked up axe and beat her with the stick of the axe (Spade) on her right hand, Mean while her son

LW-2/Naresh came to rescue her. You accused also beat him. Then Lw-4 who was present and witnessed the incident.

11.During cross-examination, PW-1 stated that, there are no talking terms between her family and accused. And stated that to reach her agricultural field she 4 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

has to pass from the agricultural field of the accused. And further stated that there is separate path way for going to her agricultural filed. And panchayaths were held between her family and accused with regard to path way in which both parties were advised to settle the disputes amicably. She further deposed that she along with PW-2 were present at the scene of offence at the time of incident and soon after her noise, LW-4 who has agricultural field by the side of her field came to the scene. She denied to the suggestion that keeping previous disputes im mind about the path way the present case was foised against the accused and further denied that the accused did not beat her and PW-2.

12. Later prosecution examined PW’s 2 and 3 who also deposed in the same lines as that of PW.1 and their evidence is not discussed here to avoid repetition.

But the significant facts elicited during cross examination of PW-2 are accused has to pass through their land to reach his land and that there are no cordial terms between his family and the family of the accused due to land disputes. A suggestion was denied by PW-2 that accused did not drive motor cycle in their land.

13. PW-3 who is the husband of Pw-1 deposed in the same lines as that of PW’s 1 and 2. Significant facts elicited during cross examination of PW.3 are that, he denied that in order to reach the agricultural land of accused, the accused should pass through his agricultural land by using the bund adjacent to his land. He stated that there is another passage to reach the land of the accused. He further stated 5 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

that to reach his sugar cane crop land, he has to use the path way from the land of the accused. Panchayats were held with regard to usage of path ways in both the lands of accused and PW-3. He admitted that he was working at sugar cane field at the time of incident and that the incident cannot be visible to him and that he came to the scene of offence only after 5 minutes and after hearing to the noise of quarrel. He denied to the suggestion that after accused filed a case against his family the present case was filed to counter blast the same. He also denied to the suggestions that accused did not abuse or beat PW’s 1 and 2 and that only to harass the accused a false case is filed against the accused keeping previous disputes in mind.

14. PW-4 who is stated to be the eye witness turned hostile to the case of prosecution and he deposed that accused and PW’s 1 and 2 were quarelling with each other and accused abused PW’s 1 and 2 and that he was working in his agricultural land which is adjacent to the land of Pw-3. He deposed that he does not know who beat whom. And the reason for their quarrel but he has seen the quarrel. That police conducted scene of offence panchanama and he signed on panchanama and rough sketch without knowing its contents. Ex. P2 and P3 signs of PW.4 were marked on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch.

15. PW-5 being shown as the panch witness turned Hostile to the case of prosecution.

6 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

16.It is pertinent to mention that the next witness is the investigating officer /PW.6 which due to typographical error was referred to as PW-7. The same error shall be corrected in the appendix of evidence. PW.6 deposed that on 05-07- 2016 on the complaint lodged by PW-1 he registered a case in Cr.No.49/16 for the offences u/sec. 324, 504 of IPC and issued Ex.P-7 FIR and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation, he examined and recorded the statement of

PW1 to PW-3 and later visited scene of offence and conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of PW-4 and PW-5. He got marked Ex.P.2 scene of offence panchanama along with rough sketch. He also collected medical certificate of PW1 from the doctor i.e., LW-6/ Dr. Krishna Chaitanya. He got marked Ex.P.8 medical certificate of PW1. After completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the accused. His cross examination was treated NIL by this court.

17.In order to substantiate the prosecution’s case, PW’s 1 to 6 were examined and exhibits P1 to P8 were marked.

18 .The case of the prosecution is that, PW-3 who is the husband of PW-1 is having land to an extent of Ac. 5-00 gts and while PW.1 was cultivating soya crop in the said land with the help of her son PW-2 , on one day, the accused came there on a motor bike and has driven the bike over the soya crop so that the crop got damaged, and when PW-1 questioned the accused as to damage of soya crop and 7 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

asked him not to traverse on bike over the crop, the accused abused PW-1 in filthy language and further picked up spade and beat PW-1 with the edge of the spade and when PW-2 tried to rescue PW-1, the accused also beat PW-2. Thus the prosecution has to prove the charges under S. 324, 504 IPC. The allegations made against the accused are that, the accused beat PW’s 1 and 2 at the agricultural field of PW-1 and further abused PW-1 is most filthy manner.

19. After careful scrutiny of the material on record and on consideration of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution, it is pertinent to mention that Pw-1 who is the defacto complainant deposed categorically that at the time of incident herself and PW-2 were present and were performing agricultural works in their field. This particular fact about the presence of accused persons on the day of incident was not denied in the cross examination of prosecution witnesses. As seen from the evidence of PW’s 1 to 4 the particular fact that was not denied is that there were PW-1, PW-2, accused, PW-3 and PW-4 present at the scene of offence. PW-4 categorically stated that he witnessed the quarrel between

PW’s 1 and 2 and the accused. As PW-4 is having land adjacent to the land of

PW’s 1 and 3 his presence at the scene of offence cannot be doubted. It is an admitted fact that there were disputes pertaining to way between PW’s 1 , 3 family and the accused as such there are no cordial terms between complainant and the accused.

8 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

20.A significant admission is that the accused and PW-1 are using each other’s lands as path way to reach through their own lands. Having such fact on record, the prosecution has an extra burden to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has in fact came to the land of complainant on his motor bike causing damage to the soya crop of the complainant and further beat PW’s 1 and 2 inflicting on them injuries and abused them.

21. It is further elicited that there were panchayats between accused and PW-1 pertaining to the use of path way in which the elders advised to settle the matter amicably. It appears that both the accused and complainant have an implied right of easement to pass through each other’s lands as they are making use of the way.

Having said so, the next crucial fact to be proved by the prosecution is that, the accused was traversing on his bike in the land of PW-1 to go to his land. PW’s 1 to 3 have categorically deposed that the accused came on his motor cycle into the land of the complainant. And when PW-1 questioned the accused as to why he is driving on his motor bike to cause damage to soya crop, the accused became aggressive on her, abused her and beat her and PW-2. The relevant and most crucial fact brought on record, which lead to the dispute is that accused has been traversing on bike in the field of complainant. This particular fact though was suggested to PW-2, he denied the same. But this crucial and most important fact was not suggested to Pw’s 1 and 3 by the accused during the cross examination of

Pw’s 1 and 3. It is true that always the burden is on the prosecution to prove it’s 9 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

case beyond reasonable doubt. But in the present case, the injured PW’s 1 and 2, along with PW-3 have cogently deposed about the use of motor bike by the accused in their land which has been the sole cause for the dispute but the accused failed to rebut the same.

22. It is the evidence of PW-1 that when she was in her agricultural field along with PW.2 her son where soya crop was being cultivated, the accused came into the field on his motor bike and drove his bike over the soya crop and on questioning the accused became aggressive and abused her , also beat her with the other edge of the spade on PW’1 s right hand. She also deposed that PW-2 was present at that time and tried to rescue her and that the accused also beat PW-2. PW-2 also deposed in corroboration with the evidence of PW-1. All the facts i.e., accused being questioned by PW-1: use of bike by accused in their land: obstruction by

PW.1 apprehending damage to soya crop: accused beating PW.1 with stick of the axe inflicting injury to PW.1 on her left hand are in corroboration with the evidence of PW’s 2 and 3. However, PW-3 deposed that at the time of incident he was working at sugar cane crop and he reached the scene after hearing noises of quarrel and he admitted that one cannot see the incident if one is working in sugar cane crop. It can be deciphered from his evidence that he was not in a position to witness the incident but he came after 5 minutes of the incident.

10 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

23.Through the evidence of PW-4 though he was treated hostile, it can be inferred that, he was very much present at the time of offence and he has seen the quarrel. Though his evidence lacks sureness, as he stated that he did not observe who beat whom but his evidence cannot be suspected with regard to the particular fact of accused abusing PW’s 1 and 2. In as much, PW-4 though is not wholly reliable his evidence is clear as to the abuses made by the accused and the quarrel between PW-1 and accused.

24. The accused has not chosen to cross examine the investigating officer/ PW- 6 thus making his evidence unrebutted with regard to manner in which the investigation in this case has proceeded with. Ex. P8: M.C. discloses that PW.1 has sustained simple injuries. It has not been disputed in any manner. The oral and documentary evidence is thus proving the case of the prosecution that the accused has beat PW-1. From the entire evidence brought on record and from the foregoing discussion, it is established that accused beat P.W-1 and P.W-2 and the offence

U/Sec.323 IPC against the accused stands proved. With regard to the offence under S. 504 IPC, none of the prosecution witnesses have stated clearly as to the abuses made by the accused so as to provoke PW-1 to commit an offence leading to breach of peace. Though the complaint Ex. P1 discloses the specific abuses, made by the accused, the evidence of PW.1 is silent in such aspect. Hence this court is of opinion that the offence under S.504 IPC is not proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.

11 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

25. From the aforesaid discussion this court is of considered opinion that the prosecution could prove the guilt of the accused for the offence under S.323 IPC and accordingly he is convicted for the said offence.

26. In the result, the Accused is found NOT GUILTY for the offences U/secs.324, 504 IPC and is acquitted for these offences U/sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C, but the Accused is found GUILTY for the offence U/Sec.323 IPC and is convicted U/Sec.248 (2)

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of Accused shall stand forfeited forthwith. No Order as to property as nothing is deposited before this court.

Typed to my dictation by the typist, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 23 rd day of May, 2022.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

Hearing on Sentence:

1. Plea of the Accused :

When asked about the sentence, the accused has prayed this court to take lenient view as he is been coming to court since 2016 and that is he is imprisoned his family will suffer for bread and butter and thus prayed to impose minimal sentence.

2. Submissions of Learned APPO & Learned Counsel for Accused : Learned

APPO has contended that, as the offence is proved beyond doubt and that it being 12 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

a deliberate act prayed to impose maximum sentence. The Learned Counsel counsel for Accused has contended that he is the elder of the family. And all the members of the family has to work to meet the ends and his imprisonment would badly effect the family and prayed impose fine only.

3. Order on Sentence: Heard. This court, after considering the plea of the counsels and also the plea of the Accused, is not inclined to invoke the benevolent provisions of section 3 & 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (P.O.Act) and taking stock of all the aggravating and mitigating factors and considering Pandemic situation that has been gone through, this court sentences the accused as follows:

4. Sentence of Accused:

(convicted for the offence 323 IPC) :

Accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand) and in default of payment of fine he is to undergo Simple Imprisonment for fifteen (15) days.

Dictated to the Typist, transcribed and, corrected and pronounced by me in

the Open Court on this the 23rd day of May, 2022.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

13 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of

PROSECUTION DEFENCE

PW1. P. Padmamma - NIL - PW2 B. Naresh PW3 B. Manaiah PW4 M. Narsimulu PW5 B. Adivanna. PW6 K. Narsimulu

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION

Ex.P.1 Complaint. Ex.P.2 Signature of the scene of offence panchanama by PW-7. Ex.P.3 Signature of the rough sketch by PW-4. Ex.P.4 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW-4 Ex.P.5 portion of signature of PW5 on scene of offence panchanama. Ex.P.6 Signature of rough sketch byPW-5 Ex.P.7 is the FIR Ex.P.8 Medical Certificate of PW1

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR DEFENCE

- NIL -

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- NIL -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad 14 Of 14

C.C NO. 287 OF 2016.

15 Of 14

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: ZAHEERABAD

PRESENT: Smt. G. Anusha,

Junior Civil Judge

Zaheerabad.

THURSDAY, DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF OCTOBER

D.V.C. No. 11 OF 2022

Between:-

Nagamani @ Mounika w/o Mohan D/o Beerala Jaipal Aged about 27 years, Occ: Household R/o Godigarpally village, Mogudampally Mandal, Presently residing at H.No: 1-55, Machireddy pally village, Koheer Mandal Sangareddy District, Telangana state. ...Petitoner/Applicant A N D.

Peddagolla Mohan S/o Peddagolla Kistaiah aged about 37 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.1-96, Godigarpally (Patti Dhanasiri) village, Mogudampally Mandal Sangareddy District, Telangana State.

… Respondent

This case is coming for final hearing before me on 16-10-2024 in the presence of Smt. T.Anusha Advocate for the Petitioner and Respondent is set Ex-parte, upon perusing the material papers on record and on hearing to the counsel for petitioner this Court delivered the following:-

O R D E R.

1.This Petition is filed U/sec. 12, 18, 20, 22 of the protection of women from domestic violence Act, 2005 (43 of 2005) by the counsel for the petitioner to grant monthly maintenance of Rs. 5000/- to petitioner for the monitory relief under 1

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

Section 20(d) and to pay Rs. 1, 30,000/- as arrears of maintenance from 01-10-2020 to 01-12-2022 @ 5000/- per month. And to pay Rs. 30,000/- compensation and damages for the mental torture and emotional distress caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent and to pay Rs. 5, 000/- towards costs of this petition.

2.The brief averments of the Petition are as follows:

Petitioner submits tht the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and the petitioner’s marriage with respondent was solemnized on 13-5- 2017 at Godigarpally village. The marriage is an arrenged marriage and solemnized in the presence of both the families and village elders. At the time of marriage as per the demand of the respondent, his parents and relatives the petitioner’s parents has presented a dowry of Rupees 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) net cash, 2 tules

Gold and Household articles worth of Rs. 1,50,0000/- to the respondent.

Immediately after the marriage the petitioner joined the matrimonial society of respondent at his residence in Godigarpally village. Out of wedlock there is no issues.

3.The Petitioner submits that after marriage both stayed happily at Godigarpally

Village for only about 3 months, thereafter the respondent started showing his indifferent altitude towards the petitioner. The respondent is alcoholic, having a habit of consuming alcohol regularly. That the respondent used to beat the petitioner 2

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022 severely under the consumption of alcohol due to which the petitioner used to sustain severe injuries for several days But the respondent has no concern towards the petitioner's feelings and health. It is submitted that as the torture by the respondent was unbearable the petitioner has informed about the same to her parents. That immediately the parents of the petitioner have conducted a panchayat at the respondent's house in the presence of both the families to resolve the issues between the petitioner and respondent, advised the respondent to avoid alcohol consumption as it may lead to the destruction of the matrimonial life. it is submitted that the respondent agreed to change his attitude towards the petitioner and shall lead a happy life that again after the panchayat the petitioner and respondent stayed happily for a period of another 2 months, During the period of 2 months also the respondent has put the petitioner to torture that the respondent has never shown interest to perform conjugal life with petitioner and always the respondent used to take lame excuses and feel the petitioner as extra burden to him.

4.The petitioner though that respondent No.1’s behavior will change in furture, but respondent never shown any interest towards petitioner and he used to avoid maintaining petitioner on one and other pretext. That the Respondent and his family were not happy with the dowry brought by the Petitioner. Ever since the day of marriage, the Petitioner has been suffering physical and mental abuse, pain, helplessness, unhappiness and anger on account of the respondent and his family.

3

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

Eventually, being unable to bear with the trauma and agony, the petitioner fearing for her life, being destitute without any money. Thereafter the respondent started harassing the petitioner to bring additional dowry of gold and Motor cycle from her parents, and the petitioner informed the said fact to her parents, and the parents of the petitioner tried to convince the respondent that they are not having amount to give towards additional dowry.

5.The Respondent has neglected the petitioner to maintain with bear requirements and due to the harassment of the respondent, the petitioner's life became miserable. That the petitioner has stayed for a period of 1 year at her parent's house expecting a change in the behaviour of the respondent, but the respondent during her 1 year of stay at her parents has neither visited nor communicated with the petitioner.

That after a period of 1 year ie., about in the year 2020 the petitioner came to know that the respondent has met with an accident, for which he sustained injuries. That immediately being known about the respondent's situation through villagers, having affection on the respondent, the petitioner has immediately went to the respondent and took good care of him by nursing him, after getting cured from the accident the respondent again started showing his sadistic nature towards the petitioner.

6.Finally in the month of October 2020 the respondent necked out the petitioner out of the house. That the petitioner has never filed any case against the respondent and his family members as she never wanted to put the family’s reputation to the 4

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022 shake. As the petitioner’s parents are very poor and the petitioner is eking her livelihood on teh meagre earnings of her old aged parents and as she is dependent and no source of income, the petiitoner is unable to afford the living expenses and suffering from a huge mental agony.

7.The Respondent has neglected the petitioner to maintain with bear requirements and due to the harassment of the respondent, the petitioner's life became miserable. That the petitioner's peace and happiness has been deteriorated and has suffered with a lot of f mental mental trauma. traum It is submitted that the after 6 months of marriage the petitioner has been necked out of the house by the respondent by putting her to mental and physical torture. Later the petitioner's parents itself took the petitioner to their house but the respondent has no coricern about the petitioner that since the year 2020, the respondent stopped taking the responsibility of family and has never spent even a penny on the petitioner. Respondent neither paid the rent, medical expenses of the petitioner nor taken the responsibility. And in return the respondent used to ill-treat the petitioner with his ruthless behavior and used to treat her like slave. The respondent has asked for divorce in several occasions but in order to uplift the matrimonial relationship the petitioner has surrendered herself to the respondent. Now as the respondent has necked out the petitioner out of the house and no one to look after it became difficult for her to survive. That the respondent not maintaining the petitioner and I at the same time harassing her.

5

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

8.That the Respondent is working at Mahindra and Mahindra Private Limited and earning a good amount of about Rs. 10,000/- and the respondent also having a joint family properties of an Ac. 12-00 guntas in Godigarpally Village,

Mogudampally Mandal from which they accrue yearly income of about Rs.

3,00,000/- income for the survival, has 4 joint family open plots and also has a support of few other sources of income from other properties. In spite of having sufficient source of income the respondent neglected to maintain the petitioner and failed to fulfill his obligations as husband. Thus, the Respondent is affluent.

9. Summons were served sufficiently on the Respondent. Respondent called absent on 2-2-2024 as such, Respondent is set exparte on the same day.

10. During the course of enquiry, on behalf of the Petitioner, she herself got examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 i.e., wedding Card Ex.P2 - the marriage photographs on her behalf. For Respondents no oral or documentary evidence is adduced and he was set exparte.

11. Now the point for consideration is :

1. Whether the petitioner/Applicant has domestic relation ship with Respondent ?

2. Whether the petitioner/ Applicant was subjected to domestic violence by the respondent?

3. Whether the petitioner is entitled for the reliefs sought for ?

6

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

12. On perusal of both the oral and documentary evidence on record and also after srutiny of the material placed before this court it is pertinent to note that as seen from Ex. P-1 and Ex.P2 maked on behalf of the petitioner, the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent took place on 13-5-2017 at Godigarpally village.

However, the petitioner stated that the respondent is addicted to bad habits and consumption of alcohol and that she was subjected to physical as well as mental harassement in the hands of the respondent . She further stated that she served the respondent in times of his ill health but the respondent did not change his behaviour and continued to harass him. As the respondent has not contested in any manner the evidence of petitoner in this aspect has remained un-challenged.

13. The petitioner further claims that she has been necked out of her matrimonial house and was not allowed to join there . The respondent has admittedly not made any attempts for uniting with the petitioner. This goes to show that the petitioner is neglected in the hands of the respondent. Further the petitioner and respondent have together stayed in a shared household for a considerable period of time. Hence the domestic relationship is established. The averments of the affidavit go to show that the petitioner is subjected to domestic violence in the hands of the respondent. The petitioner claims for maintenance from her husband who is respondent herein. As per the provisions of the domestic violence Act, the respondent/husband is duty 7

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022 bound to maintain his wife when she is not able to maintain herself. Hence this court is inclined to hold that the petitioner is entitled for the relief of maintenance.

14.However , in view of the evidence of the petitioner this Court is of opinion that the same is sufficient to show that she was subjected to mental and physical harassment by the respondent and as domestic violence against the respondent stood to be proved as discussed aforesaid, this court is of considered opinion that it would be fit and proper to order the respondent to pay a monthly maintenace of Rs. 2,000/- to the petitioner.

15.In the result, this petition is partly allowed and the respondent is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- per month to the petitioner from the date of this order .

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 17th day of October, 2024

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of

Petitioner Respondent.

PW1:Nagamani @ MouniaNil Pw2: Beerla Venkatamma 8

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PETITIONER.

Ex.P1 is Wedding card. Ex.P2 is Marriage Photographs.

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR RESPONDENT

- NIL -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

9

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: ZAHEERABAD

PRESENT: Smt. G. Anusha,

Junior Civil Judge

Zaheerabad.

THURSDAY, DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF OCTOBER

D.V.C. No. 11 OF 2022

Between:-

Nagamani @ Mounika w/o Mohan D/o Beerala Jaipal Aged about 27 years, Occ: Household R/o Godigarpally village, Mogudampally Mandal, Presently residing at H.No: 1-55, Machireddy pally village, Koheer Mandal Sangareddy District, Telangana state. ...Petitoner/Applicant A N D.

Peddagolla Mohan S/o Peddagolla Kistaiah aged about 37 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.1-96, Godigarpally (Patti Dhanasiri) village, Mogudampally Mandal Sangareddy District, Telangana State.

… Respondent

This case is coming for final hearing before me on 16-10-2024 in the presence of Smt. T.Anusha Advocate for the Petitioner and Respondent is set Ex-parte, upon perusing the material papers on record and on hearing to the counsel for petitioner this Court delivered the following:-

O R D E R.

1.This Petition is filed U/sec. 12, 18, 20, 22 of the protection of women from domestic violence Act, 2005 (43 of 2005) by the counsel for the petitioner to grant monthly maintenance of Rs. 5000/- to petitioner for the monitory relief under 1

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

Section 20(d) and to pay Rs. 1, 30,000/- as arrears of maintenance from 01-10-2020 to 01-12-2022 @ 5000/- per month. And to pay Rs. 30,000/- compensation and damages for the mental torture and emotional distress caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent and to pay Rs. 5, 000/- towards costs of this petition.

2.The brief averments of the Petition are as follows:

Petitioner submits tht the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and the petitioner’s marriage with respondent was solemnized on 13-5- 2017 at Godigarpally village. The marriage is an arrenged marriage and solemnized in the presence of both the families and village elders. At the time of marriage as per the demand of the respondent, his parents and relatives the petitioner’s parents has presented a dowry of Rupees 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) net cash, 2 tules

Gold and Household articles worth of Rs. 1,50,0000/- to the respondent.

Immediately after the marriage the petitioner joined the matrimonial society of respondent at his residence in Godigarpally village. Out of wedlock there is no issues.

3.The Petitioner submits that after marriage both stayed happily at Godigarpally

Village for only about 3 months, thereafter the respondent started showing his indifferent altitude towards the petitioner. The respondent is alcoholic, having a habit of consuming alcohol regularly. That the respondent used to beat the petitioner 2

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022 severely under the consumption of alcohol due to which the petitioner used to sustain severe injuries for several days But the respondent has no concern towards the petitioner's feelings and health. It is submitted that as the torture by the respondent was unbearable the petitioner has informed about the same to her parents. That immediately the parents of the petitioner have conducted a panchayat at the respondent's house in the presence of both the families to resolve the issues between the petitioner and respondent, advised the respondent to avoid alcohol consumption as it may lead to the destruction of the matrimonial life. it is submitted that the respondent agreed to change his attitude towards the petitioner and shall lead a happy life that again after the panchayat the petitioner and respondent stayed happily for a period of another 2 months, During the period of 2 months also the respondent has put the petitioner to torture that the respondent has never shown interest to perform conjugal life with petitioner and always the respondent used to take lame excuses and feel the petitioner as extra burden to him.

4.The petitioner though that respondent No.1’s behavior will change in furture, but respondent never shown any interest towards petitioner and he used to avoid maintaining petitioner on one and other pretext. That the Respondent and his family were not happy with the dowry brought by the Petitioner. Ever since the day of marriage, the Petitioner has been suffering physical and mental abuse, pain, helplessness, unhappiness and anger on account of the respondent and his family.

3

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

Eventually, being unable to bear with the trauma and agony, the petitioner fearing for her life, being destitute without any money. Thereafter the respondent started harassing the petitioner to bring additional dowry of gold and Motor cycle from her parents, and the petitioner informed the said fact to her parents, and the parents of the petitioner tried to convince the respondent that they are not having amount to give towards additional dowry.

5.The Respondent has neglected the petitioner to maintain with bear requirements and due to the harassment of the respondent, the petitioner's life became miserable. That the petitioner has stayed for a period of 1 year at her parent's house expecting a change in the behaviour of the respondent, but the respondent during her 1 year of stay at her parents has neither visited nor communicated with the petitioner.

That after a period of 1 year ie., about in the year 2020 the petitioner came to know that the respondent has met with an accident, for which he sustained injuries. That immediately being known about the respondent's situation through villagers, having affection on the respondent, the petitioner has immediately went to the respondent and took good care of him by nursing him, after getting cured from the accident the respondent again started showing his sadistic nature towards the petitioner.

6.Finally in the month of October 2020 the respondent necked out the petitioner out of the house. That the petitioner has never filed any case against the respondent and his family members as she never wanted to put the family’s reputation to the 4

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022 shake. As the petitioner’s parents are very poor and the petitioner is eking her livelihood on teh meagre earnings of her old aged parents and as she is dependent and no source of income, the petiitoner is unable to afford the living expenses and suffering from a huge mental agony.

7.The Respondent has neglected the petitioner to maintain with bear requirements and due to the harassment of the respondent, the petitioner's life became miserable. That the petitioner's peace and happiness has been deteriorated and has suffered with a lot of f mental mental trauma. traum It is submitted that the after 6 months of marriage the petitioner has been necked out of the house by the respondent by putting her to mental and physical torture. Later the petitioner's parents itself took the petitioner to their house but the respondent has no coricern about the petitioner that since the year 2020, the respondent stopped taking the responsibility of family and has never spent even a penny on the petitioner. Respondent neither paid the rent, medical expenses of the petitioner nor taken the responsibility. And in return the respondent used to ill-treat the petitioner with his ruthless behavior and used to treat her like slave. The respondent has asked for divorce in several occasions but in order to uplift the matrimonial relationship the petitioner has surrendered herself to the respondent. Now as the respondent has necked out the petitioner out of the house and no one to look after it became difficult for her to survive. That the respondent not maintaining the petitioner and I at the same time harassing her.

5

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

8.That the Respondent is working at Mahindra and Mahindra Private Limited and earning a good amount of about Rs. 10,000/- and the respondent also having a joint family properties of an Ac. 12-00 guntas in Godigarpally Village,

Mogudampally Mandal from which they accrue yearly income of about Rs.

3,00,000/- income for the survival, has 4 joint family open plots and also has a support of few other sources of income from other properties. In spite of having sufficient source of income the respondent neglected to maintain the petitioner and failed to fulfill his obligations as husband. Thus, the Respondent is affluent.

9. Summons were served sufficiently on the Respondent. Respondent called absent on 2-2-2024 as such, Respondent is set exparte on the same day.

10. During the course of enquiry, on behalf of the Petitioner, she herself got examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 i.e., wedding Card Ex.P2 - the marriage photographs on her behalf. For Respondents no oral or documentary evidence is adduced and he was set exparte.

11. Now the point for consideration is :

1. Whether the petitioner/Applicant has domestic relation ship with Respondent ?

2. Whether the petitioner/ Applicant was subjected to domestic violence by the respondent?

3. Whether the petitioner is entitled for the reliefs sought for ?

6

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

12. On perusal of both the oral and documentary evidence on record and also after srutiny of the material placed before this court it is pertinent to note that as seen from Ex. P-1 and Ex.P2 maked on behalf of the petitioner, the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent took place on 13-5-2017 at Godigarpally village.

However, the petitioner stated that the respondent is addicted to bad habits and consumption of alcohol and that she was subjected to physical as well as mental harassement in the hands of the respondent . She further stated that she served the respondent in times of his ill health but the respondent did not change his behaviour and continued to harass him. As the respondent has not contested in any manner the evidence of petitoner in this aspect has remained un-challenged.

13. The petitioner further claims that she has been necked out of her matrimonial house and was not allowed to join there . The respondent has admittedly not made any attempts for uniting with the petitioner. This goes to show that the petitioner is neglected in the hands of the respondent. Further the petitioner and respondent have together stayed in a shared household for a considerable period of time. Hence the domestic relationship is established. The averments of the affidavit go to show that the petitioner is subjected to domestic violence in the hands of the respondent. The petitioner claims for maintenance from her husband who is respondent herein. As per the provisions of the domestic violence Act, the respondent/husband is duty 7

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022 bound to maintain his wife when she is not able to maintain herself. Hence this court is inclined to hold that the petitioner is entitled for the relief of maintenance.

14.However , in view of the evidence of the petitioner this Court is of opinion that the same is sufficient to show that she was subjected to mental and physical harassment by the respondent and as domestic violence against the respondent stood to be proved as discussed aforesaid, this court is of considered opinion that it would be fit and proper to order the respondent to pay a monthly maintenace of Rs. 2,000/- to the petitioner.

15.In the result, this petition is partly allowed and the respondent is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- per month to the petitioner from the date of this order .

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 17th day of October, 2024

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of

Petitioner Respondent.

PW1:Nagamani @ MouniaNil Pw2: Beerla Venkatamma 8

DVC.No. 11 OF 2022

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PETITIONER.

Ex.P1 is Wedding card. Ex.P2 is Marriage Photographs.

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR RESPONDENT

- NIL -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

9

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

ZAHEERABAD

PRESENT:

Smt. G. Anusha,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad

MONDAY, DATED THIS THE 23 rd DAY OF MAY, 2022.

P.R.C.No. 08 of 2022.

Between:-

The State of Telangana through, Police Station, P.S.Jharasangam. … Complainant

A ND

Nulka Dilip @ Dilip Kumar, S/o. Vasanth, Age: 27 years, Caste: SC-Madiga, Occ: Junior line men in Electricity Department Zaheerabad, R/o. H.No. 3-23, Machnur Village, of Jharasangam of Sangareddy District.

… Accused

This case is coming up before me on this day 23-05-2022 for final hearing in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant and Sri. M.K. Nizamoddin and Jagadish, Advocates 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 the Sub-Inspector of Police P.S. Jharasangam against the accused for the offence U/Sec.376 (2), (n), 417, 420 of IPC.

1 Of 7

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

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

That on 07-08-2021 at 10:00 hrs., the complainant PP-1 R/o. SP-1 came to

Jharasangam P.S. and lodged a complaint stating that, Since 5 years one Nulka

Dhilip, S/o. Vasanth, had used the complainant physically and mentally under a false promises to marriage her, and also taken Rs. 2,50,000/- from her to purchase a car. On 13-06-2021 in the presence of village elders i.e., J. Raju,

Sarpanch of Machnur Village, K.Shyam Sarpanch of Deverampali and Kamalamma

W/o. Kanakaraju and the parents of you accused/Dhilip has agreed to marry the complainant and also ate sweetes. And they decided engagement date i.e., on 23-06-2021. But you accused did not come upto noon hours on the said date.

Dhilip has rejected her and informed over phone that he and his family members have not interest to marry the complainant. Hence she requested for taking legal action against the you accused/Dhilip who cheated her.

3.Basing on the report lodged by the complainant, the Lw-18/Sub-Inspector of

Police, P.S.Jharasangam registered case in Cr.No.56/2021 U/Sec. 376(2) (n),420, 417 of IPC and issued FIR to all the concerned and took up the investigation of this case, and sent the victim/Complainant PP-1 to Bharosa Centre at Sangareddy under the escort of Woman ASI/K. Suvarna and Vanamala HG-167 of

P.S. Jharasangam With request to record her 161 Cr.P.C. Statement by a woman 2 Of 7

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

SIP. Accordingly the Woman SIP/LW-16 has recorded the 161 Cr.P.C. statement of the PP-1, Later the LW-16/ Woman SIP has sent PP-1 to Govt. District

Headquarters Hospital Sangareddy for clinical examination, where the LW-14/

Dr. P. Veena., CAS Govt. Hospital Sangareddy has conducted the clinical examination over the Victim/PP-1 and preserved her swabs in order to send it to

FSL for examination and report.

4. On receiving the Express FIR the LW-19/ Sri. D. Nageshwar Rao., CIP.,

Zaheerabad Rural Circle came to Jharasangam P.S. and took up the investigation of this case from the LW-18/ Sri.K. Gopi, S.I of Police P.S. Jharasangam, whereas the offence is Grave in nature. During the further course of investigation, CIP.,

Zaheerabad Rural Circle came to Jharasangam P.S proceeded to Machnoor

Village, there examined and recorded the statements of PP-1 to PP-4 and LW-5 in detail case diary Part-II. Later PP-1 had shown the place of offence, as such CIP.,

Zaheerabad Rural Circle came to Jharasangam P.S secured the presence of two mediators i.e., Lws 10/Alige Pramod and 11/ N. Sathyanarayana, in their presence inspected the scene of crime minutely and conducted its panchanama and drew rough sketch.

5. While the investigation was in progress on 07-09-2021 at 11:25 hrs., on reliable information LW-18/SI of Police Jharasangam along with his staff proceeded to

Machnoor Village and apprehended you accused and produced him at 3 Of 7

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

P.S. Jharasangam. On interrogation the accused have voluntarily confessed to have committed the offence as such CIP., Zaheerabad Rural Circle came to

Jharasangam P.S secured two mediators i.e., Lw-12/ Mungi Amruth and Lw-13/

Battini Dattu in their presence recorded confession and seizure panchanama of you accused and seized one Blue color Realme Smart Mobile Phone containing (Airtel Sim) vide IMEI. No.1 863642044698178, IMEI No.863642044698160 from the possession of you accused. Later CIP., Zaheerabad Rural Circle came to

Jharasangam P.S effected the arrest of you accused at 12: 45 hrs., by issuing arrest memo and complied notice U/sec. 41(A) and (B) of Cr.P.C. and informed the grounds of his arrest to his relatives under procedure 50,50-A of Cr.P.C and send him under excort of P.C.s 400 and 1897 of Jharasangam P.S to Govt. PHC

Jharasangam for Covid-19 Virus test ,where in the duty medical officer conducted

Corona Test resulted “ Negative” issued health check up certificate. Thereafter the

LW-19 send the accused to Govt. Hospital Zaheerabad for potency test under the escort of the same PCs where the duty doctor/LW-15/ K. V. Ramji., CAS., Area

Hospital, Zaheerabad had conducted the potency test of the accused and he opined that “ there is nothig to suggest that the mael examined is not capable of performing sex Act.” Later he was produced before the Judicial Remand and was lodged in District Jail, Sangareddy at Kandi.

6. During the Course of investigation CIP., Zaheerabad Rural Circle came to

Jharasangam P.S has filed a requisiton to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, 4 Of 7

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

Zaheerabad with a request to deposit the material objects i.e., 1. Cervical Smears

2. Vaginal swab (1) in No. 3. Nail and Hair (2) in No.s which was seized from the complainant and victim PP-1 on 07-08-2021 by the Medical Officer, Govt. Area

Hospital, Sangareddy to Forensic Science Laboratory, Red Hills, Hyderabad for expert Examination and alalysis report. And also one Blue color Realme Smart

Mobile Phone containing (AirtelSim) vide IMEI. No.1 863642044698178, IMEI

No.863642044698160 which were seized from the possession of the accused and deposited before the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Zaheerabad.

7.The case property deposited vide CPR No.205/15/2021 Dated: 23-08-2021 .

and C.P.R.No. 248/15/2021 Dated: 01-11-2021.

8. During the further Course of investigation on 12-11-2021 the LW-20/ Sri. S.

Bharath Kumar CIP Zaheerabad Rural Circle visited the Machnoor Village of

Jharasangam Mandal and examined and recorded the statemewnts of LW-6 to

Lw-8 i.e,., Jangili. Raju, K. Shyam, G. Kamalamma, in detail Case diary-II.

9. On considering the entire record, this case was taken on file, for the offence

U/sec. 376(2) (n),420, 417 of IPC, against the accused and registered it as

PRC. No.08 of 2022.

5 Of 7

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

10.On appearance of the accused, copies of all the documents were furnished to him U/sec. 207 Cr.P.C.

11.Heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused and perused the record.

12.The record prima facie reveals a case U/Sec. 376(2) of IPC which is exclusively triable by a Court of Session. Hence, the case is committed to the

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

13. The entire case record and property shall be submitted to the Hon’ble Prl.

District and Sessions Judge’s Court, Medak at Sangareddy U/Sec. 209 (c) Cr.P.C.

14.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Jharasangam produced the accused and remanded to Judicial Custody on 07-09-2021 and released on bail on 08-10-2021 vide orders in Crl.m.P.No. 377/2021 Dated: 07-10-2021 of the Hon’ble IX. Addl.

District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

15.The Public Prosecutor concerned, informed about the commitment of the case to Hon’ble Prl. Sessions Judge’s Court, Medak at Sangareddy U/Sec. 209 (d)

Cr.P.C.

6 Of 7

P.R.C.NO. 08 OF 2022

16.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 28-07 -2022.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 23 rd day of May, 2022.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

- NIL-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad 7 Of 7

TSSN050002182017

Presented on : 18-09-2017 Registered on : 27-09-2017 Decided on : 21-05-2022 Duration : 4 years, 8 months, 3 days

IN THE COURT OF

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

AT ZAHEERABAD ,MEDAK

(Presided Over by SMT. G.ANUSHA)

CC/491/2017

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION): PS ZAHEERABAD/SARADA VENU GOPAL Through Police Station Officer

, RACHANNAPET STREET, ZAHEERABAD.

ZAHEERABAD MEDAK

PS ZAHEERABAD/SARADA VENU GOPAL VERSUS :

RATHOD VITTAL

Age: 34 Occupation :

NAGISHETTY THANDA,HOTHI B VILLAGE,ZAHEERABAD MANDAL.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: APP, Advocate for appearing for RATHOD VITTAL Advocate appearing for , respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 447 of INDIAN PENAL CODE, 324 of INDIAN PENAL CODE, 504 of INDIAN PENAL CODE,

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 21-05-2022)

ORDER

Accused and defacto complainant, Injured are present. Counsel for the accused and the police concerned are present. and identified the parties and obtained their signatures in my presence. The offence 447,323,504 IPC is compoundable. The matter is compromised between the parties on due conciliations before Lok Adalath. The complainant represented that he has compromised with accused, he has no grievance against the accused, and that the accused may relieved, Hence, the accused and is acquitted U/s 320 (8) Cr.P.C. Accordingly award is passed (vide separate one). The case property shall be destroyed forthwith/interim custody shall made absolute/ case property shall be given to the owner.

(SMT. G.ANUSHA)

Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Zaheerabad

ZAHEERABAD MEDAK

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