Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone

Prl JCJ Court Dhone · Kurnool · Andhra Pradesh

Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana, Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone, is posted at Prl JCJ Court Dhone, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, India. 1,614 court orders on record since 2017. 17 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, PRC, MC cases.

1,614

Total Orders

Judgments

112

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/251/2016 Acquitted

S.M.M.Hussain, vs Vs1. S.Narasimha Reddy and 5 others.

15 Apr 2020

C.C.No.251 of 2016.1J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

In the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Present:- Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana, Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Wednesday the 15th day of April, 2020

C.C.No.251 of 2016

State: Represented by Circle Inspector of Police, Dhone Circle, Kurnool District. … Complainant.

Versus

1. Sadive Narasimha Reddy, aged about 37 years, S/o Narasa Reddy, the then Rural Development Officer, Andhra Bank, Dhone Town, R/o H.No.20-814-D, Co-operative Colony, Kadapa Town, A.P (A1).

2. Parlapalli Sravan Kumar Reddy, aged about 29 years, S/o P.Obula Reddy, (Brother in law of A1), R/o H.No.6-563, Chinna Chowk, Kadapa town and District, now R/at D.No.5-3-8, Venkata Rao Nagar Colony, Kukatpalli, Hyderabad, Telangana State (A2).

3. Dorapalle Syam Babu, aged about 59 years, S/o Zakaraiah, the then Branch Manager, Andhra Bank, Dhone Town, R/o Ramappa Palem, Itikampadu (Post) Via Machavaram, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District (A3).

4. Poonjathodu Chellappa Ansukumaran, aged about 55 years, S/o Challappan, the then Sub Manager, Andhra Bank, Dhone town, R/o H.No.16, Ushas, Thiruvallem village, Trivendrum District, Kerla State (A4).

5. Jeepalem Gowtham, aged 30 years, S/oKrishna Reddy, the then Probationary Officer, Andhra Bank, Dhone town, R/o D.No.1-6-1, K.L.M.Hospital, Balaji Nagar, Renigunta village and mandal, Chittoor District (A5).

6. Dhani Reddy Ramana Reddy, aged about 59 years, S/o Late D.Konda Reddy, the then Assistant Manager, Andhra Bank, Dhone town, R/o H.No.26-389, M.S.Nagar, Opposite to Railway Post Office, Nandyal (A6).

7. Parlapallishailaja Reddy, aged 32 years, W/o Narasimha Reddy, R/o H.No.20-814-D, Co-operative Colony, Kadapa Town (A7) Not charged. … Accused No.1 to No.6 respectively.

Note:- The accused No.7 remained no charged as per the

proceedings issued by the S.D.P.O.1757/SDPO-D/2015, dated

10.10.2015.

This case coming on 23.03.2020 before me for hearing in the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.2J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant/

State and of Sri M.Naga Bhushan Reddy, Advocate for the accused, upon hearing the arguments and posted for judgment on 26.3.2020 but due to outbreak of COVID-19 Pendemic and in pursuance Circulars of

Honourable High Court dt.24.3.2020 having stood over for

consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

JUDGMENT

1. The Circle Inspector of Police, Dhone Circle, Dhone Town P.S has filed charge sheet against all the accused in Cr.No.94 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 167, 406, 409 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC.

2. As per the brief averments of the prosecution case:

This is a case of cheating followed by the criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of bank and public funds to a tune of

Rs.2,41,84,304-08 Ps (Two crores forty one lakh eighty four thousand three hundred and four rupees and eight paise only) by its employees and others with criminal conspiracy that occurred at Andhra Bank,

Dhone Branch, Dhone town which comes under the territorial jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.

The accused No.1 namely S.Narasimha Reddy while he was working as Assistant Manager/Rural Development Officer at Dhone town branch has committed an offence of cheating and also misappropriation of bank and public funds with the criminal conspiracy of A2 to A6 and caused heavy loss to a tune of Rs.2,41,84,304-08 Ps (Two crores forty one lakh eighty four thousands three hundred and four rupees and eight paise only) to the Andhra Bank, Dhone Branch.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.3J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

The accused No.2 by name Parlapalli Sravan Kumar Reddy being one of the party to the criminal conspiracy in consonance with A1, A3 to A6 as a part of illegal agreement transferred Rs.1,13,00,000/- to the account of the accused/A2 under the name and style of

M.S.L.N.Logistics, Hyderabad. In addition to that, the accused No.3 by name D.Shyam Babu, who was working as a Branch Manager of Andhra

Bank, Dhone town, and the accused No.4 by name P.C.Sukumaran working as a Sub Manager of Dhone town, and accused No.5 by name

J.Gowtham Kumar, working as a Probationary Officer in Andhra Bank of

Dhone town and accused No.6 by name D.Ramana Reddy, who was working as a Assistant Manager in Andhra Bank, Dhone town, all together conspired with the accused/A1 and A2 and the remaining accused A3 to A6 allowed the accused A1 to use their secret personal passwords to transfer the money of the public which was lying in the bank. In addition to that, the accused No.7 by name P.Shailaja Reddy, who is none other than the accused A1 has purchased some immovable properties on her name wherein during the course of investigation, the investigation officer has got permission to delete the name of accused No.7 from the list of the accused vide Proceedings

No.1757/SDPO-D/2015, dated 10.10.2015 as her involvement is not there and she being the wife of the accused No.1, the accused No.1 used her bank accounts in order to purchase some immovable properties in her name and accordingly, she is not charged in this case.

Subsequently, the list of witness by name S.M.M.Hussain, who was working as a Chief Manager of Andhra Bank, Zonal Office, Kurnool has searched the bank transactions along with L.W.2 and he found misappropriation in the bank over the public money by the accused/A1 in conspiracy with A2 to A6 herein. Accordingly, the investigation was

C.C.No.251 of 2016.4J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone taken up and therefore, the CI of Police-L.W.13, who continued the investigation took up by L.W.12, the predecessor, has laid the charge sheet into this case.

3. As per the averments of the charge sheet prior to 9.12.2013 and 28.8.2012 onwards the accused No.1 by name S.Narasimha Reddy who was working as a Rural Development Officer who joined at Dhone

Branch on 13.8.2012 from Dharmavaram Branch of Kakinada Zone and from then on 28.8.2012 onwards, the accused A1 started misusing the computer systems and misappropriated the bank money and also the public money for his personal use in conspiracy with the remaining accused. He resorted to mis-utilization of his official position and also mis appropriated the bank money in the Dhone branch by various fraudulent transactions in nexus with the remaining accused to a tune of Rs.2,41,84,304.08 Ps. (Two crores fourty one lakhs eighty four thousands three hundred and four and eight paisa only) Accordingly, the accused No.1 conspired with the remaining accused as a part of their illegal agreement wherein the accused A3 to A6, who are bank officials also co-operated with A1 in looting the bank money pertaining to Crop Insurance claims relating to Kharif in the year, 2011. They have un-authorisedly debited sundry creditors and also other items pertaining to Crop Insurance claims under NIAS Kharif, 2011 and sundry suspense account under the Head (GL Head

No.01111029540250) and credited the amounts to their personal accounts of S.Narasimha Reddy i.e., A1 herein without any justification and without any manual vouchers on record.

Basing on the said information, L.W.1 who was in the capacity of

Chief Manager, Zonal Office, Andhra Bank, Kurnool along with the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.5J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

Senior Manager i.e., L.W.2 working at the Zonal Office, Andhra Bank,

Kurnool visited the Andhra Bank of the Dhone branch on 14.8.2013 and he found some irregularities committing by A1 with the assistance of

A3 to A6 and he has found loss of Rs.1.58 Crores. Accordingly, he presented a written report on 14.8.2013 to take necessary actions against the said accused. Basing on the report given by the said Chief

Manager i.e., L.W.1 the SI of Police of Dhone Town P.S (L.W.11) has registered a case as in Cr.No.94 of 2013 for the offences under section 406, 409, 420 of IPC and submitted FIRs to all the concerned officers and he has taken the investigation and on the next day, he secured the presence of L.W.1 and examined him and recorded his statement and also found that L.W.1 stated, accused/A1 to A6 has committed the offence in looting the bank and also the public money in the bank and he has provided the data of the fraudulent transactions data wise.

Accordingly, the following transactions which are fraudulent transactions made by A1 with the conspiracy of A2 to A6 are reported in the report given by L.W.1.

(I). On 26.10.2012 out of the total amount of Rs.55,387.56 Ps the A1 credited an amount of Rs.25,000/- to his account bearing No.A/c No.011110100096679 fvg - S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered by the passward Mr.G.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.Syam Babu (A3). The above amount was drawn through ATM of A1 on 26.10.2012.

(II). On 5.11.2012 the A1 by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.23,887/- to his account (A/c No.011110100096679) fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction is entered by the password of Mr.G.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3) and the same amount was drawn through ATM of A1 on 5.11.2012.

(III). On 5.11.2012 the A1, by deleting the bank sundry creditors’ amount (G.L Head No.01111029380120) he routed the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- through bank draft fvg – Parsi Sivaiah and Company, Nizamabad, bearing deed No.605065. The above transaction is entered by the password of Mr.Syam Babu (A3) and verified by the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.6J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone password of Mr.Gowtham (A5). The above D.D. is paid on 14.12.2012 to M/s Parsi Sivaiah and Company.

(IV). On 5.11.2012 the A1, by debiting bank sundry creditors account (G.L Head No.01111029380120) he routed an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- by way of bank draft fvg Parsi Sivaiah and Company, Nizamabad trhough D.D.No.605066. The above transaction is done through the passward of Mr.Syam Babu (A3) and verified through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5). The above D.D is paid on 14.11.2012 to M/s Parsi Sivaiah and Company.

(V). On 6.11.2012 the A1, by debiting bank sundry creditors account (G.L Head No.01111029380120) he took 20 numbers of D.Ds bearing its Sl.No.s 605073 to 605092, all 20 D.Ds of Rs.95,000/- each total amounting to Rs.19,00,000/- in his favour i.e., S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) payable at Kurnool. The above transaction were entered through the passward of Mr.Syam Babu (A3) and verified through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5). The above 20 D.Ds were paid on 12.11.2012 to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy in HDFC Bank, Kurnool.

(VI). On 6.11.2012 the A1, by debiting bank sundry creditors account (G.L Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.27,887/- to his own account i.e., A/c No.11910100006719 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3). The amount was drawn on 10.11.2012 through ATM of A1.

(VII). On 9.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.24,887/- to his own account i.e., (A/c No.11910100006719) fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were entered through the password of Mr.G.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3). The amount was drawn on 10.11.2012 through ATM of A1.

(VIII). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in favour of the Andhra Bank Employees Co-operative Bank Limited through D.D bearing No.605129. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid on 15.01.2013 to the above Andhra Bank Employees Co-operative Bank Limited.

(IX). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in his favour through D.D. bearing No.605130. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid on 20.11.2012 to A1 through his HDFC Bank Account, Kurnool.

(X). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in his favour through D.D. bearing No.605131. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5)

C.C.No.251 of 2016.7J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid to the account of A1 i.e., Mr.Narasimha Reddy on 20.11.2012 to A1 through his HDFC Bank Account, Kurnool.

(XI). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in his favour through D.D. bearing No.605132. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid to the account of A1 i.e., Mr.Narasimha Reddy on 20.11.2012 to A1 through his HDFC Bank Account, Kurnool.

(XII). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in his favour through D.D. bearing No.605133. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid to the account of A1 i.e., Mr.Narasimha Reddy on 20.11.2012 through his HDFC Bank Account, Kurnool.

(XIII). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in his favour through D.D. bearing No.605134. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid to the account of A1 i.e., Mr.Narasimha Reddy on 20.11.2012 through his HDFC Bank Account, Kurnool.

(XIV). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took a D.D for an amount of Rs.95,000/- in his favour through D.D. bearing No.605135. This transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above D.D was paid to the account of A1 i.e., Mr.Narasimha Reddy on 20.11.2012 through his HDFC Bank Account, Kurnool.

(XV). On 01.12.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), he took four demand drafts of D.Ds bearing No. from 605165 to 605168, and all the four D.Ds for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- each are drawn in favour of M/s L.N.Logistics (A2’s Company) and drawn at Hyderabad to a total amount to Rs.36,00,000/-. The above transactions was entered through the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4). The above D.Ds were paid to the account of M/s L.N.Logistics through the Axix Bank on 4.12.2012.

(XVI). On 07.12.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), took five numbers of a D.Ds bearing No. from 605185 to 605189, all the five D.Ds for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- each are drawn in favour of M/s L.N.Logistics (A2’s Company) and drawn on Hyderabad, total amount to Rs.45,00,000/-. The above transactions were entered through the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.Syam Babu (A3). The above D.Ds were paid to the account of M/s L.N.Logistics through the Axix Bank on 11.12.2012.

(XVII). On 30.11.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’

C.C.No.251 of 2016.8J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone account (GL Head No.01111029380120), directly credited an amount of Rs.46,887/- to his own account bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg–S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transactions was entered through the password of one Mr.Chandra Mohan and verified by the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5). Out of the said amount the A1 drawn an amount of Rs.25,000/- through his ATM on 30.11.2012 and another amount of Rs.21,700/- was drawn through ATM of A1 on 1.12.2012.

(XVIII). On 7.12.2012, the A1, by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), credited an amount of Rs.3,99,775/- to his account bearing A/c No.011110100101458 fvg- S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above amount was drawn through withdrawal form on 18.12.2012.

(XIX). On 22.12.2012 the A1 by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.39,999/- to his account (A/c No.194801100000098) fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered by the password of Mr.Syam Babu (A3) and verified by the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5). The above amount was drawn through ATM on 22.12.2012.

(XX). On 26.12.2012 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), took two numbers of a D.Ds bearing Nos.605228 and 605229 for an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- each and on the same date he took another D.D bearing No.605230 for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- by debiting the above account, and the above three D.Ds were issued in favour of M/s L.N.Logistics (A2’s company) and drawn at Hyderabad. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4). The above all D.Ds were paid to the account of M/s L.N.Logistics (A2’s Company) on 31.01.2013.

(XXI). On 21.1.2013 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), took one D.D bearing Nos.605306 for an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- favouring M/s L.N.Logistics (A2’s company) and drawn on Hyderabad. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Ramana Reddy (A6). The above D.D was paid to the account of M/s L.N.Logistics (A2’s Company) on 23.1.2013.

(XXII). On 21.1.2013 the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), credited an amount of Rs.1,24,775/- to his account bearing A/c No.011110100101458 fvg- S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Ramana Reddy (A6) and Mr.Sukumaran (A4). Out of the said amount of Rs.90,000/- was drawn on 21.1.2013 and another Rs.35,000/- was drawn on 23.1.2013 through withdrawal form.

(XXIII). On 31.1.2013 the A1, by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), and credited an amount of Rs.14,237/- to his account bearing A/c No.091310012006585 fvg-S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Mr.Syam Babu (A3) and

C.C.No.251 of 2016.9J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone verified by the password of Mr.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above amount was drawn on 31.1.2013 through challan No.31216.

(XXIV). On 4.2.2013, the A1 has taken two pay orders for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.55,717.50 ps in favour of crop insurance 2011, out of which an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- by pay order No.672020 is credited to his account bearing A/c 011110100101458 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) on 14.2.2013. The remaining amount of Rs.55,717.50 ps by pay order NO.672021 is credited to Intermediate G.L and afterwards the amount of Rs.50,000/- credited to A/c No.011110011036481 fvg – G.Bala Rami Reddy and for remaining amount of Rs.5,717.50 ps issued pay order bearing No.672140 fvg crop insurance 2011, dt.6.4.2013. The above entries of transaction were done by the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Syam BAbu (A3). The amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was drawn on 14.2.2013 through withdrawal form and another Rs.50,000/- was drawn on 6.4.2013 through withdrawn form pertaining to this transaction.

(XXV). On 7.2.2013 the A1, by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), and credited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to his account bearing A/c No.091310012006585 fvg-S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Mr.Syam Babu (A3). An amount of Rs.50,000/- was drawn on 7.2.2013 through challan No.31218 and Rs.50,000/- was drawn on 7.2.2013 through challan No.31219.

(XXVI). On 19.11.2012, the A1, by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120), directly credited an amount of Rs.17,338.76 ps to his account bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg-S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above amount was drawn through ATM of A1 on 19.11.2012.

(XXVII). On 13.09.2012 the A1 by debiting the bank sundry suspense account (GL. Head No.01111029540250), he has taken a pay order No.671935 for Rs.1,72,294.36 ps by fvg S.Narasimha Reddy. This transaction was entered into the system by the password of A1 and verified by the passward of Mr.P.Sukumaran (A4). Later the pay order was debited and credited to the account of A1 bearing A/c No.011110100096679. In this transaction the entry was made by the password of Mr.Gowtham and verification was done through the pass word of Mr.Sukumaran (A4). Out of the total amounts, an amount of Rs.50,000/- was transferred to the account of one Mr.K.Rama Subba Reddy through N.E.F.T. on 23.10.2012, another amount of Rs.50,000/- was transferred to the account of one P.Obula Reddy through N.E.F.T and another amount of Rs.45,000/- was drawn through withdrawal form , another amount of Rs.6,000/- was credited to the account NO.016610100002634 fvg – one S.Venkata Ramana. Further the remaining Rs.20,000/- was drawn through ATM of A1 on 23.10.2012.

(XXVIII). On 8.9.2012 the A1, by debiting the bank sundry suspense account (GL Head No.01111029540250), credited Rs.28,147/- to his personal account bearing A/c No.01191010006719 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered by the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.10J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4) and verified by S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). Out of the said amount credited to amount of Rs.20,000/- was drawn through ATM on 8.9.2012 and Rs.8,000/- on 10.09.2012 through ATM of A1.

(XXIX). On 13.9.2012 the A1, by debiting the bank sundry suspense account (GL Head No.01111029540250), he has taken pay order No.671927 for Rs.23,538/- which was entered through his pass word and verified by the password of Mr.P.C.Sukumaran (A4) relating to this amount on 29.10.2012 the amount is directly credited to his account bearing A/c No.01111010096679 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy. This transaction was entered by the password of Mr.J.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.P.C.Sukumaran (A4). The above amount was drawn by A1 through his ATM on 23.10.2012.

(XXX). On 13.09.2012 the A1, by debiting the bank sundry suspense account (GL Head No.01111029540250) he took 8 pay orders for Rs.76,935.09 ps through P.O.Nos 671926 ranging from 671928 to 671934 for different amounts. For this amount on 26.10.2012, the A1 directly credited to his account bearing A/c No. 011110100096679 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) an amount of Rs.76,935.09 ps. The first transaction was entered by the password of A1 and verified by the password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4). The second transaction was entered by the password of Mr.Chandra Mohan and verified by the password of Mr.Syam Babu (A3). Out of the said amount, an amount of Rs.50,000/- was drawn on 29.10.2012 through ATM of A1 and Rs.26,700/- was drawn on the same day through withdrawal form.

(XXXI). On 7.2.2013 the A1, by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited to I.G.L account and there from the A1 debited two C.B.S cheque proceeds and there from credited to credit finance account from there an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to his account bearing No.A/c No.091310012006585 at Perusomula branch fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transactions were entered through the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3). The above amount credited was withdrawn on 7.2.2013 by challan No.31218 and another Rs.50,000/- was withdrawn on 7.2.2013 by challan No.31219.

(XXXII). On 9.2.2013, the A1 debited the amount of I.R.D.P Subsidy and credited an amount of Rs.40,583/- to his account bearing A/c No.011110100101458 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). Out of the said amount of rs.30,000/- was transferred to the festival advance to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy on 11.02.2013 and the remaining amount of Rs.11,000/- was drawn on 11.2.2013 through withdrawal form.

The total amount involved as per the above 1 to 32 transactons is Rs.1,58,00,994.21 Ps. (One crore fifty eight lakhs nine hundred and ninty fiour and twenty one paisa only)

C.C.No.251 of 2016.11J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

4. Further on 21.10.2013 L.W.1 has submitted another report to the police about some more fraudulent transactions that were done by

A1 with the assistance of A2 to A6 at their Dhone branch and caused loss to a tune of Rs.86,14,162.85 Ps which were found during the investigation by their Inspection Department. They are as follows (XXXIII). On 28.08.2012, the A1 obtained pay order bearing No.517292 dated 17.07.2013 for Rs.45,468/- issued by Andhra Bank, Dharmavaram fvg difference amount of SHGFS was credited to the account of A1 bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above amount was drawn through his ATM on 28.08.2012, 29.08.2012 and 30.08.2012.

(XXXIV). On 5.9.2012, the A1 by debiting the bank sundry creditors account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.16,830/- to his account bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.P.C.Sukumaran (A4) and verified by the password of Mr.J.Gowtham (A5). The above amount was drawn through ATM of A1 on 5.9.2012.

(XXXV). On 10.9.2012, the A1 by debiting the bank sundry creditors account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.7,103/- to his account bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.P.C.Sukumaran (A4) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above amount was drawn on 10.09.2012 through ATM of A1.

(XXXVI). On 17.08.2012, branch opened S.B account bearing A/c 011110100096226 fvg as per manual ledger with existing customer I.D.No.19647449 pertaining to above over due term deposit No.011120001000040. This account was opened by ARU 24165 and verified by Mr.Sukumaran (A4). On 27.08.2012 an amount of Rs.3,435/- and Rs.1,08,355/- was transferred from sundry creditors T.D.S account bearing No.A/c 01111029380130. The above S.B A/c No.0111101100096226 was closed on 11.09.2012. At the time of closer system generated S.B account of Rs.183/- and credited to the account. Now the total outstanding balance of Rs.1,11,973/- was debited and credited to cheque proceeds account and then credited to S.B account bearing A/c 011110100096679 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). In this series of transaction the passwards of D.Ramana Reddy (A6), J.Gowtham (A5), P.C.Sukumaran (A4) and S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) were used.

(XXXVII). On 19.10.2012 credit balance in various PAGCC accounts were debited and transferred to intermediary general ledger account. These transactions were debited by the password of ARU 21165 and verified by the password of D.Ramana Reddy (A6). Later an amount of Rs.22,898.14 Ps was debited intermediary general ledger account and credited to the account bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A4). This transaction was entered by the pass

C.C.No.251 of 2016.12J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone word of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of D.Syam Babu (A3).

(XXXVIII). There was an over term deposit account bearing A/c No.011120001000040 for an amount of Rs.9,17,694.85 ps fvg as per manual ledger lying with the branch since 2004. On 28.05.2012 the said over due term deposit was converted to KTD. Due to conversion an amount of Rs.4,33,420-00 ps accrued interest credited to the account. Further on 16.06.2012 and 22.09.2012 interest amount of Rs.13,738-00 ps and Rs.28,754/- credited to the account respectively (Rs679/- was reversed by the system). The term deposit was closed on 25.10.2012 and an amount of Rs.13,92,927.85 ps was converted to pay order bearing No.671965 gvg one Chandra. On 26.10.2012 the pay order was cancelled and the amount of Rs.13,92,927.85 ps was sent to the account of one Manenu Chandrudu at SBI, Koilakuntla bearing A/c No.30611229423 vide RTGS UTR No.ANDBH 12300533762. These transactions were done through the password of D.Syam Babu (A3) and J.Gowtham (A5). The above S.B.I account holder Manernu Chandrudu had withdrawn the said amount on 30.10.2012 onwards. The above Manenu Chandrudu is close associate of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1).

(XXXIX). On 17.07.2012 the A1 by debiting the bank sundry creditors’ account of 0119, Dharmavaram branch, took one pay order bearing No.517219 for an amount of Rs.14,497/- fvg difference amount of SHGFS. On 5.11.2012 the said pay order was cancelled and the said amount was credited to the amount of A1 bearing A/c 0111101000096679 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3). The said amount was drawn through ATM on 5.11.2012.

(XL). On 10.11.2012, the A1, by debeting the bank sundry creditors account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.1,69,775/- to the account of A1 bearing A/c No.011110100096679 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3) and verified by the password of Mr.Sukumaran (A4). The above amount was drawn on 12.10.2012 and purchased 50 grams gold coin.

(XLI). The following pay orders.

(a) Pay order NO.492820, dated 28.04.2009 fvg – B.Ramakka for Rs.5,000/-, AGLCC 01 20060700 being the amount of incentive scheme declared by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on 12.11.2012.

(b) Pay Order No.492821, dated 28.04.2009 fvg V.Rangamma for Rs.5,000/-, AGLCC 01 20060700 being the amount of incentive scheme declared by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on 12.11.2012.

(c) Pay Order No.492822, dated 28.04.2009 fvg U.Ratnamma for Rs.5,000/-, AGLCC 01 20050486 being the amount of incentive scheme declared by the Government of Andhra Pradesh.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.13J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

Were cancelled on 12.11.2012 and the above amount of Rs.15,000/- was credited to the account of A1 bearing A/c No.011910100006719 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were entered by the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of J.Gowtham (A5). The above amount was drawn through ATM on 13.11.2012.

(XLII). On 19.11.2012 the A1, by deleting the T.D.S recoveries account and credited an amount of Rs.5,756/- to his account bearing No.011910100006719 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered by the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of J.Gowtham (A5). The above amount was drawn through ATM on 19.11.2012.

(XLIII). On 22.11.2012, the A1, by deleting the Centralized D.D account, credited an amount of Rs.3,651/- to his account bearing No.091310012006585 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above transaction was entered by the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of J.Gowtham (A5). The above amount was drawn through cheques on 22.11.2012 and 24.11.2012.

(XLIV). On 26.11.2012, the A1 by debiting the pay order No.493484 dt.22.11.2011 fvg – Lakshmi Pavala Vaddi was credited as amount of Rs.2,700/- to his account bearing A/c No.091310012006585 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). On the same day, the A1 by debiting the pay order No.493486 dt.22.12.2011 fvg Lakshmi Pavala Vaddi, credited an amount of Rs.6,225/- to his account bearing A/c No.091310012006585 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were entered by the password of Mr.J.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.D.Ramana Reddy (A6). The amounts pertaining to the above pay orders were debited to sundry creditors.

(XLV). On 5.12.2012, the A1, by debiting the PAGCC in the suspense account bearing A/c No.0111105419001 for an amount of Rs.13,402/- and Rs.8,225/- credited the A1 to his account for an amount of Rs.20,515/- to his account bearing No.011110100101458 Fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy. The above transactions were routed through IGL and cheque proceeds account. The transactions were entered by the password of Mr.J.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The above amount was drawn through withdrawal form on 6.12.2012.

(XLVI). On 7.12.2012, the A1, debited an amount of Rs.7,424/-, Rs.5,607/-, Rs.6,562/- and Rs.1,018/- and credited to IGL for an amount of Rs.20,611/-. The above transactions were entered through the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the pass ward of Mr.D.Ramana Reddy (A6). The above amount was drawn through withdrawal form on 6.12.2012. Later on 10.12.2012 an amount of Rs.20,498/- was credited to the account of A1 bearing A/c No.011110100101458 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy after making entries through sundry creditors and cheque proceeds account. The entries were entered through the password of J.Gowtham (A5) and verified by the password of Mr.Syam Babu (A3). The amount was drawn through withdrawal form on 11.12.2012.

(XLVII). On 7.12.2012, the A1, by debiting the PAGCC in the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.14J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone suspense account, credited an amount of Rs.17,962/- to sundry creditors account bearing A/c No.01111029380120 which was entered by the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of D.Syam Babu (A3). Later on 14.12.2012 sundry creditors amount was debited and credited into an two intermediary general ledger account which was entered by the password of Mr.Chandra Mohan and verified through the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3). Later an amount of Rs.13,705/- was debited to PAGCC into suspense account and credited to IGL. This transaction was entered through the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) verified through the password of Mr.D.Ramana Reddy (A6). Later an amount of Rs.31,554/- was credited to his account bearing A/c No.011110100101458 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy by debiting intermediary general ledger and after routing transactions through trade finance. In these transactions the passwords of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy and D.Syam Babu (A3) were used. The above amount was drawn on 18.12.2012 through withdrawal form.

(XLVIII). On 22.12.2012, the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors account (GL Head No.01111029380120) and credited an amount of Rs.42,587/- to intermediary general ledger account. From intermediary general ledger account an amount of Rs.39,999/- was credited to the account of A1, bearing A/c No.194810100000098 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) after routing the amount through trade finance account. In these transactions the passwords of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1), J.Gowtham (A5) and Syam Babu (A3) were used. The amount was drawn through ATM on 22.12.2012 and 24.12.2012.

(XLIX). On 27.12.2012, the A1, an amount of Rs.19,412/- and Rs.3,430/- were debited to PAGCC into suspense account and credited to intermediary general ledger. From intermediary general ledger account the following credits were made which are not related to PAGCC account.

(a) Rs.3,000/- to an A/c No.011130100017557 (favouring) fvg – Heena SHG.

(b) Rs.3,000/- to an A/c No.011130100017566 fvg – Aswini SHG.

(c) Rs.3,000/- to an A/c No.011130100023619 fvg – Sana SHG.

(d) Rs.7,000/- to an A/c No.011130100033032 fvg – Devi SHG.

(e) Rs.3,600/- to an A/c No.011130031004193 fvg – A.E.Gowthami.

(f) Rs.1,500/- to an A/c No.011130031004102 fvg – G.Sreedevi.

(g) Rs.1,000/- to an A/c No.011113100087583 fvg – Dhanalakshmi SHG.

(i) Rs.300/- to an A/c 0111301000019263 fvg – M.Dhanamaiah BE.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.15J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

(j) Rs.442/ to an A/c No.011130100019740 fvg – J.Gangaiah B.E.

(k) Rs.1,788/- to an A/c 011130020003814 fvg – M.Lakshmanna ATL.

Similarly, by debiting the sundry creditors account the following credits were made which are not relevant.

(l) Rs.1,700/- to an A/c No.011130100019740 fvg –

J.Ganganna B.E.

(m) Rs.1,050/- to an A/c No.011130100019315 fvg –

Y.Jayamma B.E.

And by debiting PAGCC account bearing A/c No.011113016001588 fvg – K.Satyanarayana Rs.421.84 Ps was credited to SHG A/c No.01130032004249 fvg – Jayadurga Group. In these transactions the passwords of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) J.Gowtham (A5) and one P.Chandra Mohan were used.

(X) On 31.12.2012, the A1, debited an amount of Rs.7,871.75 Ps from PAGCC into account bearing A/c No.01111054190001 and credited to intermediary general ledger and then debited to IGL and credited Rs.4,000/- to A/c No.011130100033032 fvg – Devi SHG and Rs.3,871-75 Ps is credited to A/c No.01113100087671 fvg – Madhuri SHG which are not related to PAGCC. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.P.Chandra Mohan.

(LI). On 31.12.2012, the A1, by deducting an amount of Rs.6,887/- from SHGPS into suspense account bearing A/c No.01111054301001 and transferred to intermediary general ledger and then transferred to account bearing A/c No.011130100033032 fvg – Devi SHG. The above transaction was entered through the password of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of Mr.P.Chandra Mohan and D.Syam Babu (A3).

On 29.01.2013, the A1 debited to PAGCC into suspense account bearing A/c No.01111054301001 and credited an amount of Rs.16,820/- to intermediary general ledger account by using the pass words of D.Ramana Reddy (A6) and D.Syam Babu (A3) and again Rs.451/- was debited to PAGCC into suspense account and credited to intermediary general ledger account by using the passwords of Syam Babu (A3) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6). Later by debiting the bank sundry creditors account Rs.4,272/- was credited intermediary general ledger account by using the passwords of D.Ramana Reddy (A6) and J.Gowtham (A5). Then Rs.20,000/- was debited intermediary general ledger and credited to account of A1 bearing A/c No.011110100101458 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) by using the passwords of D.Syam Babu (A3) and J.Gowtham (A5). The said amount was drawn on 29.01.2013.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.16J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

Later Rs.1,500/- was credited to A/c No.011130032004436 fvg – Madhavi SHG using the passwords of D.Ramana Reddy (A6) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LII). On 1.2.2013, several pay orders were cancelled and credited to IGL account and from IGL account Rs.10,000/- was credited to SHG A/c No.011130032004436 fvg – Madhavi SHG, Rs.4,000/- was credited to SHG A/ No.011130032004224 fvg – Jyotsna SHG and Rs.39,887/- was credited to the A/c No.091310012006585 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were entered by the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of D.Syam Babu (A3). The above amount was drawn on 1.2.2013. Again Rs.8,274/- was credited to A/c 01113016001859 fvg – Arava Narayana by debiting sundry creditors through passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the passwords of P.Chandra Mohan.

(LIII). On 7.2.2013, the A1, debited an amount of Rs.6,300/- to PAGCC A/c No.011113016000596 fvg – Ala Balaiah, on the same day Rs.3,909-70 ps was debited to PAGCC A/c No.011113016000599 fvg – Neerugattu Krishnudu and also Rs.6,464-50 ps was debited to PAGCC A/c No.011113016000601 fvg – Uppari Srinivasulu and credited IGL account. Later by debiting the said IGL account for amount Rs.674.28 Ps and it was credited to A/c 011130020003704 fvg Mr.M.Raghava Reddy and Rs.14,887/- was credited to A/c No.011110100101458 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were entered through the password of Mr.D.Syam Babu (A3) and verified by the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The said amounts were drawn on 8.2.2013.

(LIV). On 8.2.2013, the A1, by debiting the pay order NO.671979

dated 4.12.2012 for Rs.2,955.90 Ps fvg H Salanna, credited to the loan

A/c No.011130025004070 fvg T.V.K.Sudhakar Reddy. These transactions were entered through the passwords of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of D.Ramana Reddy (A6).

(LV). On 9.2.2013, the A1, by debiting Rs.8,890-72 ps to A/c No.01111066710322 fvg written off in NPA under compromise credited to loan A/c No.0113016002222 fvg – Ala Srinivasulu. This entry was entered by the passwords of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the password of J.Gowtham (A5).

(LVI). On 11.02.2013, the A1, by debiting PAGCC into suspense account for Rs.7,017/-, credited an amount of Rs.3,292.04 Ps to PAGCC A/c No.011113016001958 fvg – M.Chennamma, Rs.3,200/- A/c No.011130032004338 fvg – Mounika Mahila Sangam and Rs.524.76 Ps to A/c 01113003004505 fvg Raghavendra Mahila Sangam through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and verified by the passwords of J.Gowtham (A5).

(LVII). On 11.02.2013, the A1 by debiting retail trade suspense account bearing A/c No.0111105425001 for amount Rs.55,870/- and same was credited to loan A/c No.011130025004013 fvg – G.C.H Lakshmi Narayana through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LVIII). On 11.02.2013, the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors

C.C.No.251 of 2016.17J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone account for an amount of Rs.10,000/- and credited to loan A/c No.011130032004338 fvg – Mounika Mahila Sangam through pass words of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and Gowtham (A5) (LIX). On 11.02.2013, the A1 by debiting SHG int suspense account, for an amount of Rs.3,679/- credited to loan A/c No.011130032004221 fvg Saraswathi Mahila Sangam by debiting sundry creditors of Rs.4,451/- and Rs.4,451/- was credited to the same account through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5). (LX). On 11.02.2013, the A1 by debiting SHG int suspense account, for an amount of Rs.4,733/- credited to loan A/c No.011130032004223 fvg-Siva Sankara Swamy, SHG and by debiting sundry creditors Rs.6,860/- credited to the same loan account through passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXI). On 11.2.2013, the A1, by debiting sundry creditors account for an amount of Rs.11,500/- credited to loan A/c No.011130032004225 fvg-Anjaneya Podupu Group SHG and by debiting SHG int.suspense account bearing A/c No.01111054301001 for an amount of Rs.10,000/- credited to the same loan account A/c No.011130032004225 fvg – Anjaneya Podupu Group SHG and by debiting sundry creditors account, for an amount of Rs.622/- was credited to the account A/c No.011130032004225 fvg-Anjaneya Pdupu Group SHG through passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXII). On 11.02.2013, the A1 by debiting Sundry creditors account for an amount of Rs.254.20 Ps was credited to loan A/c No.011130032004330 fvg Sri Lakshmi Mahila Sangam through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXIII). On 11.02.2013, the A1, by debiting RT int suspense account bearing A/c No.01111054250001 for an amount of Rs.30,000/- was credited to loan account bearing A/c No.011130032004248 fvg – Sri Thyagaraju Swamy MPPS through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXIV). On 6.2.2007, one S.Chinna Thimmappa deposited Rs.50,000/- under KDT bearng A/c No 011120016006101 for 36 months which was due on 5.2.2010 with maturity value of Rs.65,302.50 ps. It was automatically relieved on 8.2.2011. By 8.2.2011 the amount became Rs.17,061.50 ps along with accrued interest. Further on 10.03.2011 the amount of rs.70,061.50 Ps is renewed bearing term deposit A/c 011120100022799 up to 4.12.2013 with maturity value of Rs.89,954-50 Ps. But the term deposit was cancelled and credited to S.B A/c 011110025100049 fvg S.Chinna Thimmappa for Rs.80,795-50 Ps on 8.2.2013.

On 11.02.2013 an amount of Rs.80,795.30 Ps is debited from the said S.B account and transferred as term deposit No.011120100043677 for Rs.70,061.50 Ps and remaining amount of Rs.10,033.80 Ps was transferred to sundry creditors account. On 13.02.2013 an amount of Rs.10,733.80 ps was debited to sundry creditors account and amount of Rs.5,000/- was transferred to an A/c

C.C.No.251 of 2016.18J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

No.011130032004374 fvg – M/s Bhaghya Lakshmi SHG, and another an amount of Rs.5,733/- was credited to A/c No.011130032004496 fvg- M/s Parvathi Lakshmi SHG. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

Further an amount of Rs.6,30,000/- was debited to sundry debtors account and same is transferred to above term deposit A/c No.011120100043677. The total amount became Rs.7,00,061.50 Ps. These transactions were done through the passwords of one S.Narasimha Rao and D.Syam Babu (A3). While transferring the above amounts to term deposit account, the branch has given value date as 5.2.2010. Hence, the system calculated interest of Rs.1,37,770/- on Rs.7,00,061.50 Ps from 05.02.2010. Out of the total interest an amount of Rs.28,810/- was deducted towards TDS and net amount of RS.1,08,960/- was credited to the above account.

Now the total amount of term deposit became Rs.8,09,021.50 Ps.

Immediately accrued portion of interest Rs.1,08,960/- was debited from the TD account and transferred as two following items.

(a) An amount of Rs.1,00,000/- credited to S.B account

No.011110011012119 fvg – G.Mohan Babu on 13.02.2013.

(b) an amount of Rs.8,960/- credited to SHG A/c

No.011130032004496 fvg – M/s Parvathi Lakshmi Mahila Sangam on 15.02.2013.

The above transactions were routed through sundry creditors and

IGL through the passwords of PC Sukumaran (A4) and D.Syam Babu (A3) and J.Gowtham (A5).

The outstanding amounts of Rs.7,00,061.50 Ps in term deposit account closed on 11.02.2013 and credited as following ways.

(a) An amount of Rs.70,061.50 Ps was credited tonew term deposit A/c No.011120100043686 fvg – S.Chinna Thimmappa within value date as 5.2.2010. On account of this, system calculated interest again from 5.2.2010 and an amount of accrued interest Rs.11,344/- was credited to term deposit account. On 18.4.2013 this term deposit was cancelled and the said amount is credited to the SB account bearing A/c No.01110025100049 fvg – Chinna Thimmappa. .

(b) an amount of Rs.6,30,000/- was credited to sundry debtors account to nullify the debt amount.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.19J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

(c). TDS amount of Rs.28,810/- was deducted by the system from interest on term deposit diverted to the account of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) bearing A/c No.194810100000098 on 18.02.2013. This transaction is done through the password of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Chandra Mohan.

(LXV). On 12.02.2013, the A1 by debiting retail trade suspense account, an amount of Rs.25,000/- was credited to loan account, bearing A/c No.011130025004043 fvg – E.Manjula through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Chandra Mohan.

(LXVI). On 13.02.2013, the A1, by debiting the pay order bearing No.492837 dated 19.05.2009 fvg – Project Director DWNA, Kurnool for an amount of Rs.7,671/- was credited to laon account bearing A/c No.011130032004328 fvg – Dhanalakshmi Mahila Sangam and by debiting Rs.20,000/- to SHGPS int suspense account and same is credited to A/c No.011130032004328 fvg M/s Dhanalakshmi Mahila Sangam through the passwords of D.Syam Babu (A3) and S.Narasimha Reddy (A1).

(LXVII). On 13.02.2013, the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors account, an amount of Rs.5,000/- was credited to loan account, bearing A/c No.011130032004374 fvg Bhagyalakshmi Mahila Sangam through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu.

(LXVIII). On 15.02.2013, the A1, by cancelling D.D.No.605381

dated 4.2.2013 for Rs.50,000/- fvg DRDA, Kurnool and same is credited

to A/c No.194810100000098 fvg-S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) routing through the transaction through IGL through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXIX). On 15.02.2013, the A1, by debiting sundry creditors account, an amount of Rs.8,960/- was credited to loan account, bearing A/c No.011130032004496 fvg – Parvathi Lakshmi Mahila Sangam through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Chandra Mohan.

(LXX). On 18.02.2013, the A1, by debiting various crop loan accounts towards insurance of PAGCC accounts for Rs.74,160/-, Rs.69,660/- and Rs.1,30,700/- were transferred to intermediary general ledger account and from there a D.D bearing No.605423 dt.18.02.2013 for an amount of Rs.2,74,520/- fvg – United India Insurance Company Limited through the pass ords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6). On 19.02.2013 the said D.D was cancelled and the said amount was credited to intermediary general ledger account, later it was credited to an A/c No.194810100000098 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) through the pass words of P.C Sukumaran (A4) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXXI). On 18.02.2013, the A1, by debiting insurance on agree credit card for an amount of Rs.18,545/- and prepared a D.D bearing

C.C.No.251 of 2016.20J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

No.605424 dated 18.02.2013 for an amount of Rs.18,545/- fvg – United India Insurance Company Limited through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6). On 12.01.2013 the said DD was cancelled and the said amount is credited intermediary general ledger account, later the same is credited to an A/c No.194810100000098 fvg S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) through the passwords of P.C Sukumaran (A4) and S.Narasimha Reddy (A1).

(LXXII). On 18.02.2013, the A1, by PAGCC int suspense account, an amount of Rs.10,782/- was credited to loan A/c No.01113060001640 fvg – Katta Seshi Reddy through intermediary general ledger account through the passwords of P.C Sukumaran (A4) and P.Chandra Mohan.

(LXXIII). On 19.02.2013, the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors account, an amount of Rs.5,502.48 PS was credited to loan account, bearing A/c No.011113016001640 fvg – Saraswathi Mahila Sangam to intermediary general ledger account through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6).

(LXXIV). On 22.02.2013, loan subsidy amount of Rs.8,62,374/- pertaining to M/s Akash Industries Limited and loan subsidy amount of Rs.6,72,200/- pertaining to M/s Sri Vinayaka Industries Limited was debited and transferred to term deposit No.01112010004826 fvg Katti Seshi Reddy for Rs.15,34,374/- by giving value date as 22.2.2003. Hence, the system generated accrued interest for the last 10 years amounting to Rs.11,03,619/-. Out of the interest portion of the Rs.11,03,619/- an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- was debited to the interest accrued and credited to A/c No.011110100010192 fvg G.Venkata Krishna Reddy on 23.02.2013. One Mr.Venkata Rami Reddy issued 3 cheques which are (1) Rs.3,00,000/- in the name of Mr.Hanumantha Reddy (2) Rs.5,00,000/- in the name of Balarami Reddy (3) Rs.3,00,000/- in the name of G.Balarami Reddy. The said amount was drawn by cash on 25.2.2013. These transactions were done through the passwords of J.Gowtham (A6) and P.C.Sukumaran (A4). Out of the remaining of Rs.3,619/-, Rs.1,000/- was credited to ATL NPA A/c No.011130020003704, Rs.919/- to ATL NPA A/c No.011130020003694 and the remaining amount of Rs.1,700/- was drawn in ash through intermediary general ledger account. The term deposit bearing No.011120100043826 for Rs.15,34,374/- was closed and the amount reversed to the respective subsidy accounts.

(LXXV) On 25.02.2013, loan subsidy amount of Rs.8,62,374/- pertaining to M/s Akash Industries Limited and another loan subsidy amount of Rs.6,72,000/- pertaining to M/s Sri Vinayaka Industries Limited was debited and transferred to a term deposit No.011120100043880 for Rs.8,62,374/- fvg K Satya Narayana and term deposit No.011120100043871 fvg K.Satya Narayana for Rs.6,72,000/- with value dated 26.02.2003. Hence, system generated accrued interest for the 10 years, amounting to Rs.11,16,740/-. From the above accrued interest an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- was debited and two pay orders were prepared each Rs.5.50 lakhs fvg Mr.G.Bala Rami Reddy and Mr.G.Hanumantha Reddy. These pay orders of Rs.5.50

C.C.No.251 of 2016.21J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone lakhs were credited to A/c No.011110021051832 fvg Mr.Hanumantha Reddy and Rs.5.50 Lakhs was credited to the A/c No.011110011036481 fvg G.Balarami Reddy on 1.3.2013 through the passwords of J.Gowtham (A6) and P.C Sukumaran (A4). The remaining amount of Rs.16,740/- was credited to sundry creditors account. Both term deposits were closed totaling Rs.15,34,374/- and the amount reversed to the respective subsidy accounts.

(LXXVI). On 5.3.2013, the A1, by debiting an amount of Rs.5,371/- of sundry creditors account and an amount of Rs.3,371/- was credited to the A/c No.011130032003813 fvg Payasam Bali Reddy through intermediary general ledger account and remaining amount of Rs.2,000/- was drawn in cash. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6).

(LXXVII) On 14.3.2013, the A1, by debiting an amount of Rs.3,134/- pertaining to sundry creditors account and same is credited to loan A/c No.011130100003192 fvg Kommu Prakash. These transactions were done through the passwords of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3).

(LXXVIII). On 14.3.2013, the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors account for an amount of Rs.10,600/- and credited pay order bearing No.672093 fvg R.Sunkanna. On 15.3.2013 the pay order was cancelled and credited to intermediary general ledger account. From that intermediary general ledger account for an amount of Rs.7,044/- was credited to loan A/c No.011130020003594 fvg Ala Narayana. By debiting the IGL credits which were effected to A/c No.011130020003596 fvg Boya Hanumanna for Rs.6,953/- and A/c No.011130020003596 fvg Boya Hanumanna for Rs.3,898/-, A/c No.01113002003599 fvg Mala Obulapathi for Rs.6,560/- and Rs.3,681/-, A/c No.011130020003652 fvg Pedda Kondanna for Rs.562/- and Rs.1,571/- and loan A/c No.011130032003693 fvg - B.Siva Reddy for Rs.29.00 Ps. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.C.Sukumaran (A4).

(LXXIX). On 16.03.2013, the A1, by debiting the A/c No.011110100109016 fvg-P.Sundura for Rs.6,000/- and A/c No.01111080600551 computer stationary for Rs.4,000/- were credited to intermediary general ledger account and from there cash of Rs.10,000/- was drawn. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and Ramana Reddy (A6).

(LXXX) On 16.03.2013, the A1, by debiting the IRDP back end subsidy account an amount of Rs.1,47,727/- was credited to pay order bearing No.672103 fvg-S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). On 28.3.2013 the said pay order was credited to the A/c No.194810100000098 fvg- S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3).

(LXXXI) On 16.3.2013, the A1, by debiting IRDP back end subsidy account an amount of Rs.40,000/- was credited to pay order

C.C.No.251 of 2016.22J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone bearing No.672104 fvg-SGSY. ON 3.4.2013 the said pay order was cancelled and credited to A/c No.11910100022133 fvg-Parlapalle Shailaja Reddy. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6). Later by debiting intermediary general ledger account the A1 credited to ATL NPA accounts for an amount of Rs.3,539/- and Rs.3,48.50 Ps A/c No.011130020003693 fvg-BSiva Reddy and an amount of Rs.7,533/- and Rs.1,362/- to loan A/c 011130020003640 fvg-U.Lingappa, an amount of Rs.4,785.41 Ps and Rs.1,232/- to loan A/c No.011130032004326 fvg-Uma Mahenswari, Mahila Group and an amount of Rs.5,973/-, Rs.3,489/- to loan A/c No.011130020003642 fvg- G.Pullaiah, an amount of Rs.3,072/- and Rs.4,892/- to loan A/c No.011130020003644 fvg-O.Venkata Ramudu, and an amount of Rs.3,063/- and Rs.4,868/- to loan A/c No.011130020003645 fvg J.Gopla Reddy, an amount of Rs.12,273/- and Rs.9,668/- to loan A/c No.0111300200003629 fvg-Chityala Pedda Kondanna, an amount of Rs.4,508/- and Rs.7,574/- to loan A/c No.011130020003655 fvg- G.Danamma, an amount of Rs.5,841/- and Rs.2,458/- to loan A/c No.011130020003656 fvg – S.Ramakrishna Reddy, an amount of Rs.5,329/- to loan A/c No.011130020003664 fvg-P.Rangamma, an amount of Rs.4,805/- to loan A/c No.011130020003667 fvg- B.Lakshmidevi, an amount of Rs.4,011/- to loan A/c No.011130020003669 fvg-Maadevi, an amount of Rs.1,984.50 Ps to loan A/c No.011130020003664 fvg-P.Rangamma. On 16.3.2013 by debiting an amount of Rs.85,000/- from intermediary general ledger account, a D.D. bearing No.605531 fvg-J Thejovathi for Rs.85,000/- was made. All these transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6).

(LXXXII). On 30.03.2013, the A1, by debiting sundry creditors account for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- credited to pay order bearing No.672122 fvg –HP Minerals. These transctions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Chandra Mohan. On 10.04.2013 the said pay order was cancelled by changing the name to S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and credited the same to the A/c No.194810100000098 fvg-S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.C.Sukumaran (A4).

(LXXXIII). On 4.4.2012, the A1, by debiting intermediary general ledger account an amount of Rs.50,000/- was credited to D.D.No.605561 fvg-J.Tejovathi, drawn on Service Centre, Tirupati. The A1 by debiting intermediary general ledger account for an amount of Rs.2,856/- and same was credited to loan A/c No.011130020003667 fvg-B.Lakshmidevi an amount of Rs.2,547/- to A/c No.011130020003669 fvg-Madhavi, an amount of Rs.185.50 Ps to A/c No.011130020003664 fvg-P.Rangamma, an amount of Rs.850/- to A/c No.011130032004248 fvg-Thyagaraju. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and J.Gowtham (A5).

(LXXXIV). On 12.04.2013, the A1, by debiting the sundry creditors TDS recovery amounts, a pay order bearing No.674144 for an

C.C.No.251 of 2016.23J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone amount of Rs.3,58,998/- fvg-TDS was prepared. These transactions were done through the passwords of P.Chandra Mohan and P.C.Sukumaran (A4). Later on 25.04.2013, the said pay order was cancelled and same is credited to intermediary general ledger account. Subsequently, the intermediary general ledger account is debited and two pay orders were prepared i.e., (1) pay oder bearing No.672149 fvg – T.DS for an amount of Rs.1,58,998/-, (2) Pay order bearing No.672150 fvg – TDS for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and the remaining amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was credited to loan A/c No.002610027900485 fvg – Yella Srinivasa Reddy which is pertaining to Andhra Bank, Atmakur Branch. These transactions were routed through the passwords of P.Chandra Mohan and J.Gowtham (A5). Later on 6.7.2013 pay order No.672149 fvg – TDS changed the name and the same is credited to A/c No.011910100022133 for an amount of Rs.1,58,998/- with Andhra Bank,Dharmavaram branch fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy. Again pay order No.672150 for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- fvg-TDS changed the name and the same is credited to A/c No.0119101000022133 with Andhra Bank, Dharmavaram branch fvg – P.Shailaja Reddy. These transactions were effected through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Jagan Mohan Reddy.

(LXXXV). On 31.3.2013, the A1, by debiting TDS amount pertaining to TD A/c No.011120100021806 and A/c No.011120100021833 fvg-M.Udaya Kiran for an amount of Rs.15,057/- was credited to pay order bearing No.671795 dated 31.3.2012. On 15.4.2013 the said pay order name was changed to P.Shailaja Reddy and the same is credited to A/c No.011910100022133 for Rs.15,057/- fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy, Andhra Bank, Dharmavaram Branch. These transactions were routed through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3). The amount was drawn on 15.4.2013 through ATM.

(LXXXVI). On 17.04.2013, the A1, by debiting sundry creditors account for an amount of Rs.22,11,503/-, the following transactions were effected.

(a) An amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was debited to sundry creditors and a pay order bearing No.672146, dated 17.04.2013 fvg-INT subvention was prepared by using the passwords of D.Syam Babu (A3) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6).

(b) an amount of Rs.10,11,503/- was debited to sundry creditors and a pay order bearing No.672147, dated 17.04.2013 for fvg-INT subvention was prepared by using the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3).

(c). an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was debited to sundry creditors and same is credited to intermediary general ledger account. From the said intermediary general ledger account an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was transferred to S.B.I. account fvg – S.Sudharni at Vishakapatnama through NEFT. This transaction was done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3).

(LXXXVII). On 31.05.2013, the A1 cancelled the pay order

C.C.No.251 of 2016.24J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone bearing No.672146 fvg – Intermediary general ledger account for an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- and same is credited to intermediary general leger account. From there i.e., intermediary general ledger account for an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- was transferred to his A/c No.32424063949 fvg – S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) at S.B.I Chinna Chowk Branch, Kadapa. Out of the remaining amount of Rs.2,00,000/- under intermediary general ledger account an amount of Rs.1,99,775/- was credited to A/c No.011910100022133 fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy through cheque proceeds account. These transactions were routed through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1), P.Chandra Mohan and D.Syam Babu (A3).

(LXXXVIII). On 12.06.2013, the A1, cancelled the pay order bearing No.672147 fvg-intermediary general ledger account for an amount of Rs.10,11,503/- and same is transferred through intermediary general ledge account. Later an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was transferred to pay order bearing No.672196 fvg – interest, and an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was transferred to pay order bearing No.672197 fvg – interest. The remaining amount of Rs.2,11,503/- was credited to the account bearing A/c No.011910100022133 fvg – P.Shailaja Reddy through the passwords of P.C.Sukumaran (A4) and one P.Jaganmohan Reddy. On 17.06.2013, the A1 cancelled the pay order bearing No.672196 for an amount of of Rs.4,00,000/- and the same is credited to A/c No.011110011036481 fvg-G.Balarami Reddy. Another pay order bearing No.672197 for an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was cancelled by A1 and the same is credited to the account, bearing A/c No.011110021051832 fvg-G.Hanumantha Reddy. These transactions were done through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3). The amounts were drawn by cash on 17.06.2013.

(LXXXIX). On 18.04.2013, the A1 cancelled the pay order bearing No.672138 fvg – Debt waiver for an amount of Rs.32,000/- and same is credited to an account bearing A/c No.011910100022133 fvg- P.Shailaja Reddy through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Syam Babu (A3). The above amount was drawn through ATM on 19.04.2013 and 20.04.2013.

(XC). On 22.04.2013, the A1 cancelled the pay order bearing No.672131 fvg-debt waiver for an amount of Rs.23,538/- and the same is credited to A/c No.011910100022133 fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Chandra Mohan. The above amount was drawn through ATM on 22.04.2013.

(XC1). On 25.04.2013, the A1, cancelled the pay order bearing No.672134 fvg-debt waiver for an amount of Rs.19,687/- and same is credited to A/c No.011910100022133 fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy through the passwords of S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and P.Chandra Mohan. The above amount was drawn through ATM on 25.04.2013 and 27.04.2013 and 29.04.2013.

(XCII). On 6.5.2013, appraisers charges (Gold loans) was debited by A1 for an amount of Rs.9,410/- and credited to A/c No.0111100111117 fvg-K.Chandrasekhar for an amount of Rs.7,410/-

C.C.No.251 of 2016.25J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone and Rs.2,000/- paid in cash from intermediary general ledger account through the passwords as S.Narasimha Reddy (A1) and D.Ramana Reddy (A6).

(XCIII). On 9.7.2013, appraiser charges (Gold loans) was debited by A1 for an amount of Rs.33,149/- and credited to A/c No.0111100111117 fvg-K.Chandrasekhar for an amount of Rs.23,149/- and an amount of Rs.10,000/- was credited to the account bearing A/c No.011910100022133 fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy through the passwords of D.Syam BAbu (A3) and one P.Jagan Mohan Reddy. The above amount was drawn on 9.7.2013 through ATM.

(XCIV). On 19.06.2013, the A1, cancelled the pay order bearing No.672136 fvg-Debt waiver for an amount of Rs.11,628/- and same is credited to an account bearing A/c No.011910100022133 fvg-P.Shailaja Reddy through the passwords of D.Syam Babu (A3) and P.Jagan Mohan Reddy. The above amount was drawn through ATM on 19.06.2013 and 20.06.2013.

(XCV). On 12.07.2013, the A1, debited 17 PAGCC accounts having credit balances and an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and same is credited to pay order bearing No.672238 fvg-interest. The above pay order for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was cancelled and same is credited to account bearing A/c No.165410100000867 fvg- D.Hariramaraju (Kompalli branch) through the passwords of D.Syam Babu (A3) and S.Narasimha Reddy (A1). The amount was drawn on 12.07.2013 by cash.

4. Subsequently during the course of investigation, basing on all the said transactions i.e., from I to XCV transactions there was total mis appropriation of amount involving Rs.2,41,84,304-08 Ps (Two crores forty one lakhs eighty four thousands three hundred and four and eight paisa) and the Circle Inspector of Police, i.e., D.Prabhakar L.W.12 collected all the relevant records pertaining to all those transactions and he found prima facie case against all the said accused.

5. While the things stood like that, the accused/A1 was arrested by L.W.5 i.e., SI of Police of Sanjamala P.S in connection with Cr.No.18 of 2014 for the offences under Sections 120 (B), 420, 468 and 471 of

IPC r/w Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C as the accused/A1 was shown as one of the accused in that case i.e., accused/A9 in that case and in the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.26J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone course of his interrogation, the accused/No.1 herein i.e., S.Narasimha

Reddy has confessed about his involvement in the present case on hand. Accordingly, he was taken into judicial custody by L.W.13 i.e.,

S.Ismail under P.T Warrant and he was taken into police custody from 17.8.2015 to 19.8.2015 for interrogation pertaining to the present case on hand and accordingly confessional panchanama was drafted by the the then Investigating Officer.

6. Further more, as per the confession panchanama during the course of the police custody he has confessed about his studies as well as his family life as well as his back ground and brief history of his career and also getting the Campus Selections and wherein he got selected as a Field Officer and he was posted as a Field Officer in

Andhra Bank, Perusomula village of Sanjamala Mandal and joined there and discharging his duties and the Modus Operandi how he started committing mis-appropriation in the bank while he was working and holding in various positions. Therefore, a confession panchanama was drafted in the presence of the mediators during the said police custody.

Further more, on 10.09.2015, L.W.13 i.e., CI of Police received credible information about the presence of the accused/A6 D.Ramana Reddy, who was working as a Probationary Officer in Andhra Bank of Dhone town and he caught hold of him and interrogated him in the presence of the mediators and during his interrogation he confessed about the commission of crime and accordingly he also confessed about his involvement in the offence and also confessed about the involvement of A1 to A5 therein. Further more, on 12.09.2015 L.W.13 i.e., the CI of

Police, i.e., Shaik Ismail received the credible information about the presence of Accused/A5 Gowtham and he also affected the arrest of

C.C.No.251 of 2016.27J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone the said accused and recorded the confession panchanama in the presence of mediators wherein he also confessed about his involvement in the offence and also involvement of the remaining accused therein. In addition to that, on 15.09.2015, the accused

A2/P.Sravan Kumar Reddy got surrendered before L.W.13 (CI of Police) and he revealed his name and identity and also his residence particulars and also confessed that he is none other than the accused

No.2 in the case and accordingly in the presence of the mediators he was interrogated and wherein he voluntarily confessed about involvement of himself along with the remaining accused/A1, A3 to A6 therein.

7. In addition to that, on 21.9.2015 the accused/A3 and A4 approached the Honourable High Court of A.P, seeking anticipatory bail and after getting anticipatory bail as per the orders of Crl.M.P.No.9180 of 2015, and after due process of completion of investigation, he found that accused No.7 who is none other than wife of accused No.1 is not at all a party in the criminal conspiracy in looting the bank and also the public money which is present in the bank and therein A1 only used her bank accounts and also her name to keep property on her name and accordingly the IO i.e., L.W.13 requested the SDPO and as already stated after receiving of the S.D.P.O proceedings Vide

No.1757/SDPO/55D/2015, Dt.10.10.2015, as all the said accused i.e.,

A1 to A6 committed irregularities being the capacity of the bank authorities and after conducting detailed departmental enquiry wherein it was it was brought to the notice of the IO, that a major punishment of dismissal of service of the bank was given to accused No.1 herein and the accused No.3 was deducted by 2 time scale of pay for a period

C.C.No.251 of 2016.28J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone of two years without cumulative effect by not adversely affecting his pension and accused No.4 was also a deducted a pay by two stages in his time scale of pay for one year without cumulative effect by not adversely affecting his pension and another accused No.5 was awarded the punishment of compulsory retirement from the services of the bank and punishment of postponement of increment for 3 years for the accused No.6 and all details were also submitted by the IO and accordingly, basing on the confessional statements and all the documents which are pertaining to the transactions 1 to 95 which are discussed in the charge sheet as in above and with all the relevant documentary evidence, the involvement of A1 to A6 has clearly been elicited and thereby are liable for the punishment as they have committed the offences as under Section 120-B, 167, 406, 409 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC according to law and accordingly charge sheet was laid by the IO. Hence, the charge.

8. After filing of the charge sheet, the case was taken on file and cognizance was taken for the offence u/secs.120-B, 167, 406, 409 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC against all the accused A1 to A6 herein.

9. On appearance of all the accused, copies of the case documents were furnished to them as contemplated u/sec 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

10. The accused A1 to A6 were examined as under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure by putting forth the charges framed against them as under Secs.409, 406, 420, 120-B and 167 r/w 34 of

IPC, subsequently, read over and explained to them in their vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.29J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

11. The prosecution has examined P.W.1 to P.W.11 and got marked Ex.R1 to R13. The evidence of remaining witnesses i.e., L.W.9 and L.W.13 was closed.

12.All the accused A1 to A6 were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, after closure of prosecution side evidence by putting forth incriminating material against them, read over and explained to them in their vernacular language for which they denied the same and reported no defence side evidence. Hence, the defence side evidence is treated as nil.

13. Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record both in oral and documentary.

14. Now the point for consideration is:-

Whether the accused/A1 to A6 hereby have committed

the offences 409, 406, 420, 120-B and 167 r/w 34 of IPC and

whether the prosecution has proved each of the ingredients

against each of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt?

15. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, let us discuss the entire evidence which has been let in by the prosecution herein and also all the evidence leaded to facts and circumstances of the case which has been brought forth during the process of trial. However, in order to prove the case of the prosecution, the core evidence and witness to the prosecution is the Chief Zonal Manager i.e, L.W.1-

S.M.M.Hussain and he was examined as P.W.1 herein wherein during his chief examination he corroborated his version with that of the report given by him and he stated that while he was working as a Chief

Manager in Andhra Bank of Kurnool Zone from July, 2013 to May, 2016 he had to generally visit every branch office in all the branches of

C.C.No.251 of 2016.30J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

Andhra Bank in Kurnool district and also Anantapur district as per his regular duty for inspection purpose. Accordingly, on 8.8.2013 he visited along with L.W.2 by name S.Sreenivasulu, who was working as the Zonal Manager and who assisted him in the present case and he along with L.W.2 inspected and found that several high value transactions in which he found some irregularities in the Sundry

Creditors, interest suspense accounts, T.D.S accounts total to a tune of amount of Rs.2,39,00,000/- (Two crores and thirty nine lakhs only) approximately which occurred under 95 transactions. Accordingly they went to their zonal office at Kallur and verified the said 95 transactions thoroughly and concluded that there are irregularities committed under those transactions and then the L.W.1 being in the capacity of the chief manager reported the same to his higher ups and also to the SHO of the Dhone town police station for taking necessary action under Ex.P.1 which is nothing but the report given by him and accordingly, the higher ups have conducted an internal inquiry and also dismissed the accused/A1 i.e., Narasimha Reddy and accused/A5 i.e., Gowtham and also suspended A3 i.e., Syam Babu and A4 i.e., Sukumaran and accordingly disciplinary proceedings were also initiated and also punishment was awarded to them. Therein, the L.W.1, who is examined as P.W.1 herein has re-iterated the transactions which are nothing but a replica of all the said 95 transactions which are stated in the charge sheet wherein some amounts were credited to the account of S.Narasimha Reddy/A1 bearing his account No.011110100096679 and accordingly, he has corroborated his version by speaking about each details of a particular transaction which occurred on various dates by A1 with the help of the remaining accused A2 to A6 who are involved in the said transaction which took place only after

C.C.No.251 of 2016.31J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone authentication of official passwords of accused A1 along with A2 to A6 wherein his account along with the account of A2, who is none other than his own brother in law was also credited and by transacting all such amounts he has withdrawn the same accordingly. The transactions deposed by P.W.1 are

1. On 26.10.2012 an amount of Rs.25,000/- was credited to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.011110100096679.

2. On 5.11.2012 an amount of Rs.23,887/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and was credited to the above account number of A1.

3. On 5.11.2012 an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605065 in favour of

Parsi Shivaiah and company, Nizamabad by A1.

4. On 5.11.2012 an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605066 in favour of

Parsi Shivaiah and company, Nizamabad by A1.

5. On 6.11.2012 by debiting Sundry creditors account, A1 taking 20 DD`s bearing numbers from 605073 to 605092, each Rs.95,000/- total Rupees 19 Lakhs in his favour payable at Kurnool.

6. On 6.11.2012, an amount of Rs.27,887/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and it was credited to the own account number of A1 i.e., 11910100006719 by A1.

7. On 19.11.2012 an amount Rs.24,887/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and was credited to the own account number of A1 i.e., 11910100006719 by A1.

8. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605129 in favour of the Andhra Bank Employees Co-operative Bank Limited, Hyderabad.

9. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605130 in favour of

A1 payable at Kurnool.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.32J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

10. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605131 in favour of

A1, which is credited to his account with HDFC Bank.

11. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605132 in favour of

A1 payable at Kurnool.

12. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605133 in favour of

A1 payable at Kurnool.

13. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605134 in favour of

A1 payable at Kurnool.

14. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.95,000/- by debiting Sundry creditors account and a DD was taken bearing no.605135 in favour of

A1 payable at Kurnool.

15. On 01.12.2012 an amount of Rupees 9 Lakhs each was drawn by debiting Sundry creditors account by way of DD`s bearing nos. from 605165 to 605168 in favour of L.N.Logistics drawn at Hyderabad for total amount of Rs.36 Lakhs.

16. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.9 Lakhs each was drawn by debiting Sundry creditors account by way of DD`s bearing nos. from 605185 to 605189 in favour of L.N.Logistics drawn at Hyderabad for total amount of Rs.45 Lakhs.

17. On 30.11.2012 an amount of Rs.46,887/- was credited to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.011110100006719 by debiting Sundry creditors account.

18. On 17.12.2012 an amount of Rs.3,99,775/- was credited to theaccountofMr.S.NarasimhaReddy(A1)bearing no.011110100006719 by debiting Sundry creditors account.

19. On 22.12.2012 an amount of Rs.39,999/- was credited to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.194810100000098 by debiting Sundry creditors account.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.33J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

20. On 26.12.2012 an amount of Rs.8 Lakhs each was drawn by debiting Sundry creditors account by way of DD`s bearing nos. from 605228 to 605229 and A1 had taken one more DD bearing No.605230 for Rs.9,00,000/- in favour of L.N.Logistics drawn at Hyderabad for total amount of Rs.25 Lakhs.

21. On 21.01.2013 an amount of Rs.7 Lakhs was drawn by debiting Sundry creditors account by way of DD bearing no. 605306 in favour of L.N.Logistics drawn at Hyderabad.

22. On 21.1.2013 Rs.1,24,775/- was credited to the account of

Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.011110100101458 by debiting

Sundry creditors account.

23. On 31.1.2013 Rs.14,237/- was credited to the account of

Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.091310012006585 by debiting

Sundry creditors account.

24. On 4.2.2013 two pay orders were taken by A1 for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.55,717.05 paisa in favour of Crop insurance 2011 out of which an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- via pay order no.672020, on 14.2.2013 was made and was credited to the a/c no. of A1 i.e.,011110100101458. The remaining amount of Rs.55,717.05/- by pay order no.672021 was credited to Intermediate GL and afterwards an amount of Rs.50,000/- was credited to a/c no.011110011036481 in favour of G.Balarami Reddy and for remaining amount of Rs.5,717.05/- issued pay order no.672140 favouring crop insurance 2011

dt:6.4.2013.

25. On 7.2.2013 an amount of Rs.99,887/- was credited to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.091310012006585 by debiting Sundry creditors account.

26. On 19.11.2012 an amount of Rs.17,388.76/- was credited to theaccountofMr.S.NarasimhaReddy(A1)bearing no.011910100006719 debiting Sundry creditors account.

27. On 13.9.2012 an amount of by debiting Sundry suspense account a pay order was taken for Rs.1,72,294.36/- bearing no.671935 favouring A1 and credited to his account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.011110100096679.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.34J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

28. On 8.9.2012 an amount of Rs.28,147/- was credited to the account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.011910100006719 debiting Sundry Suspense account.

29. On 13.9.2012 an amount of by debiting Sundry suspense account a pay order was taken for Rs.23,538/- bearing no.671927 favouring A1 and credited to his account of Mr.S.Narasimha Reddy(A1) bearing no.011110100096679.

30. On 13.9.2012 an amount of Rs.76,935.09/- was drawn by debiting Sundry suspense account by way of Pay orders bearing nos.

i.e., 671926 and from 671928 to 671934 of different amounts and on 23.10.2012 an amount of Rs.76,935.09/- was directly credited in the account of A1 bearing No.011110100096679.

31.On 6.2.2013 by debiting Sundry creditors acciount and credited to IGL account and from IGL debited to CBS Cheque proceeds and there from credited to Trade Finance Account and from there credited Rs.1,00,000/- to the account of A1 at Perusomula branch.

32. On 9.2.2013 Rs.40,583/- was debited to IRDP subsidy account and credited to A1`s account directly. Henceforth, he explained the 32 transaction which was found initially.

16. Subsequently he also corroborated his version wherein he stated that at the earlier instance they could found that there was a misappropriation total to a tune of amount of Rupees one and half crore and subsequently again on 21.10.2013 he presented another report to the SHO of Dhone by mentioning remaining 63 fraudulent transfers to a tune of Rs.86,14,162.00 Ps (Rupees eighty six lakhs fourteen thousand one hundred and sixty two only) and therefore, he corroborated his version that there was a total misappropriation of amount and looting of the bank to a tune of Rs.2,41,84,304-08 Ps (Two crores forty one thousand eighty four thousand three hundred and four and eight paisa only) by the accused/A1, who is the kingpin and also

C.C.No.251 of 2016.35J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone holding the prime role and who has committed the said act of mis appropriation and looted the bank with the assistance of A2 to A6 herein. However, he was cross examined at length by the counsel for the accused/A1 and A2 wherein during the cross examination he stated that their Andhra Bank is Nationalised in the year 1980 and admitted that he has not mentioned in his report specifically that in respect of

Sundry Creditor Accounts, T.D.S Accounts and Interest Suspense

Accounts the following misappropriation of funds had taken place.

However he stated that he furnished annexures explaining the said transactions to the investigating officer. He further admitted that the report is given to the total mis-appropriation took place to a tune of

Rs.1,53,00,000/- (One crore fifty three lakhs only) and further the witness has added making a clarification that it was the amount of misappropriation wherein he reported the matter at the first instance and subsequently he also found Rs.86,14,162.56 Ps (Eighty six lakhs fourteen thousand one hundred and sixty two and fifty six paisa only) was also misappropriated and accordingly he reported the matter to the IO. Further more he admitted that as per the first 32 transactions as mentioned by him in his report i.e., Ex.P.1, he concluded that there is only misappropriation to a tune of Rs.1,53,00,000/- (Rupees one crore fifty three lakhs only). He also admitted that as per his report in column No.15 he mentioned that Rs.45,00,000/- were misappropriated.

For which he submitted that due to clerical error it is mentioned but it is actually Rs.36,00,000/-. Further he admitted that the bank operations are generally conducted by two persons and there will be to 8-10 computer systems in the branch and they are connected to the

Manager of Andhra Bank, he also admitted that in general the manager has to verify the daily transactions on the next day and the zonal office

C.C.No.251 of 2016.36J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone and the head office will supervise the each day transaction as it was online and also admitted that each branch has to preserve all the vouchers. Further he stated that for every three months one manager or the officer of the another branch or staff of any other zonal office would come and verify the security items which are cash, gold and cheques, drafts and pay order. He denies that every month inspection was conducted by the area manager and report will be sent to zonal office. However he admitted that quarterly an annual report will be submitted to the zonal office and the head office. He also admitted that in the month of march, statutory auditors visit each branch and inspect all the branches. He denies that there is variation in his report and the charge sheet which is filed by the IO.

17. However, he admitted that there is no report given by the higher officers given by the public in respect of any mis appropriation.

He further admitted that there was no report from their institution during the year, 2008 to 2013 in the respect of misappropriation till he himself has given his report. However, he stated that as per the D.Ds are concerned if it is below Rs.1 lakh (one lakh) one officer has to attend and if it exceeds Rs.1 lakh two officers have to attend it.

Further he made a clarification to the said statements stating that if there is scarcity of officers or the staff in the bank and if any one is on the leave, in such circumstances only one person can sign even on the

D.D which is exceeding Rs.1 lakh. Further more he admitted that in the

Dhone branch of Andhra Bank, there are five officers, who are working as a staff and all are empowered to sign. In addition to that, he admitted that if the signature is not tallied the service centre would seek clarification from the issuance bank. Further he denies that it is

C.C.No.251 of 2016.37J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone mandatory to verify if the bulk D.Ds are drawn in favour of signatory authority but in order to save their zonal office and also their head office, he is deposing false. He further submitted that he cannot say unless he could see the details whether A1 has signed on them or not.

He further denies that as there is suspicion in respect of signatures on the D.Ds amounts the service centre i.e., zonal office and the head office intentionally he has not submitted the same to the investigating officer. He further denies that A1 is not concerned with respect to the

D.Ds mentioned in his report and the signatures of those D.DS are not that on the A1. He further admitted that the transactions which are mentioned in his report are not secured by physical voucher forms. He further stated that he has not collected any original forms in respect of the deposits which were made as well as the withdrawals from the

H.D.F.C Bank, Axis Bank regarding transactions conducted in between the accused/A1 and A2 herein. However, witness has made a clarification stating that, the original vouchers and all the physical vouchers will be present in the custody of the concerned branch and they would not be hand over them to them. But on the request of the department, the HDFC bank or the Axix bank will furnish the said original vouchers in respect of the transactions which were done by A1 and A2 herein. He further admitted that he has not submitted any document showing that accused/A2 is a partner of L.N Logistics. He further admitted that they do not have the account openings of L.N

Logistics and withdrawal forms of L.N Logistics from Axis Bank,

Hyderabad. Further he stated that the Axix bank is under the custody of the above said forms and they will not hand over the same to them as they did not requested the same. He further admitted that they have not submitted any original vouchers pertaining to the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.38J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone transactions in favour of L.N Logistics to a tune of Rs.1,13,00,000/- .

However, the witness adds that the accounts pertaining to the different branches as per the KYC norms must have been obtained by different branches respectively only. Further he admitted that if there is any huge money transaction in the account of the staff member there would be vigilance on such accounts by the head office and the zonal office. He further admitted that as per the transactions mentioned in

Ex.P.1 there was no such report at the head office or zonal office.

Subsequently, he was further cross examined at length wherein he admitted that no such report was given either by the head office or the zonal office regarding the said offence in the case and also admitted that in general one person from the branch will quarterly visit and they will conduct surprise verification and submit its report to the zonal office. Further more, the questions were put forth by the counsel describing about the transactions which are generally done and the mode of transactions which are done in the bank in day to day activities. However, he admitted for all of them. However, he admitted during the period of 2012 to 2013 four surprised visits might have taken place and also admitted that inspite of the such four surprised visits they have not found any such mis appropriation or irregularities. He further admitted that 30%-40% of transactions are done between 8.00 am to 10.00 am as per Ex.P.1 which are not the bank timings and also admitted that the zonal office and their head office will observe and know about the time of transactions. However, he further admitted that their zonal office or head office did not report about those transactions which were held in between 8.00 am to 10.00 am. Further he denies that the said 95 transactions which were as per his report Ex.P.1 were held in the head office and the zonal office but

C.C.No.251 of 2016.39J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone not in the Dhone branch office and only to protect their higher ups they have foisted a false case against all these accused and that they are innocent. Further he admitted that he never stated before the police or during his report how such huge amounts were credited in the

Sundry Creditors. Further he also admitted that there is no report either from the government, public or the beneficiaries either to the head office, branch office or the zonal office in respect of any such mis appropriation which had taken place in the Sundry Creditor Accounts.

He further stated that it is mandatory to mention the outstanding accounts in Sundry debtors with full details. Further more he admitted that there is no report which is given in four quarterly surprise visits and verifications done about any such misappropriation in the Sundry

Creditors and also admitted that A1 alone cannot operate the Sundry

Creditor Account. Further he stated that if any one know the pass word of two officers, the Sundry Creditor Account can be operated from anywhere through online. He further stated that as at the time of the incident in the case there was no system of alerts and accordingly they will not come to know that who has operated the same. He further admitted that if any one operates with wrong password the system will automatically locks by itself and also admitted that if the employee forgets its password in the system and to make the system unlock one has to request the zonal office to get a new password. However he denies that if any person having the knowledge of the soft ware can easily grasp the password of staff. He further admitted that the departmental information technical officers can login any branch systems and do repair if the problem is there and stated that he do not know whether there is any such password crackers soft ware in the system. However general suggestions were put forth about the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.40J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone transaction and also about the soft ware working and the style of the working wherein the chief manager being in the capacity has answered for the same but nothing much could be elicited in order to contradict the version of the chief manager denying the involvement of the said accused/A1 in conducting misappropriation in the bank. Further he has made a clarification stating that the transactions are done by A1 and he has transferred the amounts to the third party accounts and they have been done by taking drafts and by withdrawing the amounts through ATMs. Further more he stated that no vouchers were prepared for all such transactions. Further he stated that if any such mis appropriation in any account had been found out either up to 3 to 6 months approximately it will come out. Further he admitted that he had not examined the account holders to whom the accounts were sent as per the transactions i.e., mentioned under 52 to 95 in the

additional report given by him to the Inspector of Police i.e., L.W.13.

However, on a whole he denies that one can generate the transactions with the same I.P number of the system from any branch and accordingly, A1 and A2 are no way connected and they are innocent for the cross examination alone by the learned counsel for the accused A1 and A2.

Further more he was cross examined at length by the learned counsel for the accused A3 to A6 wherein the same set of questions were put forth by the counsel to the Chief Manager/P.W.1 for which he reported about the modus operandi of how the bank works and also how each of the branch managers and the remaining branch managers who are working in the capacity under various heads i.e., A3 to A6 can have access to the system and further he stated that do not know

C.C.No.251 of 2016.41J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone whether the accused A3 was on leave on dates which are 26.10.2012, 5.11.2012, 6.11.20212, 9.11.2012 and 4.2.2013 and also that he also do not remember whether A4 was on leave 21.1.2013 to 30.1.2013.

18. On a whole, after going through the cross examination done by the counsel for the accused-A3 to A6 as it is already discussed above the said the same set of questions were put forth and he has given answers to the same. Further he denies that the accused/A3 to

A6 are no way connected for the suggestion that they were not involved in any such kind of criminal conspiracy with that of A1 and no such mis-appropriation had been taken place by A3 to A6 herein in consonance with that of A1. However, he admitted that in his report he has not mentioned the involvement of accused/A3 to A6 for which

P.W.1 stated that he had not mentioned any persons name except the facts. He further stated that he do not know whether there are any such allegations against A3 to A6 either before the report or subsequently. Further he denies that the zonal office and the head office can have access to the Sundry Creditors Accounts of any banch and they can operate any branch by virtue of IP number and denies that only to cover their discrepancies they have foisted this false case against A1 and also falsely implicated the remaining accused A3 to A6 herein.

19. Now coming to the evidence of P.W.2, wherein the P.W.2 was working in the capacity of the Senior Manager at the time of conducting inspection and inspected along with P.W.1 was examined as

P.W.2 wherein he stated that he know P.W.1 and also all the accused/A1 to A6 except A2 by name Sravankumar Reddy. He further submitted during his chief examination that the Divisional General Manager, who

C.C.No.251 of 2016.42J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone was working in zonal head on suspicion deputed P.W.1 working in the capacity of Chief Manager of Andhra Bank of Zonal Office so as to inspect and conduct inquiry at Andhra Bank located at Dhone branch and accordingly on his instructions he being the senior manager of credit also accompanied P.W.1 in the month of August, 2013 and went to the Dhone branch and noticed that some amounts which are deposited in the Sundry Creditor accounts were transferred to four

Savings Bank accounts and also crop insurance accounts and it was reported to the head of the zonal office and then such amounts were deposited in the Sundry Creditor accounts which ought to have been deposited in the individual farmers account. Later they came to know through P.W.1 that the accused No.1 have misappropriated an amount to a tune of rupees two and half crores (Rs 2 ½ Crores) through various transactions. He further stated that he is not aware of any other facts of the case and further reported that police had not examined him. As he did not support the case of the prosecution and he had turned hostile and was cross examined by the learned A.P.P and even during the cross examination done by the learned A.P.P nothing could be elicited against the accused A1 to A6 herein and he failed to corroborate his version as per the prosecution case and stated that the police had never examined him and also stated that he never stated as per Ex.P.2 i.e., 161 Cr.P.C statement recorded by the police.

20. However, he was cross examined by the counsel for the accused A1 and A2 wherein he admitted that as per his knowledge the amount was not transferred in the Personal Savings Bank Account from the Sundry Creditor Accounts. He also admitted that he has not examined any such individual account and he came to know that the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.43J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone accused/A1 has misappropriated the amounts but he has not conducted any such personal inspection to that extent. He further stated that he do not know whether any complaints were preferred from any public or any authority about the misappropriation of funds at

Andhra Bank, Dhone at their zonal office and he further stated that he do not know whether the amounts transferred in the crop insurance was distributed to the farmers or not. He further denies that only to please his higher ups he is deposing false and no such irregularities and misappropriation of funds took place in the bank and he is deposing false at the instance of P.W.1. However he was also cross examined by the counsel for the remaining accused A3 to A6 herein wherein he denies that the amounts were never transferred from

Sundry Creditors accounts to the Saving Banks accounts but stated that he cannot say whether any such quarterly and annual inspections conducted in the said bank is found correct. He further denies for the suggestion that he never visited Dhone along with P.W.1 and never assisted him and that he is deposing false at the instance of his higher authorities. He further denies that there are no such irregularities and misappropriation of funds found in the bank and that he is deposing false only at the instance of P.W.1 therein.

21. Subsequently, the prosecution has examined one of the mediator, who said to have been present during the confession panchanama dated 3.8.2015 by name Yerukalaiah and got examined as P.W.3 wherein he stated that he do not know the accused A1 in this case and he stated that he is not aware of any facts and circumstances of the present case on hand and further submitted that the SI of Police of Sanjamala P.S called him to the police station and obtained his

C.C.No.251 of 2016.44J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone signature on the written document and he do not know the contents of the said panchanama. Except identifying his signature on the certified copy of the panchanama dt.3.8.2015 nothing could be elicited in his evidence in support of the prosecution case. Even during the cross examination done by the learned A.P.P no incriminating material could be elicited in the evidence of P.W.3.

22. Subsequently, the prosecution had also examined another panch witness and he got examined as P.W.4 and mediator to that of the confession panchanama of the accused No.1 herein which was done by the SI of Police of Sanjamala P.S wherein he also corroborated his version as that of P.W.3 and did not corroborate with that of the version of the prosecution case and stated that he do not know the accused/A1 in this case and he is not aware of any facts and circumstances of the case and also stated that the SI of Police of

Sanjamala PS called him to the police station and obtained his signature on the written document and except getting his signature marked as Ex.P.4 on the certified copy of the panchanama dt.3.8.2015 nothing could be elicited in consonance and in corroboration with that of the prosecution case and even during the cross examination done by

A.P.P. nothing is elicited against the accused A1 herein.

23. Further more the prosecution had also examined another mediator as P.W.5 who was present at the time of the confession panchanama recorded by the CI of Polie i.e., L.W.13 during the police custody of the accused No.1 and also the accused A2 wherein he stated that he do not know the accused A1 and A2 herein and further stated that the police i.e., L.W.13 has called him to the police station and he obtained his signature on the panchanama dated 18.5.2015

C.C.No.251 of 2016.45J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone and he is not aware of the contents of the panchanama. Except identifying his signature which got marked as Ex.P.5 on the confession panchanama of A1 dt.18.5.2015 nothing could be elicited by the prosecution in his evidence. He further stated that on 15.9.2015, the

CI of Police i.e, L.W.13 also called him to the police station and obtained his signature on the panchanama dt.15.9.2015 but he do not know the contents of the said confession pancahnama and except his signature being identified as Ex.P.6 nothing could be elicited in his evidence.

Furthermore, even during the cross examination done by the learned A.P.P nothing could be elicited in corroboration with that of the case of the prosecution and he denies for the suggestion that he was present during the confession panchanama of the accused/A1 and A2 which was drafted on 18.5.2015 as well as 15.9.2015 respectively and they confessed about their involvement in the crime and that now he is deposing false to help them.

24. Accordingly, the prosecution has also examined another

V.R.O as P.W.6 who was present along with P.W.5 and before whom the confession of accused/A1 during police custody done by L.W.13 wherein A1 confessed about his involvement accordingly the panchanama dt.18.5.2015 was drafted but the said witness P.W.6 who acted as independent mediator along with P.W.5 did not corroborate his version and stated that the police called him to the police station and obtained his signature on the said pancahnama and his signature being identified as Ex.P.7 on the confession panchanama dt.18.5.2015, nothing could be elicited in his evidence. He further stated that on 10.09.2015 also the CI of Police of Dhone town i.e., L.W.13 obtained his

C.C.No.251 of 2016.46J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone signature on the panchanma dt.10.09.2015 and he do not know the contents of the said panchanama and except his signature being marked as Ex.P.8 dt.10.09.2015 and also his another signature on 12.9.2015 during the arrest of the remaining accused and his signature being marked as Ex.P.9, he could not corroborate the version of the prosecution and stated that he do not know the accused/A1, A5 and A6 and he has endorsed his signatures which got marked as Ex.P.7 to

Ex.P.9 was done without knowing the contents of it and only on the request of the police. Therefore, even in his evidence, who acted as a independent mediator for the confession panchanama of A1 and arrest panchanama of A5 and A6 nothing could be elicited against the accused accordingly and no incriminating material against the accused was elicited in his evidence.

25. However, the prosecution has examined the then SI of Police who was working at Sanjamala P.S wherein he was examined as P.W.7 and he stated that on 3.8.2015 basing on credible information about the accused in Cr.No.18 of 2014 of Sanjamala P.S who is none other than A1 herein in the present case wherein P.W.7 along with his staff left the police station and they found the accused who was in the said crime of Sanjamala P.S and he is none other than the accused A1 in the present crime on hand and a confession statement was recorded dt.3.8.2015 wherein he had confessed about the commission of misappropriation of public money in the bank while he was working in the Andhra Bank at Dhone branch of Dhone town. Therefore, the confession panchanma drafted by the SI of Police and the certified copy of the same got marked as Ex.P.10. However, during the cross examination done by A1 counsel he admitted that he had not tried to

C.C.No.251 of 2016.47J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone secure any independent witnesses, who does not have interest as independent witnesses during the said confession panchanama.

Further he admitted that he has not mentioned the geographical location while drafting the said panchanma. However, he denies that the signatures of P.W.3 and P.W.4 who are none but the stock witnesses to their police station and at his request they have signed on it. He further denies that the accused A1 herein in the present crime on hand i.e., Cr.No.94 of 2013 of Dhone Town P.S is no way connected and he was never arrested and he never confessed about his involvement in the present crime pertaining to Sanjamala police station. However with respect to the cross examination done by the learned counsel for the accused A3 to A6 he admitted that the accused has not confessed that about the involvement of the remaining accused A3 to A6 as in

Cr.No.94 of 2013 as per his confession panchanma dt.3.8.2013.

26. Subsequently, the prosecution has examined P.W.8 one more mediator who was working in the capacity of the V.R.O and acted as a panch witness for the confession panchanama dated 10.9.2015 wherein he stated that he do not know the accused No.6 herein and except identifying his signature which got marked as Ex.P.11 dt.10.09.2015 nothing could be elicited by the prosecution even in his evidence.

27. In the same manner, even another mediator was examined as P.W.9 who acted as panch witness to the confession panchanama dt.15.9.2015 though he stated that though he identified his signature which got marked as Ex.P.12 on the confession panchanama but except identifying his signature he did not corroborate the version of the prosecution and stated that he do not know the accused/A2 herein and

C.C.No.251 of 2016.48J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone no confession and arrest was made before him.

28. However, the SI of Police, who received the report from P.W.1 i.e., the Chief Manager of Andhra Bank and registered the crime got examined as P.W.10 and the said SI of Police reported that on 15.8.2013 while he was present at the police station the Chief Manager of the Andhra Bank i.e., P.W.1 came to the police station and he gave a typed report which is already marked as Ex.P.1 and accordingly he registered a case as in Cr.No.94 of 2013 for the offences punishable as under sections 406, 409 and 420 of IPC and issued FIR and in the said

FIR got marked as Ex.P.13. As the offence was grave in nature, he handed over the CD file to the CI of Police-L.W.12 for further investigation. During the cross examination done by the counsel for the accused A1 and A2 as well as A3 to A6 he admitted that in column

No.3 of the said FIR, the offence occurred prior to 9.2.2013 and the reasons for the delay is not mentioned in column No.9 of the said FIR.

Further he admitted that neither any bank official has given report on 9.2.2013 as well as none from the public has preferred any report with respect to the present offence on hand. He also admitted that only the name of accused/A1 is mentioned in Ex.P.13 the quantum the alleged misappropriation of amount is mentioned as rupees one crore and fifty eight lakhs (Rs.1,58,00,000/-). He also admitted that Ex.P.1 i.e., the report does not disclose the names of remaining accused therein.

29. Further the CI of Police, i.e., L.W.12 who initially took up the investigation in the capacity of the Inspector of Police of Dhone circle was examined as P.W.11 and he stated that as per the instructions of the SDPO, Dhone he took up the investigation in the present crime and found that the accused/A1 i.e., Narasimha Reddy with the help of his

C.C.No.251 of 2016.49J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone brother in law A2 has misappropriated an amount of Rs.1,58,00,000/- (Rupees one crore and fifty eight lakhs only) under 32 various transactions and on the same day he secured the presence of the chief manager of Andhra Bank i.e., P.W.1, examined him and recorded his statement. Subsequently, on 22.8.2013 he secured the presence of

P.W.1 and P.W.2 and also examined P.W.2 and recorded his statement and he stated that P.W.2 stated before him as per Ex.P.2. Later he handed over the CD file to his successor i.e., L.W.13, CI of Police for further investigation. However, he was cross examined at length by the counsel for the accused A1 and A2 as well as for the remaining accused A3 and A4 wherein he admitted that as per the FIR, the offence took place prior to 9.2.2013 and it was reported in the police station on 15.8.2013 and he stated that the reasons for the delay is not mentioned in the said FIR for which he stated that there are no reasons for the delay as the bank authorities had acquired knowledge with respect to the offence and they verified the transactions and approached the police station on 15.8.2013 for taking legal action.

However, he admitted that the same is not mentioned in column No.8 of the FIR. He admitted that as the bank being a nationalized bank, all the said persons are considered to be the public servants. Further more, he denies that before prosecuting, the CI ought to have taken permission as under section 195 of Cr.P.C, for which he stated that there is no such necessity to obtain prior sanction in the present case on hand as it is nothing but misappropriation of amounts. Further he admitted that as per Ex.P.1 the government has deposited the crop insurance amounts in the sundry creditors accounts and he admitted for the same, for which he stated that it is not only the crop insurance amount but also the various other amounts which were deposited in

C.C.No.251 of 2016.50J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone the sundry creditors amount and the same was misappropriated.

Further he stated that the role of the farmer as well as the government employee do not come at this stretch as the Sundry Creditor Account consists of various accounts and only the bank authorities have the knowledge of it. Further he denies that he did not try to examine other bank employees of Andhra Bank, Dhone Branch as he stated he was on transfer and thereby he handed over the CD file to his successor i.e.,

L.W.13.

30. In addition to that, he have not step ahead to know the names of the public who have suffered due to the said alleged mis appropriation and his investigation is silent about it. He further admitted that he has not received any transaction copy about 32 transactions mentioned in Ex.P.1. He has also not asked P.W.1 to give any such transaction copy about the said 32 transactions.

Subsequently he was further cross examined wherein he admitted that he has not seized any case property to the present case on hand and he stated that only he made a requisition to the bank authorities for providing the case property and relevant document but on account of his transfer he was not able to receive the same and he also admitted that the said requisition letter is not filed before the court. He further admitted that he has not further conducted any investigation and further stated that the case was transferred to CCS. He denies for the suggestion that A1 and A2 are innocent and P.W.2 never stated before him as per Ex.P.2 and further he also denies for the suggestion that prior sanction is required in prosecuting the public servants in the present case on hand and however he admitted that neither any customer nor any farmer has given report as they were the victims in

C.C.No.251 of 2016.51J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone the present case on hand. However, he denies that A1 to A6 are not interested and they have not committed any misappropriation of amounts in bank. But he admitted that no case property and any relevant documents are seized during his tenure of investigation and denies that A1 to A6 are innocent and they have not committed any offence and only as per the instruction of the higher ups in order to fill up their lacaunas, a false case has been foisted against the accused.

31. However, the said investigating officer was examined as

P.W.11 and there was onus on the case of the prosecution on behalf of the state in order to bring the IO, who conducted and took up all the further investigation in the present case on hand i.e., L.W.13 who was the then Circle Inspector of Police and on account of transfer of P.W.11, who had taken up the charge therein, and L.W.13 came onto record and he has took up all the further transactions and further investigation and also received the entire case record and also all the relevant case documents in the present case on hand and laid the charge sheet. But, the irony in the present case on hand is that inspite of giving repeated opportunities and also sufficient time to the prosecution, neither the prosecution on behalf of the state was able to bring the said person and serve summons to the said IO i.e., L.W.13 and was able to bring L.W.13 on record to corroborate the version of the prosecution and also to get all the said documents marked which are found on record which remained unmarked at this stage of the trial process and even inspite of issuance of letter to the Superintendent of

Police, Kurnool as per the orders of this Honourable Court dt.17.2.2020 and giving more than sufficient time to bring the evidence of L.W.13 so as to get him on record and get the material documents marked in

C.C.No.251 of 2016.52J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone order to corroborate the case of the prosecution who was the then investigation officer who collected the bundle of documents in the present case on hand which are found on record was not able to produce by prosecution inspite of addressing a letter to SP, Kurnool but the same remained un-marked in the present case on hand.

Accordingly, as per the memo filed by the prosecution and the state the un-served copies of summons to L.W.13 are submitted along with the report of the V.R.O wherein the state failed to secure the presence of L.W.13 inspite of issuance of notice to the Superintendent of Police,

Kurnool and the state has utterly failed to serve the copies of summons to L.W.13 who was the Circle Inspector of Police, Dhone circle and who has took up all the major portion of investigation as well as collected all the documents found on record describing each fraudulent transaction which stands in corroboration to the case of the prosecution and failed to get them marked after giving due opportunity to the accused for cross examination therein.

32. Henceforth, as per the evidence which has been let in by the prosecution the entire case of the prosecution is based on the report given by the Chief Manager i.e., P.W.1 herein and who has given his report as under Ex.P.1 and accordingly there was a total tune of mis appropriation of funds committed to an amount of Rs.2,41,84,304.08

Ps (rupees two crores fourty one lakhs eighty four thousands three hundred and four and eight paisa) and after the complete process of trial as well as the evidence which has been let in by the prosecution and inspite of giving reminder letters to the state for service of summons wherein they have failed to serve the summons to L.W.13 and bring him on record, the prosecution was not able to corroborate

C.C.No.251 of 2016.53J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone their version by bringing the IO on record which is nothing but major flaw and same is fatal to the case of the prosecution.

33. However, the learned counsel for the accused A1 to A6 has submitted bunch of documents and also has referred to bunch of judgments as below which are delivered by (1) Honourable Patna High Court in Cr.A.No.592 of 2005 in

Parshu Ram Dhandhi Vs State of Bihar, dt.21.10.2011.

(2) Honourable Patna High Court in Deo Nandan Yadav and others Vs the State of Bihar, dt.22.6.2018.

(3)HonourableSupremeCourtofIndiain

Prof.R.K.Vijayasarathy and another Vs Sudha Seetharam and

another in Cr.A.No.238 of 2019.

(4) Honourable High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the

State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh reported in 2019 (3) ALT (Crl) 105 (TS and AP) in Kacharangarala Venkateswarlu @ Venkatesh Naidu and others Vs State of AP.

(5) Honourable High Court of Rajasthan-Jodhpur in Kailash Vs

State of Rajasthan, dt.24.10.2018.

(6) Honourable Supreme Court of India in Crl.A.Nos.478-479 of 2017 in Vinubhai Haribhal Malaviya and others Vs The State of

Gujarat and another.

(7) Honourable Supreme Court of India in Crl.A.No.478-479 of 2017 in Vinubhai Haribhal Malaviya and others Vs The State of

Gujarat and another.

(8) Honourable Supreme Court of India LAWS (SC) 1996 page 1274 in Randhir Singh Rana Vs State of Delhi.

(9) Supreme Court of India LAWS (SC) 1998 page 1033 in Raj

Deo Sharma Vs State of Bihar.

(10) Himachal Pradesh High Court in Raju Rawat Alias Mathan

Vs State of Himachal Pradesh

C.C.No.251 of 2016.54J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

34. Further the learned counsel for the accused/A1 to A6 has also filed a written arguments and they have vehemently submitted their arguments to a larger extent stating that all the witnesses turned hostile in the present case on hand and it is only the evidence of P.W.1 who is retired Chief Manager, who corroborated his version as per his report and even during his cross examination he was not able to corroborate about the presence of the remaining accused A3 to A6 herein and reported that P.W.1 admitted that as no documents were given by him and the prosecution has utterly failed so as to connect the link pertaining to the transactions as mentioned in the charge sheet and the reports to be filed by the IO therein. Further he has also relied on the ratio laid in the above mentioned judgments stating that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of all the accused therein and none of the witnesses, who are the independent mediators in the present case on hand has supported the case of the prosecution and accordingly basing on the confession statements which could not be marked by the prosecution, the prosecution has utterly failed so as to bring home guilt of each of the accused for all the said offences and accordingly utterly failed to prove the ingredients of each of the said offences against the accused A1 to A6 and submits that they are entitled for benefit of doubt and they may be acquitted.

35. However, considering the evidence which has been let in by the prosecution and also going through the judgments submitted by the learned counsel for the accused herein and also the evidence which has been let on record, the point that has to be taken into consideration is that this is a case of the prosecution wherein the IO

L.W.13 whose evidence could not be brought by the prosecution in this

C.C.No.251 of 2016.55J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone case before the court remained uncorroborated with that of the evidence of P.W.1. Though there are bunch of documents containing original D.Ds and also other original transactions describing the various modes of transactions as mentioned under I to XCV mentioned in the charge sheet. The non examination of L.W.13 and non corroboration of the confessional statements either by any of the independent mediators who got examined as P.W.3 to P.W.9 herein except the IO i.e.,

P.W.7 makes the confessional statements as well as the panchanamas which are drafted basing on the confession of A1, A2 and A3, A6 herein stands un-corroborated as in view of section 25 to 27 of Indian

Evidence Act as even the IO who drafted those confession statements could not be brought on record and even the independent mediators, who said to have been present during the said confession statements could not corroborate the same. Further the only confession statement which could be marked is nothing but the confession statement of A1 in another crime of Sanjamala P.S wherein he was A1 which got marked by P.W.7 by the IO of Sanjamala Police Station but there is an admission made by the said IO with respect to non involvement of the remaining accused/A3 to A6 herein. Therefore, as per the evidence which has been let in, it is only the evidence of P.W.1 and which stands un- corroborated to the case of the prosecution and there is no supporting evidence on record or no other documentary evidence which could be marked on behalf of the prosecution in support of the evidence of P.W.1 as well as the evidence of the IO which is let in on record i.e., P.W.10 and P.W.11 and could not corroborate any incriminating material except the recording the 161 Cr.P.C statements of the P.W.1 and P.W.2. Even the Assistant General Manager, who was in the official capacity and got examined as P.W.2 and who assisted P.W.1 also did not support the

C.C.No.251 of 2016.56J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone version of the prosecution and he simply stated that he is not aware of any facts and circumstances of the case and he do not know any other facts and he came to know from the P.W.1 that A1 has misappropriated huge amount to a tune of Rs.two and half crores and this also throws out the testimony of P.W.2 therein. Therefore, putting in a nutshell the evidence on record except the evidence of P.W.1, there is no other stronger strengthening corroborative evidence on record to support the case of the prosecution. The evidence of independent mediators to confessional and seizure panchanamas who are examined as P.W.3 to

P.W.6 and P.W.8 had turned hostile. The evidence of P.W.1 who is IO stands un-corroborated by an independent mediator. The evidence of

P.W.10 i.e., IO is only to extent of registration of FIR and the IO who took up investigation initially P.W.11 reported during his examination that his successor i.e., L.W.13 had collected documents thought it is reported in charge sheet in para of page that L.W.12,. who is examined as P.W.1 had collected relevant documentary records. However, the IO i.e., L.W.13 who said to have collected the bunch of documents could not be produced before court and therefore, the prosecution miserably failed to bring independent, corroborative incriminating evidence for all said offences against each of the accused A1 to A6.

36. However as per the judgments which are referred above as the present case of the prosecution is that being the official capacity they were entrusted with the bank amounts they have committed the offence which is not an act under discharging of official duty, there is no necessity of any prior sanction for prosecuting the said accused.

Accordingly, the prosecution has utterly failed so as to bring home guilt of each of the accused/A1 to A6 and also their involvement in each of

C.C.No.251 of 2016.57J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone committing the crime as under sections 406, 409, 420, 120-B and 167 of IPC and thereby the accused/A1 to A6 are entitled for benefit of doubt and thereby they are acquitted.

37. In the result, the accused No.1 to No.6 are found not guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 406, 420, 120-B and 167 of IPC and thereby they are acquitted u/s 248 (1) of Cr.P.C.

The bail bonds of all the accused shall be treated as bail bonds as under section 437 (A) of Cr.P.C to appear before the higher court as and when such Court requires in respect of any appeal or petition against the judgment of this Court and the same shall be in force for a period of six months from to day.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court this the 15th day of April, 2020.

Judl.Magistrate of Ist Class, Dhone

Appendix of Evidence.

Witnesses Examined.

For Prosecution For Defence.

P.W.1. S.M.M.Hussain. None. P.W.2. S.Srinivasulu. P.W.3. Yerukalaiah. P.W.4. M.Venkata Bala Tulaseerwar Reddy. P.W.5. Ranga Swamy. P.W.6. G.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy. P.W.7. O.vijaya Bhaskar. P.W.8. B.Krishna Murthy. P.W.9. K.Prahallada. P.W.10. K.Mohan Reddy. P.W.11. D.Prabhakar.

Exhibits marked for the Prosecution.

Ex.P.1. Report given to police by P.W.1 Ex.P.2. 161 (2) Cr.P.C statement of P.W.2.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.58J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

Ex.P.3. Signature of P.W.3 on the panchanama. Ex.P.4. Signature of P.W.4 on the panchanama. Ex.P.5. Signature of P.W.5 on the panchanama. Ex.P.6. Signature of P.W.5 on the panchanama. Ex.P.7. Signature of P.W.6 on the panchanama. Ex.P.8. Signature of P.W.6 on the panchanama. Ex.P.9. Signature of P.W.6 on the panchanama. Ex.P.10. CC of panchanama for arrest of A1 in Cr.NO.18 of 2014 Of Sanjamala P.S. Ex.P.11. Signature of P.W.8 on the panchanama. Ex.P.12. Signature of P.W.9 on the panchanama dt.15.9.2015. (Arrest of A2). Ex.P.13. FIR in Cr.No.94 of 2013.

Exhibits marked for the Defence.

Nil.

J.M.F.C., Dhone.

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

In the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

C.C.No.251 of 2016

Date of Prior to 28.8.2012 and 9.12.2013. offence

Date of 15.8.2013. Complaint

Date of 17.1.2017. apprehension

Date of release

Date of comm 21.1.2017. of trial

Date of close 23.3.2020. of trial

Date of 15.4.2020. Judgment

ComplainantC.I of Police, Dhone Circle.

Name of the 1. Sadive Narasimha Reddy, aged about 37 years, S/o AccusedNarasa Reddy, the then Rural Development Officer, Andhra Bank, Dhone Town, R/o H.No.20-814-D, Co- operative Colony, Kadapa Town, A.P (A1).

C.C.No.251 of 2016.59J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

3. Dorapalle Syam Babu, aged about 59 years, S/o Zakaraiah, the then Branch Manager, Andhra Bank, Dhone Town, R/o Ramappa Palem, Itikampadu (Post) Via Machavaram, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District (A3).

7. Parlapallishailaja Reddy, aged 32 years, W/o Narasimha Reddy, R/o H.No.20-814-D, Co-operative Colony, Kadapa Town (A7) Not charged. … Accused No.1 to No.6 respectively.

Note:- The accused No.7 remained not charged as per the proceedings issued by the S.D.P.O.1757/SDPO-D/2015, dated 10.10.2015.

Offence409, 406, 420 and 120B and 167 of IPC

FindingsFound not guilty.

Sentence In the result, the accused No.1 to No.6 are found not guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 406, 420, 120-B and 167 of IPC and thereby they are acquitted u/s 248 (1) of Cr.P.C.

C.C.No.251 of 2016.60J.M.F.C. Court, Dhone

Judl.Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

Copy to Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Prl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Kurnool.

CC/146/2012 Convicted

GOLLA RAJU vs GOLLA NAGA RAJU

31 Aug 2017

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

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

Present: Smt.Asifa Sulthana,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Thursday, the 31st day of August, 2017.

Calendar Case No.146/2012

State: Represented by Inspector of Police, Bethamcherla P.S. … Complainant.

Versus

Golla Naga Raju, S/o Golla Sunkanna, Age 32 years, of Hussainapuram Village, Bethamcherla Mandal.… Accused.

This case came on 28-8-2017 before me for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant/State and of Sri M.Nagabhushana Reddy and Sri A.Sreedhar, Advocates for accused, and having perused the material available on the record, on hearing 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 Inspector of Police, Bethamcherla Police Station has filed a charge sheet in Cr.No.39/2012 for the offence punishable under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code against the accused.

2.As per the brief averments of the prosecution case:-

The defacto complainant/LW.1-Golla Raju is resident of

Hussainapuram Village of Bethamcherla Mandal and the injured LW.6-Golla

Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju is brother of the complainant. The injured

LW.6-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju has been residing at Hyderabad for the last 9 years and earning his livelihood by running a Tea Stall at

Hyderabad. Subsequently, about 3 years back the said injured LW.6-Golla

Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju came to Hussainapuram Village and started 2

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

staying in the said village and constructed a new house in his village. On dt.10-3-2012 in the morning at about 7.00 a.m., the injured LW.6-Golla

Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju along with LW.1-Golla Raju and LW.2-Golla

Gounda Ramesh came to the construction work of his house wherein the

LW.3-Golla Venkatesh, LW.4-Golla Sanjamma and LW.5-Golla Krishnamma who are staying near the house of the injured were also present.

Meanwhile, the accused who is the neighbour of the injured LW.6-Golla

Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju came there by saying “EMIRA SANKARANNA

NEEVU ME ILLU CATTUKOVADANIKI ISUKA, RAYI BICHULU MAA

INTIPRAKKANE VESINAVU, ENNI SARLU CHEPPINA TEESIVEYAVA” and when the said injured LW.6-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju replied the accused that, due some work which was pending he was unable to throw away the wastage and he started taking away the wastage with the help of spade (Chalika Paara). Meanwhile, the accused said to the injured LW.6-

Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju “INNI ROJULU TEESIVEYAMANTE TEESI

VEYAKUNDA EROJU TEESIVESTANU ANI ANTAVA” and went in to his house and came back with a iron rod and beat the said injured with the help of the said iron rod and caused bleeding injury on his head and a fracture injury over the left hand under the elbow of injured LW.6-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju. He was rescued by LW.1 to LW.5 who were present there and subsequently the accused left the scene of offence.

Immediately, the LW.1 came along with LW.6 to the Bethamcherla Police

Station and the LW.1 who is the brother of the injured gave a complaint, basing on which the Inspector of Police (LW.10) of Bethamcherla Police

Station has registered a case as in Cr.No.39/2012 for the offence under

Sec.324 of IPC and investigated into the said case. During the course of investigation, the LW.10 who is the investigating officer arrested the accused on 16-3-2012 in the presence of panchayathdars LW.7 and LW.8 3

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

and also seized the iron rod and sent the accused for remand.

Subsequently, the doctor who examined the injured LW.6-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju has issued wound certificate with an opinion that the injuries sustained by LW.6 are grievous in nature and thereby the investigating officer has filed the present charge sheet for the offence under Sec.326 of IPC. Hence, the charge sheet.

3. After filing of the charge sheet, the case was taken on file and cognizance was taken for the offence u/sec.326 of Indian Penal Code against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, copies of this case were furnished to him as contemplated under Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure.

5. The accused was examined u/sec 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure by putting forth the charge framed against him, read over and explained to him in vernacular language for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.To prove its case, the prosecution has examined all witnesses as

PW.1 to PW.10 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P10 and M.O.1 is marked.

7. The accused was examined U/s 313 of Cr.P.C., after closure of prosecution side evidence by putting forth incriminating material against the accused, read over and explained to him in Vernacular language for which he denied for the same and reported no defence side evidence.

Hence, defence side evidence is treated as NIL.

8.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record both in oral and documentary.

9. The point for determination is:

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused that

he has voluntarily caused grievous hurt by using dangerous

weapon against the injured LW.6-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga

Raju beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

10. In order to prove the case of prosecution, the prosecution has examined all the witnesses who are listed in the said memo of evidence.

The complainant and the brother of the injured who came to the police station and preferred a report is one Golla Raju who is none other than

LW.1 and he got examined as PW.1 and he reported that on dt.10-3-2012 at about 7.00 a.m., while he was present at his house along with his brother LW.6-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju and also the remaining witnesses, the accused came to the house of his brother and asked him to remove the stone chips for which his brother replied that he would remove the same and subsequently started to remove the stone chips with the help of the spade (Chalika Paara). Then, the accused came with an iron rod and beat his brother with the said iron rod due to which he fell down and sustained bleeding injury on his head. The accused also beat his brother below left elbow due to which his left hand got fractured. Subsequently, he was rescued by the others and as his brother was not in conscious stage, the complainant/PW.1 preferred a report under Ex.P1. However, during the course of cross examination, he stated that the houses of LW.3 to LW.5 are not situated near the house of LW.6 who is the injured. He also admitted that his brother has constructed a house and he has arranged a pipe in order to flow of rain water which comes infront of the house door of the accused. He further admitted that whenever there is a heavy rain there is every chance for the flow of the rain water into the house of the accused due to the said pipe. However, he denies that his brother LW.6 has restrained the flow of drainage water which comes from the house of 5

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

accused by putting the stone. In addition to that, the PW.1 denies of all the suggestions put forth by the learned counsel for the defence that the panchayaths were held between the injured LW.6 and the accused with respect to various issues at the time of construction of the house of LW.6.

However, he further stated that his brother LW.6 left the Hussainapuram

Village due to the quarrels with some of the villagers and thereby he adds that he had left the said village due to the quarrel of accused only. In addition to that it is elicited that the injured LW.6 has suffered bleeding injuries and he was not in conscious stage after the accused beat him. It is also elicited that he was took to RMP Doctor at R.S.Rangapuram and subsequently he was shifted to the Government General Hospital, Kurnool for treatment. In addition to that, it is elicited that there are no disputes with the neighbours of LW.1 as well as LW.6 and the neighbours were also present at the scene of offence. Furthermore, the learned defence counsel relies on the statement made by PW.1 that “There were neighbours at the time of sustaining injuries by LW.6 by falling down at 7.00 a.m.,” and submits his arguments that the LW.6 injured sustained injuries by falling down but not due to the beating of the accused. However, the PW.1 stated in his cross examination that he did not know the contents of his report which got marked as Ex.P1.

11.In addition to that, the prosecution has also examined one person by name Ramesh who was the eye witness as per the case of prosecution and during his examination he stated that about 2 ½ years back at about 7.00 a.m., while he was doing plastering work in the house of LW.6 who is the injured , the said injured LW.6 was removing the stone chips at the demand of the accused and thereby he came to know that the accused beat the LW.6 with the iron rod on his head and also on his left hand.

Though, he was cross examined by the learned APP except to the marking 6

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

of Ex.P2 nothing more could be elicited in his cross examination. However, during the cross examination done by the learned counsel for the defence he stated that he did not know how LW.6 sustained injuries, but however he denied for the suggestions that the PW.1 has kept his money with him and threatened him to give his evidence in his favour and therefore he is deposing false. The prosecution has also examined the another eye witness as PW.3 but he did not support the version of prosecution and no incriminating material was elicited by the prosecution in his evidence, except to the marking of Ex.P3.

12.However, the injured LW.6 was examined as PW.4 by the prosecution and he admitted the relationship of PW.1 who is his younger brother and

LW.5-Golla Krishnamma who is his brother’s wife. Furthermore, he corroborated the version of the prosecution in all the aspects during his chief examination and stated before the Court that while he was rennovating his old house, the accused came to him and asked him to remove the wastage material for which the PW.4 started to remove the wastage material by bending himself with the help of spade and the accused went inside of his house and brought one iron rod and thereby beat him on his left side of the head causing bleeding injuries. Due to which he fell down unconscious. He also reported that the accused also beat him with the same iron rod on his left hand and as a result he sustained fracture injury on his left hand. Further, he stated that he was shifted to hospital and also taken to the police station by his brother PW.1 and therefore the PW.1 preferred a report against the accused to the police and stated that he do not know what was reported in the said report.

13.However, during the cross examination done by the defence, he denies for the suggestions that due to the ill feelings with the villagers, he 7

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

left the village. However, he admits that prior to the construction of his house there are no disputes in between the accused and the PW.4. He further denies for the suggestions put forth by the learned defence counsel that panchayaths were held in various issues during the construction of the house of PW.4 with the accused due to the troubles caused by PW.4 to the accused. However, he admitted the fact that there is a rain water pipe channel which is fixed and during heavy rain the said rain water gets entered into the house of the accused through that pipe.

However, he denies for the suggestion that he has intentionally arranged the said pipe in order to cause disturbance to the accused. Furthermore, he denies for the suggestions that he did not sustain any injury on his left side of the head and the accused is innocent and he never beat him. He stated that the police might have taken his blood stained clothes.

However, he denies for the suggestions that he sustained the injury by falling down from his house while he was doing curing work and he did not sustain any injury in the hands of the accused and has filed a false case against the said accused by taking undue advantage of the self inflicted injury caused by him. He further stated that he has no disputes with his neighbours.

14.However, the prosecution has also examined the wife of PW.1 who is the relative to PW.4 and she also corroborated the version of PW.1 stating that while he was taking the cattle manure to the manure pit, he along with PW.1, PW.2, PW.4 and also some other workers were doing the construction work wherein the accused came there and beat the PW.4 with the iron rod and thereby caused bleeding and fracture injuries. However, she corroborated her version as per the case of prosecution in her evidence. During the cross examination she admitted that her house is located at a distance of 4 houses from the house of PW.4 and she cannot 8

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

witness the incident if she is present at her house. She denies for the suggestions that there is no manure pit which is situated towards the house of PW.4 and there was no necessity for her to go towards the house of PW.4 for the said manure pit. During cross examination she admitted that due to some disputes with some of the persons, the PW.4 left to

Hyderabad. However, she denies for the suggestions put forth by the learned counsel for the defence with respect to the innocence of the accused and claiming that the PW.4 himself is the trouble monger and he intentionally he is troubling the accused during the construction of his house. She stated that the police has seized blood stained towel and shirt of the PW.4. Thereby nothing much could be elicited in contradiction in the cross examination of PW.4.

15.Subsequently, the prosecution has also examined one of the eye witness to the scene as PW.6 and he reported that he noticed the PW.4 was taken to the police station in an auto and thereby he accompanied them and also stated that the PW.4 sustained injury on his head and also on his left hand and on enquiry he came to know that the accused has beat the PW.4. However, he stated that he is not the eye witness to the incident. During the cross examination done by except to the marking of

Ex.P4 nothing more could be elicited in his evidence. In the cross examination done by the counsel for the defence it is elicited that there is manure pit which is situated towards eastern side but not towards to the western side over the house of PW.4. However, he denies for the suggestions that he never came to know that the accused beat the PW.4 and he is deposing false.

16.Subsequently, the panch witnesses as per the case of prosecution who were present at the time of arrest of the accused and seizure of iron 9

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

rod which is material object in the present case got examined as PW.7 and

PW.8 and both panch witnesses did not support the version of the prosecution. Except their signatures being marked as Ex.P5 and Ex.P6 nothing could be elicited in their evidence in support of the prosecution.

17.Subsequently, the doctor who has examined the PW.4 was examined as PW.9 and he reported that he has examined the PW.4 on dt.10-3-2012 at about 11.13 a.m., and found the following injuries:

(1) A lacerated injury present over left occipital region size 5 x 2 cm and it is red in colour and (2) A swelling deformity present over left forearm.

He further stated that he is of the opinion that the injury No.1 is simple in nature and injury No.2 is grievous in nature.

18.During the cross examination he denies for the suggestions that both the injuries 1 and 2 are not bleeding injuries. However, he stated that at the time of examination there was no oozing of the blood. He admits that he did not annex the Radiologist report to the wound certificate issued by him which got marked as Ex.P7. However, the said doctor reported that he has mentioned the MLC X-ray number in his wound certificate. Further, the PW.9 stated that there is a possibility of sustaining injuries 1 and 2 if any person falls down from height of 5-6 feet. He denies for the suggestions that he has issued Ex.P7 without examining the injured

PW.4.

19.Lastly, the prosecution has examined the investigating officer who took up the investigation in the present case and filed charge sheet as

PW.10 and he reported that on 10-3-2012 at 9.00 a.m., while he was present in the police station, the complainant/PW.1 came to police station and given his statement which got marked as Ex.P1. Basing on which he 10

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

has registered a case as in Cr.No.39/2012 for the offence under Sec.324 of

IPC and issued FIR which got marked as Ex.P8. In addition to that the said investigating officer has also stated that as the injured PW.4 was unable to give his statement due to the injuries sustained by him, the PW.1 has preferred a report. Subsequently, he took up the investigation, examined the witnesses and drafted the rough sketch which is marked as Ex.P9.

Thereby on 16-3-2012, on receipt of credible information about the presence of the accused he along with panchayathdars went and proceeded to Hussainapuram Village hayrick yard and thereby caught hold of the accused along with the material object which is the iron rod used by the said accused in order to beat the PW.4 under the cover of panchanma which got marked as Ex.P10. Subsequently, he stated that after receipt of wound certificate of the PW.4 which reveals that one of the injury sustained by him is grievous in nature, he has filed the charge sheet for the offence under Sec.326 of IPC. The investigating officer was cross examined at length by the learned defence counsel and he reported that the PW.4 did not leave the village as he was involved in criminal cases and denies for the suggestions that the PW.4 was involved in criminal cases.

He further stated that he did not know whether the houses of PW.1 to

PW.3, PW.5 and PW.6 are not located near the scene of offence. He denies for the suggestions that he failed to examine the neighbours of the scene and volunteers that none of the neighbours came forward during the investigation done by the said investigating officer. He denies for the suggestions that the witnesses are planted by the PW.1 and PW.4 for the purpose of false case. However, he admits that the PW.5 never stated

before him that she was carrying the manure towards to the manure pit

during her Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement. He further denies for the suggestions that the injuries are self inflicted by the PW.4 himself and the 11

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

accused have never beat him and he is innocent. The investigating officer reported that he has not seized any blood stained clothes of PW.4 and also denies for the suggestions that he never visited the scene of offence on 16-3-2012 and did not affect arrest of accused in the presence of panchayathdars and he never seized any material objects from the scene of offence and the accused never confessed about his commission of crime and Ex.P10 is drafted at the police station. However, he stated that the iron rod which was seized under the cover of panchanama Ex.P10 got marked as M.O.1 did not contain blood stains. He admitted that the said

M.O.1 which was produced before this Court can be used for the cot (Manchamu pipe) purpose. He denies for the suggestions that the seizure slips on M.O.1 did not contain the signatures of the accused. The investigating officer stated that he received the wound certificate on dt.6-4-2012 and till then he did not come to any conclusion that the said injuries was grievous in nature. However, he admitted that on the seizure slips on M.O.1 (i.e., iron rod) the offence is mentioned as Sec.326 of IPC.

He also admitted that he has not mentioned the measurements of M.O.1 in the property form which he has sent to the Court and the said property form was sent on dt.17-3-2012 but the same is received on 6-5-2016. The investigating officer admitted that the M.O.1 is described as one iron tap pipe in the property form which is submitted before this Court. However, he denies for the suggestions that his investigation is table made and PW.4 never sustained any injury due to beating of accused.

20.After the evidence was let in, the learned prosecution submitted his arguments stating that the evidence of PW.1, PW.4 and PW.5 are in corroboration with each other and also corroborated with the medical evidence of PW.9 and further submits that the PW.2 has partly supported the case of prosecution and therefore relied that basing on the said 12

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

evidence, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under Sec.326 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt.

21.On the other hand the learned counsel for the defence has vehemently submitted his arguments and stated that the prosecution has examined only interested witnesses and the PW.1, PW.5 are the relatives of the PW.4 are the interested witnesses and they have only supported the case of prosecution. Further, the defence relies that no independent witnesses has supported the case of prosecution and no neighbours were examined by the prosecution who are independent witnesses even though it is elicited in the cross examination of PW.1, PW.4 and PW.10 that there is no enimity between the neighbours. Further, the defence relies on the credibility of presence of PW.1 and PW.5 whose houses are not present at the house of PW.4 and therefore the securing the presence of PW.1 and

PW.5 at the time of offence at the scene is not trustworthy as per their under evidence. He draws attention to the statement made by PW.5 during her chief examination wherein she stated that she was carrying the cattle manure towards the manure pit of the house of PW.4 and which was denied by the investigating officer that no such statement was made by the PW.5 in her Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement. However, the said statement is nothing but omission to be considered in the evidence of PW.5 and it is not fatal to the case of prosecution as the presence of PW.2, PW.3 and PW.5 and PW.6 is already elicited as per Ex.P1 and also in the evidence of PW.1 and PW.4. Further, the defence relies on the admission made by PW.1 during his cross examination that the neighbours were present on the scene at the time of PW.4 falling down at 7.00 a.m., and draws attention of this Court that the term “falling down” infers that the PW.4 himself has fallen down while he was doing curing work and thereby he sustained injuries and bore grudge against he accused, he has falsely filed a case 13

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

against him. However, turn falling down in the said statement is not clear whether the PW.4 was falling down on his own or he has fallen down due to the beating of the accused with the said iron rod. Henceforth, the arguments advanced by the learned defence counsel with respect to such statement cannot be considered. However, he further relies on the probability stated by the doctor who has examined the PW.4 and in his evidence during the cross examination he stated that the injuries 1 and 2 can be sustained if the person falls from the height of 5-6 feet. Therefore, that is a suggestion which has been put forth in general and it is a case of probability of sustaining such injuries. Another aspect which has to be looked into in the evidence of PW.9 is that he has clearly stated on the basis on the X-ray report of PW.4 he has termed one of the injuries as “grievous” and another injury caused on occipital region of the head of the

PW.4 is “simple” in nature and both injuries are bleeding in nature.

However, the learned defence counsel further relies on the existence of

M.O.1 which is the iron rod seized by the investigating officer PW.10 in the presence of the panchayathdars where the said panchayathdars PW.7 and

PW.8 did not support the version of prosecution. One observation which was enlightened by the learned defence counsel is that as per the property form, the description of the material object has defined as one iron tap pipe and when it comes to the panchanama Ex.P10 it is defined as one iron rod and further on physical perusal of the said material object M.O.1 it is an iron rod in the form of pipe which admittedly can be used in cots (Mancham pipe). However, the learned defence counsel further stated that prosecution has utterly failed to prove the ingredients for the offence under Sec.326 of IPC wherein the seizure of the material object M.O.1 is in contradiction with respect to description in the property form placed 14

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

before this Court. Further, he also relies on the Judgments passed by the

Hon’ble High Court of A.P.

(1) Bholu alias Hanuman and others etc., Vs. State of

Rajasthan (2009 (1) ALT (Crl.) 23 N.R.C.).

(2) Baki Venkata Ramana Reddy Vs. State of A.P., (2008 (2)

ALT (Crl.) 185 A.P.).

(3) Bandela Oaveedu Vs. State of A.P., (2011 (1) ALD (Crl.)

723 A.P.).

(1) The ratio laid in those Judgments is that in order to prove under Sec.326 of IPC “The report of X-ray and the opinion should be given, brought Radiologist so as to establish the fact that the injured has sustained grievous injury. Non production of Radiologist in the witness box by the prosecution is fatal and failed to brought the conclusion that the said offence is under Sec.326 of IPC.

(2) Further, the evidence of the interested witnesses is not a mere proof that the injured sustained injuries and therefore basing on the evidence of interested witnesses it cannot be held sufficient that the prosecution has proved his case.

22.On perusal of the Judgment submitted by the learned defence counsel admittedly non production of Radiologist for examination is fatal to the case of prosecution so as to prove the ingredients for the offence under Sec.326 of IPC. However, the defence taken by the accused is that the injuries are sustained by PW.4 himself by falling down and thereby he has foisted a false case against the accused. However, in the evidence of

PW.1, PW.5 coupled with the evidence of injured PW.4 they have very well corroborated each other versions with respect to the occurrence of the offence and also occurrence of the injuries sustained by PW.4 due to the beating of the accused with the iron rod. However, though the evidence of

PW.2 and PW.5 who are eye witnesses as per the version of prosecution did not corroborate their version but on careful perusal they have submitted

before the Court that they came to know about the incident that the

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

accused has beat PW.4 and thereby caused bleeding and fracture injury on his head and hand thereby. This can be held sufficient so as to support the case of prosecution with respect to the said witnesses PW.2 and PW.4 having knowledge with respect to the commission of crime done by the accused.

23.In addition to that, the counsel argues that it is the nature of the

PW.4 to quarrel with the accused but on perusal there is every likelihood and motive for the accused to beat PW.4 as he was vexed with respect to the construction work done by PW.4 and admittedly it is elicited in the evidence that the rain water flows from the house of PW.4 into the house of the accused through the water pipe and therefore there is every motive and “mens-rea” for the accused himself in order to cause harm to PW.4. In addition to that, the ratio laid in the Judgments is admitted and thereby the prosecution failed to bring the Radiologist on record so as to prove the injury No.2 which is grievous in nature. However, the doctor PW.9 has stated that basing on the X-ray report he has opined the said injury is grievous in nature. With respect to the injury No.1 admittedly it is simple in nature and on whole in there is no doubt that the injuries are not sustained by PW.4. Admittedly, the PW.4 has sustained injuries and he has given treatment at Government General Hospital, Kurnool immediately after the incident took place. Further, there is a link and series of incident which has been established by the prosecution that the PW.4 while doing his construction work the accused who is none other than the neighbour came there and indulged in the quarrel with PW.4 and thereby beat him. Now with respect to the seizure of M.O.1 in the light of Sec.27 of Indian

Evidence Act which speaks “Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act :- How much of information received from accused may be proved: Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from 16

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved”

24.Therefore, there is no necessity for corroboration with respect to the seizure of material object with the evidence of the panchayathdars PW.7 and PW.8 as the confession made by the accused with respect to the discovery of the material object is held sufficient in the light of evidence of investigating officer and it is admissible in nature. In addition to that, with respect to the statement made by PW.1 during his cross examination that he did not know the contents of the report Ex.P1 and after careful perusal of the evidence of PW.1 he has very well corroborated his version as per the contents of the report Ex.P1 even in his chief examination and also in his cross examination. Therefore, mere denial that he do not know the contents of Ex.P1 is not fatal to the case of prosecution. In addition to that, the PW.4 stated in his evidence that the police might have seized his blood stained clothes and the PW.5 stated that the police has seized the blood stained clothes and the same was denied by the investigating officer that he has not seized any blood stained clothes. However, in the evidence of

PW.9 it is brought to the light of the Court that the both injuries 1 and 2 are bleeding in nature and therefore it is held sufficient to draw a conclusion that the PW.4 sustained bleeding injuries. Thereby, non seizure of blood stained clothes of PW.4 is not fatal to the case of prosecution. The prosecution has proved the said witnesses were present near the scene of offence as PW.4 was doing the construction work and therefore they can be termed as “chance witnesses” rather than interested witnesses.

25.Further in the light of Sec.222(2) of Cr.P.C. which speaks

“Sec.222 (2) of Cr.P.C.:- When offence proved included in

offence charged: When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor offence, although he is not charged with it” 17

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

26.Furthermore, the evidence of PW.1 and PW.5 cannot be termed as interested witnesses only for the reason that they are the relatives of

PW.4. The onus lies on the defence in order to prove them as interested witnesses. However, satisfied with the arguments advanced by the counsel for the defence with respect to the commission of offence under

Sec.326 of IPC which was mentioned on seizure slips prior to the issuance of medical report is taken into consideration and therefore this Court of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the ingredients for the offence under Sec.326 of IPC but on the same point of time the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under

Sec.324 of IPC that he has caused injury to PW.4 in the light of the evidence of PW.1, PW.2, PW.3, PW.5 and PW.9 and they stands in corroboration with each other.

27. In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offence punishable u/sec.324 of Indian Penal Code and he is convicted under Sec.248 (2) of

Cr.P.C.

Judl.Magistrate of First Class, DHONE.

Accordingly, the accused is questioned with regard to the quantum of sentence to be imposed against him for the offence under Sec.324 of

Indian Penal Code wherein he stated that he is having wife and children and also age old parents and he is the sole bread winner of the family and further he stated that he underwent surgery recently and his medical condition is very poor and therefore he prays mercy of this Court. In view of the nature of the offence and the gravity of committing the offence this is not a fit case in order to apply the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

However, taking into the statement made by the accused and considering 18

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

his medical health and also the family condition as mitigating circumstances and therefore this Court has taken a lenient view so as to impose fine only as per his prayer. Therefore, the accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine he is directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Sec.324 of Indian Penal Code. Furthermore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case out of the fine amount of Rs.5,000/-, an amount of Rs.4,000/- shall be paid to the injured PW.4-Golla Sankaraiah @

Golla Naga Raju after the expiry of the appeal time towards compensation as under Sec.357 (1) of Cr.P.C. The material object M.O.1 i.e., Iron tap pipe shall be destroyed after completion of appeal time.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, after transcription, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court, this the 31 st day of August, 2017.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1: Golla Raju. -None-

P.W.2: Golla Gounda Ramesh.

P.W.3: Golla Venkatesh.

P.W.4: Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju.

P.W.5: Golla Sanjamma.

P.W.6: Golla Krishnamma.

P.W.7: Harijana Rajaiah.

P.W.8: D.Maddaiah.

P.W.9: Dr.M.Y.Sreenivasulu.

P.W.10: D.Maheswara Reddy, Inspector of Police.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

Ex.P.1: Report given by PW.1. - Nil –

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

Ex.P.3: 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.3.

Ex.P.4: 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.6.

Ex.P.5: Signature of PW.7 on Panchanama, dated 16-3-2012.

Ex.P.6: Signature of PW.8 on Panchanama, dated 16-3-2012.

Ex.P.7: Wound certificate of PW.4 issued by PW.9.

Ex.P.8: F.I.R. in Cr.No.39/2012.

Ex.P.9: Rough sketch.

Ex.P.10: Panchanama, dated 16-3-2012.

MATERIAL OBJECTS

M.O.1: Iron tap pipe.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.146 of 2012.

C ALENDAR AND J UDGMENT

I N THE COURT OF THE J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS :: D HONE .

C ALENDAR C ASE N O .146/2012

DATEOFOFFENCE.:10-03-2012 DATEOFCOMPLAINT.: 10-03-2012 DATEOFAPPREHENSIONOFACCUSED. :16-03-2012 DATEOFRELEASEONBAIL. :16-03-2012 DATEOFCOMMENCEMENTOFTRIAL.:17-09-2014 DATEOFCLOSUREOFTRIAL.:28-08-2017 DATEOFSENTENCEORORDER.:31-08-2017 EXPLANATION.: ---- COMPLAINANT: STATE: REPRESENTEDBYTHE INSPECTOROF POLICE, BETHAMCHERLAP.S. as in Cr.No.39/2012.

S.NAMEFATHER’SNAMERELIGIOOCCU-RESIDENCEAGE NO NPATIONyrs. Hussainapuram (V) Golla Naga RajuHINDUCOOLIE32 years Golla SunkannaBethamcherla (M)

O FFENCE.: Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.

S ECTION OF L AW: Sec.324 of Indian Penal Code.

F INDING: Found guilty.

S ENTENCE OR ORDER: In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offence punishable u/sec.324 of Indian Penal Code and he is convicted under Sec.248 (2) of Cr.P.C.

Therefore, the accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine he is directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Sec.324 of Indian Penal Code. Furthermore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case out of the fine amount of Rs.5,000/-, an amount of Rs.4,000/- shall be paid to the injured PW.4-Golla Sankaraiah @ Golla Naga Raju after the expiry of the appeal time towards compensation as under Sec.357 (1) of Cr.P.C. The material object M.O.1 i.e., Iron tap pipe shall be destroyed after completion of appeal time. Sd/- Asifa Sulthana

F INE : Fine amount of Rs.5,000/- paid by the accused.

J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS ,

D HONE .

Copy submitted to The Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate - Cum –

Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool.

CC/791/2014 Convicted

V.KRISHNAIAH vs VADLA SIVANNA

13 Jul 2018

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

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

Present: Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Friday, the 13th day of July, 2018.

Calendar Case No.791 of 2014

State: Represented by Sub-Inspector of Police, Veldurthy P.S. … Complainant.

Versus

Vadla Sivanna, age 37 years, S/o Vadla Ramudu, Ramallakota Village, Veldurthy Mandal, (Occu: Carpenter, Caste: Kammari).… Accused.

This case came on 09-07-2018 before me for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant/State and of Sri S.T.Haroon and Sri N.Maddaiah Yadav, Advocates for accused, and having perused the material available on the record, on hearing 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, Veldurthy Police Station has filed a charge sheet in Cr.No.194/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 506 of Indian Penal Code against the accused.

2.As per the brief averments of the prosecution case:-

The defacto complainant/LW.1-V.Krishnaiah is resident of Adoni Town and he is native of Ramallakota Village, Veldurthy Mandal. He is having a house bearing H.No.2-23 in the said Ramallakota Village. The accused is none other than the brother’s second wife son of the complainant and he entered into his house for which the complainant approached the Hon’ble

Civil Judge, Dhone and thereby on 5-7-2013 the Hon’ble Court has issued

decree in his favour. Thereby the complainant has filed an Execution 2

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

Petition vide E.P.No.39/2014 in O.S.No.385/2011 and thereby the Hon’ble

Court passed orders to hand over the possession of the house of the complainant and thereby sent the Ameena. Accordingly, as per the orders of the Hon’ble Court the house was handed over to the complainant on 19- 7-2014 by the Court Ameena to him. However, the accused trespassed into his house and he is living in the said house. On hearing the information, on 24-11-2014 he went to Ramallakota Village at 12.00 noon found the accused is residing in the said house by keeping his own household articles. He informed the accused but he ignored the orders of the Court and has intentionally trespassed into the said house and further the accused objected him not to enter into the house and if he enters he will see his end, damage and burnt the said house. On seeing this, none interfered due to the high handedness behaviour of the accused. Thereby basing on the complaint preferred by the complainant, the Station House

Officer, Veldurthy Police Station has registered a case as in Cr.No.194/2014 for the offences under Secs.448, 506 of IPC and thereby after due process of completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

3. After filing of the charge sheet, the case was taken on file and cognizance was taken for the offences under Secs.448, 506 of Indian Penal

Code against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, copies of this case were furnished to him as contemplated under Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure.

5.The accused was examined U/s 251 of Cr.P.C and the contents of the examination for the offences 448, 506 of IPC were read over and explained to him in Telugu to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed the case to be tried.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

6.To prove its case, the prosecution has examined PW.1 to PW.3 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5.

NIL.

8.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record both in oral and documentary.

9. The point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of accused for

the offences under Secs.448, 506 of Indian Penal Code beyond all

reasonable doubt?

POINT:

10.In order to prove the case of prosecution, the prosecution has examined the defacto complainant V.Krishnaiah who has preferred a report as PW.1 and he reported that on 23-11-2014 while he was at Adoni, he received information through the villagers that the accused has trespassed into his house bearing No.2-23 of Ramallakota village which was delivered to him as per the Execution Petition orders in E.P.No.39/2014 thereby on the next day dt.24-11-2014 at 12.00 noon he went to Ramallakota Village and visited his house bearing D.No.2-23 and found that the accused was in his house along with his household articles and not allowed the complainant to enter into the his house. He further threatened the complainant with dire consequences that he would see his end, if he enters into the house. The same was witnessed by LW.2 and also some other neighbours but none interfered in the said matter. Immediately he 4

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

went to police station and gave report which is nothing but Ex.P1. In the cross examination he admitted that the accused is his elder brother’s son.

Further it is also added by complainant that the accused is his elder brother’s second wife son. He denied for the suggestion that as the accused is the son of his elder brother’s second wife, there are no good terms in between the accused and PW.1. It is admitted by PW.1 that LW.2 is son of his 4th elder brother. He denied for the suggestion that he has not filed any supporting documents to show that he is in possession and enjoyment of the said house which is in his possession and further he admitted that he has filed another suit vide in O.S.No.213/2011 seeking

Specific Performance along with another suit vide in O.S.No.385/2011 for

Declaration of Title and delivery of possession. He denied for the suggestion that the suit scheduled property in O.S.No.213/2011 is a vacant site but not house. He admitted that the said disputed house site in

O.S.No.213/2011 is situated towards North-East corner of the above said

house. He denies that there is a carpenter shop and Beedi bunk which belongs to the accused in the above vacant site. He further admitted that the said suit i.e., O.S.No.213/2011 is dismissed on merits. However, he denied for the suggestion that developing grudge against the accused he has filed this present false case. He further stated that there are some bind over cases and also Court endorsement cases which are pending over the accused. However, he did not submit the crime numbers of the said cases. He stated that he do not know who has telephoned him while he was present at Adoni and informed him with respect to the trespass into his house. He admitted that his house is in Veldurthy is located in a residential area and people frequently moved in the said street. He further stated that he has been possession and enjoyment over the said house from the date of delivery by the Court Ameen till the date of the examination. He further denied for the suggestion that in order to grab the 5

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

vacant site of the accused and to harass his, PW.1 has filed a false case against him. However, he denies that Ex.P1 is prepared by somebody else and PW.1 has simply signed on it. He also denies for suggestion that as he is a retired police officer and by influencing the police he has got foisted a false case against the accused and the accused never trespassed into his house and threatened him, he is innocent.

11.Subsequently, another person by name Sreenivasulu who is eye witness to the scene was examined as PW.2 and he reported that on dt.19-7-2014 the Court Ameena along with police and also Advocates,

PW.1 and Sarpanch of the village came to his village and also made Tom-

Tom in the village with respect to the decree passed by the Court in favour of PW.1 and thereby delivered the said house to PW.1 i.e., bearing D.No.2- 23 in Ramallakota Village. Further he stated that during the said point of time, the accused was in possession of the said house. Further all the persons including Court Ameena, Police and Advocates has informed the accused to vacate the house and take all his belongings and accordingly the accused has vacated the same and thereby the house was locked and key was handed over to PW.1 and then PW.1 left the village and went to

Adoni. He further reported that the said house was in possession of PW.1 till 22-11-2014. Subsequently on 23-11-2014 the accused broke opened the lock and entered into the above said house and he has been in possession and living in the said house till today. Further he also reported that on dt.24-11-2014 PW.1 came to Ramallakota village and asked the accused why he has broke opened the lock and trespassed into his house inspite of the Court orders but the accused has threatened him to kill him and also reported that he will not vacate the said house. Therefore though lengthy cross examination was done by the learned defence counsel the

PW.2 corroborated his version and also admitted that PW.1 and accused 6

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

both are his relatives. He also admitted that the said disputed house is in a residential locality. He further denied for the suggestion that the accused is residing in a house which is in the upstairs situated on the western side of the disputed house. He denies that there is a Beedi bunk and carpenter shop on the northern side of the disputed house. He further denies that he do not have his house in the same street. He further denies that the accused never trespassed into the said house and never threatened PW.1.

He further stated that he do not know about the civil suit filed by PW.1 against the accused with respect to the open place which is adjacent to the disputed house. PW.2 also stated that he is aware of the civil dispute in respect of the disputed house filed by PW.1 seeking delivery of possession and Permanent Injunction and thereby the said suit is decreed in favour of

PW.1. He further stated that he has not informed PW.1 about the trespass of the accused into his house. He also stated that he has not accompanied

PW.1 at the time of going to his house and also he giving report. He stated that he came to know about the incident which occurred in the time of 5 – 10 minutes and thereby some people namely Ranganna, Yellaiah,

Pullanna, Ranga Swamy and others were present. He further denies that he accompanied PW.1 on the last date of adjournment to Court and only to help PW.1 he is deposing false.

12.The prosecution has examined the investigation officer who received report from PW.1 and thereby registered a case as in Cr.No.194/2014 for the offences under Sec.448, 506 of IPC and he is examined as PW.3 and he stated that on 24-11-2014 at 14.00 hours basing on the complaint of PW.1 a crime has been registered and thereby he has issued FIR which is nothing but Ex.P2. Later he proceeded to the Ramallakota Village and drawn rough sketch which is Ex.P3. Therein he secured the presence of witnesses and recorded their statements. Further on dt.1-12-2014 at 8.45 7

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

hours the accused came to police station and got voluntarily surrendered

before him. Thereby PW.3 released him on station bail. In addition to that,

the prosecution got marked Ex.P4 which is certified copy of delivery report in E.P.No.39/2014 in O.S.No.385/2011. Further the certified copy of decree in O.S.No.385/2011 also got marked as Ex.P5. During the cross examination done by the defence counsel, it is admitted by investigation officer that PW.1 is retired police officer, but he is unaware of the suit proceeding in O.S.No.213/2011 which was filed by PW.1 and that it was dismissed. He stated that he do not know whether any dispute existed in between PW.1 and the accused with respect to the open site. He also stated that he do not know whether the said open site belongs to the said accused. He admitted that his investigation is silent with respect to the said open site. However, he admitted that there is no other rastha from disputed house to go except passing through the said open site which is adjacent to the disputed house. He denies that the accused is innocent and never tried to commit any trespass and due to the influence of PW.1, a false case is registered against the accused. He admitted that there is a big Banyan tree (Ravi Chettu) near the scene of offence. He denied for the suggestion that as PW.1 do not succeed in the civil suit, he has foisted a false case against the said accused. However, he admitted that there are civil disputes between PW.1 and the accused. He denies that his investigation is table made.

13.However in the light of the above evidence which has been let in, the prosecution relies on the corroborative evidence of PW.1, PW.2 clubbed with the evidence of investigation officer PW.3 and further the prosecution relies on Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 wherein he relies on Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 which clearly shows that as per the orders of the Hon’ble Court, the Court Ameena has handed over the possession of the said disputed house to PW.1 on 19-7- 8

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

2014. Further the prosecution submits that the accused is possession of the said house by committing the act of criminal trespass and also threatened the PW.1 with dire consequences if he tried to interfere into the illegal possession of the accused and thereby the prosecution submits that in the light of the corroborative evidence of PW.1 to PW.3 coupled with

Ex.P1 to Ex.P5, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offences under Secs.448, 506 of IPC and thereby prays the Hon’ble Court in order to convict the accused with maximum sentence.

14.On the other hand, the learned defence counsel submitted that it is a false case which has been foisted by PW.1 by using his influence who is retired police officer and submits that the accused was never in possession of the said house and furthermore submits that as PW.1 got defeated in the another civil suit in O.S.No.213/2011 seeking Specific Performance of contract with respect to the open site which is adjacent to the said disputed house and thereby as an act of grudge as he was defeated, a false case is foisted against the accused.

15.However, after taking into consideration the evidence which has been let in and the arguments advanced on either side, the case of the prosecution is that the house bearing No.2-23 at Ramallakota village stands in the name of PW.1 and the same was delivered in favour of PW.1 as per the orders of the Hon’ble Court by the Court Ameena and in support of the contention of PW.1, Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 are marked on behalf of PW.1.

On perusal of Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 which are the certified copy of decree passed in favour of PW.1 against the accused herein and further the delivery warrant along with delivery report which are on record clearly shows that after due procedure the plaintiff who is none other than the complainant herein has been given the physical possession and delivery of 9

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

the disputed house i.e., house No.2-23 at Ramallakota village and thereby a delivery warrant was prepared by the Court Ameena in E.P.No.39/2014 in

O.S.No.385/2011 and hence the schedule in the said E.P. is one and the

same with respect to the house which is question on record. Therefore, the delivery warrant and the report given by Court Ameena clearly shows that on 19-7-2014 the physical possession of the disputed house is handed over to PW.1 from the defendant who is none other than the accused herein. Therein prima-facie it proves the contention of the complainant

PW.1 that the accused was in illegal possession and enjoyment of the disputed house prior to the delivery report dt.19-7-2014.

However, it is another admitted fact on record is that PW.1 is resident of

Adoni and thereby during his absence on 23-11-2014 the accused has trespassed into his house along with his household articles. Therefore, the chronological order of dates and sequence of the events from the date of decree in O.S.No.385/2011 and subsequently the issuance of delivery warrant on 19-7-2014 and thereby the act of criminal trespass done by the accused on 23-11-2014 and thereby the complainant PW.1 after knowing the said incident came to Ramallakota village and questioned the accused are in corroboration with each other and thereby found to be correct and true on record. Furthermore though lengthy cross examination was done by the learned defence counsel to both PW.1 and PW.2 and thereby no contradiction was elicited in the evidence of PW.1 as well as the eye witness PW.2 in order to throw away the case of prosecution. Though it is admitted fact that PW.1 was defeated in another civil suit but the accused was unable to establish the prejudice against PW.1 in the minds of the

Court that in order to take vengeance against the said accused for the defeat experienced by PW.1, he has foisted a false case against the accused. However, as per the evidence of investigation officer who has prepared a rough sketch i.e., Ex.P3 it shows that towards the North-East 10

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

corner of the said disputed house there is one Beedi bunk and carpenter shop and also open place in order to go outside. Further it is not corroborated with respect to the contents of Ex.P3 and the presence of the said Beedi bunk and carpenter shop in the house site area which is towards the North-East corner of the disputed house. It is denied by both

PW.1 and PW.2. Furthermore there are no contradictions which are elicited in the evidence of PW.1 and PW.2 to shake the credibility of their evidence.

Further PW.2 who is eye witness to the said scene has narrated the said incident and corroborated his version as per the prosecution case and there are no fatal contradictions elicited in the evidence of PW.2. The learned defence counsel relies that the PW.1 has admitted that the possession and enjoyment of the disputed house by PW.1 is from the date of delivery till today. But, the intention of PW.1 in the light of evidence of

PW.2 and PW.3 clearly shows that the physical possession of the said house was in the hands of PW.1 from the date of delivery i.e., dt.19-7-2014 till the accused has trespassed into the said house i.e., 23-11-2014.

Therefore it also stands in corroboration with respect to the evidence which has been let in and furthermore the evidence of PW.1 who is the complainant is supported by the independent eye witness to the scene and therefore there is presence of occular evidence as well as documentary evidence in support of contention of PW.1, thereby Ex.P4 and

Ex.P5 clearly shows that the accused was previously in possession of the said disputed house and thereby the same was given in delivery to PW.1 as per the orders of the Hon’ble Court and subsequently the accused has committed the act of trespass on 23-11-2014.

Hence, in view of Sec.448 of IPC:- “Punishment for house- tresspass:- Whoever commits house-trespass shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both”.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

And thereby the act of house trespass in refers to Sec.442 of IPC clearly shows that “Whoever commits criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or any building used as a place for worship, or as a place for the custody of property, is said to commit ‘house-trespass’ “.

16.Therefore in the light of the ingredients of the said offence of the house trespass, the accused herein has criminally trespassed into the house by entering himself without the knowledge and consent of the complainant PW.1 and thereby has remained in the said building which is used for human dwelling purpose and thereby he has committed offence as under Sec.448 of IPC.

17.In addition to that, with respect to Sec.506 of IPC the accused who was questioned with respect to his house trespass on 24-11-2014 by PW.1, he reported that he would kill PW.1 as well as he will burn the house as per the contention of the report i.e., Ex.P1 and thereby as he has left PW.1 in fear and criminally intimidated PW.1 with respect to the delivery of the property. Thereby, the prosecution has also proved the ingredients for the offence under Sec.506 of IPC against the accused herein. Further relying on Sec.134 of Indian Evidence Act that “Number of witnesses: No particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact”.

It is the quality of witness which has to be taken into consideration rather than the number of witnesses examined from the un-contradicted testimony of PW.1 which stands corroborative with evidence of PW.2 clubbed with evidence of Investigation Officer and in absence of any fatal contradictions of omission and in support of documentary evidence, the case of prosecution for the said offences is proved beyond all reasonable doubt.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

18.Therefore, the prosecution has proved that the accused committed the act of Criminal trespass as well as Criminal intimidation against PW.1 and guilty and he is found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the point is answered.

19. In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under Secs.448, 506 of Indian Penal Code and thereby he is convicted under Sec.255(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

Accordingly, the accused was questioned with respect to the quantum of sentence to be imposed against him for the offences under

Secs.448, 506 of Indian Penal Code respectively wherein he reported that he is having old aged parents and he is only breadwinner of his family and request the Hon’ble Court to show mercy on him and considering these as mitigating circumstances and in view of the nature of the offences and the gravity of committing the offences this Court is not inclined to invoke the

Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

The accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) for the offence under Sec.448 of Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine amount he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month.

The accused is also sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Sec.506 of Indian Penal Code.

As the accused did not undergo judicial remand, hence, set off under

Sec.428 of Cr.P.C. does not apply.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, after transcription, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court, this the 13 th day of July, 2018.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1: V.Krishnaiah. -None-

P.W.2: V.Sreenivasulu.

P.W.3: S.Nagendra, Sub-Inspector of Police.

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P.1: Report given by PW.1.

Ex.P.2: F.I.R. in Cr.No.194/2014.

Ex.P.3: Rough sketch.

Ex.P.4: Certified copy of delivery report in E.P.No.39/2014 in

O.S.No.385/2011.

Ex.P.5: Certified copy of Decree in O.S.No.385/2011.

FOR DEFENCE: -Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-Nil-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.791 of 2014.

C ALENDAR AND J UDGMENT

I N THE COURT OF THE J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS :: D HONE .

C ALENDAR C ASE N O .791/2014

DATEOFOFFENCE.:24-11-2014 DATEOFCOMPLAINT.:24-11-2014 DATEOFAPPREHENSIONOFACCUSED. :01-12-2014 DATEOFRELEASEONBAIL. :01-12-2014 (STATIONBAIL) DATEOFCOMMENCEMENTOFTRIAL.:02-11-2016 DATEOFCLOSUREOFTRIAL.:09-07-2018 DATEOFSENTENCEORORDER.:13-07-2018 EXPLANATIONFORDELAY.: -NIL- COMPLAINANT: STATE: REPRESENTEDBYTHE SUB-INSPECTOROF POLICE, VELDURTHY P.S. IN CR.NO.194/2014.

S.NAMEFATHER’SNAMERELIGIONOCCU-RESIDENCEAGE NO PATIONyrs. VADLA SIVANNAVADLA RAMUDUHINDUCOOLIERAMALLAKOTA (V)37 YEARS

VELDURTHY (M)

O FFENCE.: HOUSETRESPASS, CRIMINALINTIMIDATION.

S ECTION OF L AW: SECS.448, 506 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE.

F INDING: FOUNDGUILTY.

S ENTENCE OR ORDER: In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under Secs.448, 506 of Indian Penal Code and thereby he is convicted under Sec.255(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) for the offence under Sec.448 of Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine amount he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month.

The accused is also sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Sec.506 of Indian Penal Code.

As the accused did not undergo judicial remand, hence, set off under Sec.428 of Cr.P.C. does not apply.

Fine: Fine amount of Rs.1,000/- paid by the accused.

J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS ,

D HONE .

Copy submitted to The Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate - Cum –

Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool.

Dis.No.

CC/551/2014 Acquitted

BOYA BOGGUNARENDRA vs Vs1. MADIGA KRISHNA AND 3 OTHERS

13 Jul 2018

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

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

Present: Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Friday, the 13th day of July, 2018.

Calendar Case No.551/2014

State: Represented by Sub-Inspector of Police, Veldurthy P.S. … Complainant.

Versus

1. Madiga Krishna, S/o Venkateswarlu @ Koteswara Rao, age 30 years.

2. Madiga Shilpi Krishna @ Shilpi, S/o Venkateswara Rao @ Koteswara Rao, age 28 years.

3. Madiga Sreenivasulu, S/o Siddanna, age 40 years.

4. Madiga Ashok, S/o Srinivasulu, age 20 years.

All are residents of Allugundu Village, Veldurthy Mandal.… Accused.

This case came on 06-07-2018 before me for final hearing in the presence of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant/State and of Sri C.Viswanatha Reddy and Sri E.Madhu Sudhan Reddy, Advocates

for the accused and having perused the material available on the record,

on hearing 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, Veldurthy Police Station has filed a charge sheet in Cr.No.154/2014 for the offence punishable under Sec.324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code against the accused A1 to A4.

2.As per the brief averments of the prosecution case:-

The incident occurred on 28-8-2014 at about 07.30 hours while the defacto complainant/LW.1-Boya Boggu Narendra is coming from the hayrick yard and to get the hay he passed infront of the house of the one

Madiga Gorantla wherein the accused A1 to A4 concealing the previous ill 2

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

feelings abused the LW.1 saying that “they beat the said complainant who will come to his rescue” and thereby took out the sticks and cart pegs and beat the complainant over the back of the body and ribs and caused contusion and dumb injuries. On witnessing the same the mother of the complainant by name Pullamma along with his brother came to the spot, intervened and separated the accused and thereby they went away.

Further, Boya Uruvakili Dubbanna (LW.4) has spoken about the motive of the offence and having above ill feelings with the accused A1. Thereby basing on the report of the defacto complainant, the Sub-Inspector of

Police (LW.6) has registered a case as in Cr.No.154/2014 for the offence under Sec.324 r/w 34 of IPC of Veldurthy Police Station and took up investigation. After due process of completion of investigation he has filed charge sheet.

3. After filing of the charge sheet, the case was taken on file and cognizance was taken for the offence under Sec.324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal

Code against the accused A1 to A4.

4. On appearance of the accused A1 to A4, copies of this case were furnished to them as contemplated under Section 207 Code of Criminal

Procedure.

5.The accused A1 to A4 were examined under Section 239 of Code of

Criminal Procedure by putting forth the charges for the offence under

Sec.324 r/w 34 of IPC was framed against them, read over and explained to them in vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.To prove its case, the prosecution has examined PW.1 to PW.6 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

7. The accused A1 to A4 were examined U/s 313 of Code of Criminal

Procedure after closure of prosecution side evidence by putting forth incriminating material against the accused A1 to A4, read over and explained to them in Vernacular language for which they denied for the same. Hence, defence side evidence is treated as NIL.

8.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record both in oral and documentary.

9. The point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused

A1 to A4 for the offence under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC beyond

all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

10.In order to prove the case of prosecution, the prosecution has examined the defacto complainant and victim Boya Boggu Narendra as

PW.1 and he reported that on 28-8-2014 at about 07.30 hours while he was coming from his hayrick yard and on the way when he reached the house of one Madiga Gorantla, the accused A1 to A4 came to him and beat him with cart pegs and sticks on his back and ribs and due to which he sustained swelling and contusion injuries, thereby he was rescued by LW.2 to LW.4 and then he went to police station and gave report which got marked as Ex.P1. He further reported that the motive behind the incident is that there are some disputes with respect to hayrick yard and the accused filed criminal case against him along with his brother and brother- in-law wherein the said complainant were convicted by the Hon’ble SC/ST

Special Court, Kurnool. Further during the cross examination done by the counsel for the accused he admitted that at the time of incident i.e., at 4

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

07.30 hours in general there is possibility of both male and female members of the family to be present in their house at that time. He further denied that he has not submitted about the names of Madanna, Govindu,

Pullanna and Suresh whose houses are present near the scene of offence.

He further stated that he went to police station on the same day after the incident at about 11.30 a.m., and he further stated that he has explained the delay of giving report to the police. Further he stated that the scene of offence and his house is at distance of 60 feet and there is a house of one

Madiga Govindu in between his house and also the scene of offence. He admitted that one cannot see the scene of offence from his house of the said Madiga Govindu stands in between and also that one cannot hear the hue and cries. Further he admitted that at the time of occurrence of said galata LW.2 and LW.3 were present in his house that the accused has beat him continuously for 10 to 15 minutes and further stated that he has shown all his injuries to the Doctor and also reported the reasons for sustaining such injuries. Further he denied that the accused are innocent and he fell down from the bullock cart and thereby sustaining injuries and further boring grudge against the accused as the said complainant was convicted basing on the report given by the accused, he has got foisted a false case against them.

11.In addition to that, the brother of the complainant was examined as

PW.2 and he corroborated the version of PW.1 stating that on 28-8-2014 while he along with his brother and mother were present in his house and

PW.1 reached the one house of Madiga Gorantla, the accused A1 to A4 came and attacked him, immediately on seeing the said galata he along with his mother rushed to the scene of offence and rescued his brother.

Further during the cross examination he denied that he and his brother

PW.1 has not drafted the report i.e., Ex.P1. He further admitted that one 5

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

Madanna, Govindu, Pullanna and Suresh houses are situated infront of the said scene of offence. He further stated that the names of the people are mentioned by him before police. He admitted that the house of Madiga

Gorantla in between his house and the said scene of offence. Furthermore, he also admitted that he along with his mother were present infront of their house at the time of said offence. He further stated that after 10 minutes of the offence they have reached the scene. He also stated that his brother PW.1 sustained 60 injuries and he accompanied his brother to the Government Hospital, Kurnool for treatment and they have shown all the injuries to the said doctor. Furthermore he denied for the suggestion that as he along with his brother were convicted previously in the SC/ST case filed by the said accused.

12.Furthermore the one of the eye witness was examined as PW.3 and he reported that he do not know any facts of this case. Except to the marking of Ex.P2 no incriminating could be elicited in his evidence against accused.

13.However, the prosecution has examined the doctor who has examined and treated the injured PW.1 on 28-8-2014 as PW.4 and he stated that he was brought by PC.762 and found the following injuries: (1)

A contusion injury over the back of 7x2 cms, (2) An abrasion over the nape of size 3 x 2 cms, (3) A contusion injury over the left shoulder of size 7 x 2 cms. He is of the opinion that the said injuries are simple in nature and thereby he has issued a wound certificate which got marked as Ex.P3.

During the cross examination done by the counsel for the defence he admitted that in Ex.P3 he has not mentioned the object by which the victim PW.1 has sustained the injuries. He also admitted that the age of the wound and also time of the examination of PW.1 is not mentioned in 6

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

Ex.P3. He further admitted that the injuries which are mentioned as in

Ex.P3 can be caused if a victim falls on rough surface from motor bike. He further admitted that except the injuries he has mentioned in Ex.P3 he has not found any other injuries in his clinical examination. He denied for the suggestion that he has issued false wound certificate without examining the PW.1.

14.However, the prosecution has also examined the investigation officer as PW.5 who took up investigation basing on the report given by PW.1 which has been registered as in Cr.No.154/2014 for the offence under

Sec.324 r/w 34 of IPC which is marked as Ex.P4. He also stated that he along with PC went to the Allugundu bus stop and reached the scene of offence and thereby drafted the rough sketch. The said rough sketch is marked as Ex.P5. He further stated that the presence of LW.2, PW.3 and

PW.3 was secured and the 161 Cr.P.C. statements were recorded, thereby after finding the accused and handed over the CD file to LW.7 for further investigation. During the cross examination done by the counsel for the accused, he reported that as per Ex.P1 the said offence occurred at 7.30 a.m. Further he admitted that it takes only 15 to 20 minutes to reach

Veldurthy from Allugundu Village. However with respect to the mentioning of delay in column No.8 of the FIR, he reported that there is no delay in reporting of the FIR and the complainant has approached the police station within time. Further he stated that he do not know about the relationship of PW.1, PW.2 and LW.2 as well as PW.3. The investigation officer further admitted that he has not examined the persons namely Madanna,

Govindu, Gorantla, Suresh, Pullanna who are the neighbours to the scene of offence. However, the said witness stated that he tried to interrogate them but they did not reveal any particulars of the offence. He denied for 7

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

the suggestion that no offence has been taken place and only for statistical purpose a false case is foisted against them basing on false complaint. He further admitted that he has not seized any sticks and stones of the bullock cart. He also admitted that particular overt act of each accused is not mentioned in Ex.P1. He further stated that he do not know about the conviction of PW.1 and PW.2 in a criminal case under

SC/ST Act basing on the report given by the accused A1. No incident has taken place and the accused are innocent.

15. PW.6 is the investigation officer who took the CD file of this crime from PW.5 and after receiving wound certificate of PW.1 and found investigation done by PW.5 on correct lines and filed charge sheet. During cross examination, he denies that a false wound certificate is obtained and false charge sheet is filed against the accused A1 to A4.

16.After the evidence which has been let in, the prosecution was unable to examine the mother of the complainant LW.2 due to her ill health and her evidence was closed. Further the prosecution relies on the evidence of

PW.1 coupled with PW.2 and the evidence of PW.4 Doctor who treated the injured as well as investigation officer PW.5 and PW.6 and submits that the prosecution has proved the ingredients for the said offences and thereby prays the Hon’ble Court to convict the accused A1 to A4.

17. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused argued that as per the version of PW.1, PW.2, the accused A1 to A4 came and beat the

PW.1 continuously for a period of 15 minutes due to which he sustained 60 injuries on his back, ribs and all over his body. The Doctor who has been examined as PW.4 and who has issued wound certificate i.e., Ex.P3 has clearly admitted that except the injuries which has been mentioned by him 8

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

in Ex.P3 there are no other injuries he has found on his clinical examination. Further the learned defence counsel relies on the admission made by PW.5 wherein he stated the specific overt act of each of the accused is not mentioned by PW.1 either in his report or 161 Cr.P.C.

statement. Further probability of occurrence of the offence and beating of the accused against PW.1 is in contradiction with that of the medical evidence. Further he submits that the mother of the complainant who is the eye witness to the scene is not examined is also fatal to the case of prosecution. Therefore the learned counsel submits that there is an admitted fact that on record is that the complainant PW.1 along with PW.2 and his brother-in-law have been convicted by the Hon’ble SC/ST Court basing on the report given by accused A1 and therefore boring grudge against the said accused A1, a false case has been preferred by PW.1 herein. Hence, the learned counsel prays the Hon’ble Court to acquit the accused as they are innocent.

18.However after careful perusal of the evidence as well as arguments advanced on either side, the case of the prosecution in nutshell is that the accused A1 to A4 came to PW.1 and beat him with respect to the ill dispute of hayrick yard, however the said incident witnessed by PW.2 and LW.2 who is mother of PW.1 and thereby PW.3 rescued and intervened in the said galata. However, the admission made by PW.1 as well as PW.2 during the cross examination clearly shows one cannot see and witness what is happening at the scene of offence from the house of complainant as there is another house of Madiga Gorantla in between the house of PW.1 as well as the scene of offence. Thereby probability of treating PW.2 as well as

LW.2 as eye witness to scene is itself doubtful. However, the another independent witness who has been examined as PW.3 did not support the 9

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

version of prosecution and turned hostile. Further it is true that the PW.1 hass not mentioned the specific overt act of each of the accused A1 to A4 against him in his examination. He stated that all the accused beat him with sticks and cart pegs. The investigation officer PW.5 has admitted that he failed to seize any such cart pegs and sticks and he further admitted that except the relatives of PW.1, he failed to examine any other neighbours at the scene of offence who are the independent witness to the occurrence of offence and the non examination of such independent witnesses is fatal to the case of prosecution. Furthermore as admitted by

PW.1 and rightly put forth by the defence counsel that PW.1 has sustained 60 injuries and he has shown his injuries to the doctor who has examined him but the same stands in contradiction with respect to the credibility and genuinity of the wound certificate Ex.P3. As per the version of the doctor during his cross examination PW.4 has clearly reported that except the injuries 1 to 3 he has not observed any other injuries in his clinical examination. This raises a reasonable doubt with respect the probability of occurrence of offence and beating of the accused against PW.1 and also about sustaining 60 injuries as such. Further it is also admitted by PW.1 that one cannot hear the hue and cries from his house from the scene of offence. Therefore the probability of presence of PW.2 as well as LW.2 is not established by the prosecution. Further the another independent witness did not support the version of prosecution. Another admitted fact to be taken into consideration is that, the prosecution failed to establish the ill motive and the mens-rea for the accused to come and beat PW.1.

However, on the other hand, as per the version of the defence is that PW.1 has foisted a false case and given a false report as an act of vengeance as

PW.1 was convicted basing on the report given by A1. Hence the motive

for accused to attack PW.1 is not established by prosecution. Henceforth,

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

there are no corroboration of independent eye witness with that of PW.1 and the injuries sustained by PW.1 stands in contradiction with that of the medical evidence and therefore the investigation officer has also not supported the version of prosecution wherein he failed to examine independent eye witnesses from the scene of offence and also failed to seize any material objects or the weapons which are used by A1 to A4 in order to beat PW.1 and these are fatal to the case of prosecution.

Henceforth, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of accused A1 to A4 for committing the said offence against PW.1. Therefore all the accused A1 to A4 are entitled for benefit of doubt and thereby they are acquitted.

Accordingly, the point is answered.

19. In the result, the accused A1 to A4 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sec.324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and thereby they are acquitted under Sec.248(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judgment of this court and the same shall be in force for a period of six months from the date of this order dt.13-7-2018.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, after transcription, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court, this the 13 th day of July, 2018.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1: B.B.Narendra. -None-

P.W.2: B.B.Pandurangadu.

P.W.3: B.U.Dubbanna.

P.W.4: Dr.A.Nagaraju.

P.W.5: S.Nazeer Ahammed, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police.

P.W.6: S.Nagendra, Sub-Inspector of Police.

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P.1: Report given by PW.1.

Ex.P.2: Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3.

Ex.P.3: Wound Certificate of PW.1 issued by PW.4.

Ex.P.4: F.I.R. in Cr.No.154/2014.

Ex.P.5: Rough sketch.

FOR DEFENCE: -Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-Nil-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.551 of 2014.

C ALENDAR AND J UDGMENT

I N THE COURT OF THE J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS :: D HONE .

C ALENDAR C ASE N O .551/2014

DATEOFOFFENCE.:28-08-2014 DATEOFCOMPLAINT.:28-08-2014 DATEOFAPPREHENSIONOFACCUSED. : 26-09-2014 DATEOFRELEASEONBAIL. :26-09-2014 DATEOFCOMMENCEMENTOFTRIAL.:25-01-2017 DATEOFCLOSUREOFTRIAL.:06-07-2018 DATEOFSENTENCEORORDER.:13-07-2018 EXPLANATION.: ---- COMPLAINANT: STATE: REPRESENTEDBYTHE SUB-INSPECTOROF POLICE, VELDURTHY P.S. IN CR.NO.154/2014.

S.NAMEFATHER’SNAMERELIGIONOCCU-RESIDENCEAGE NO PATIONyrs. 1MADIGA KRISHNAVENKATESWARLUHINDUCOOLIE30 YEARS @ KOTESWARA RAO

ALLUGUNDU (V)

2MADIGA SHILPIVENKATESWARHINDUCOOLIE28 YEARS

VELDURTHY (M)

KRISHNA @ SHILPIRAO @

KOTESWARA RAO

3MADIGASIDDANNAHINDUCOOLIE40 YEARS

SREENIVASULU

4MADIGA ASHOKSRINIVASULUHINDUCOOLIE20 YEARS

O FFENCE.: VOLUNTARILYCAUSINGHURTBYDANGEROUSWEAPONSORMEANS.

S ECTION OF L AW: SEC.324 R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE.

F INDING: FOUNDNOTGUILTY.

S ENTENCE OR ORDER: In the result, the accused A1 to A4 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sec.324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and thereby they are acquitted under Sec.248(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

The bail bonds of the accused A1 to A4 if any, shall be treated as bail bonds u/sec 437 (A) of Cr.P.C. to appear before the Higher Court as and when such court requires in respect of any appeal or petition against the Judgment of this court and the same shall be in force for a period of six months from the date of this order dt.13-7-2018.

Sd/- Asifa Sulthana

J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS ,

D HONE .

Copy submitted to The Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate - Cum –

Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool.

Dis.No.

CC/253/2017 Acquitted

Sub Inspector of police vs Ramadasu

12 Jul 2018

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

In the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Present:- Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone.

Thursday, the 12th day of July, 2018.

C.C.No.253 of 2017.

State: Represented by Sub-Inspector of Police, Dhone Town P.S. … Complainant.

Versus

M.Ramadasu, age 37 years, S/o M.Ramanjaneyulu, H.No.3-119, Ungaranigundla Village, Dhone Mandal, Driver of Tata Indica Car Bearing No.AP 21 L 7573.… Accused.

This case coming on 10-7-2018 before me for hearing in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant/

State and of Sri M.Nagabhushana Reddy and Sri A.Sreedhar, Advocates

for the accused, and having stood over for consideration till this day,

this court delivered the following:-

JUDGMENT

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Dhone Town Police Station filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.57 of 2017 for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code.

2. As per the brief averments of the prosecution case:

The defacto complainant/LW.1-K.Sanjeevudu and the deceased

K.Hanumanthu are residents of U.Kothapalli Village, Dhone Mandal and they are the son and father. On 17-2-2017 the complainant and the deceased and his younger father (LW.2) left their village at morning and came over to Dhone Town for marriage. After completion of marriage, the complainant, his younger father (LW.2) were proceeding on the motor cycle of his younger father bearing No.AP 21 BM 1636, while his father (deceased) was proceeding on another motor cycle to 2

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

their village, when they were passing at Y.S.R. statue on NH-44, B.T.

Road at about 14.40 hours. By that time, the accused who is driver of

Tata Indica Car bearing No.AP 21 L 7573 came behind them, drove his car in a rash and negligent manner, with high speed, lost control over the car and dashed the motor cycle of the deceased on its backside and that the deceased got fell down and the accused stopped the car at a little distance. On that the complainant stopped his motor cycle, went to the deceased (his father) and noticed his father had sustained bleeding injury in the middle of the head, also noticed contusion injuries on the hands and also noticed contusion injuries on the body here and there. By that time, the complainant noticed the car number, which is of Tata Indica bearing number as AP 21 L 7573 and ascertained the name of the accused as M.Ramadasu, S/o

Ramanjaneyulu, Ungaranigundla Village, Dhone Mandal. Then the complainant shifted his father (deceased) to Government Hospital,

Dhone with the assistance of his younger father (LW.2) in an auto for treatment. Thereby, on due examination, the doctor declared that his father (deceased) died. The motor cycle of the deceased was also damaged in the accident. Later the complainant informed the accident to his relatives and he kept his younger father at his father (deceased) and then gave report. Basing on the report of the complainant, the

Sub-Inspector of Police (LW.9) has registered a case as in Cr.No.57/2017 for the offence under Sec.304-A of IPC of Dhone Town Police Station and thereby after due process of completion of investigation and issuance of Post Mortem Examination report of the deceased, Motor

Vehicle Inspector report and inquest panchanama the Sub-Inspector of

Police (LW.9) has filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Sec.304-A IPC. Hence, the charge sheet.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

3.After filing of the charge sheet, the case was taken on file and cognizance was taken for the offence u/sec.304-A of Indian Penal Code against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, copies of the case documents were furnished as contemplated u/sec 207 of Code of Criminal

Procedure.

5. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried when the accusation is explained to the accused by means of examination

U/Sec.251 Cr.P.C. for the offence U/Sec.304-A of I.P.C.

6. The prosecution has examined PW.1 to PW.4 and got marked

Ex.P1 to Ex.P5. The remaining witnesses were given up by the prosecution as the material witnesses did not support the version of prosecution.

7.As there was no incriminating material against the accused examination u/sec.313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was dispensed with.

8. Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record both in oral and documentary.

9. Now the point for consideration is:-

Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the

accused that he is the rider of the crime vehicle i.e., Tata

Indica car bearing No.AP 21 L 7573 and thereby due to his rash

and negligent driving resulted in the death of the deceased by

name K.Hanumanthu beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

10.In order to prove the case of prosecution, the prosecution has examined the defacto complainant K.Sanjeevudu who is the son of the 4

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

deceased and also eye witness to the incident as PW.1 and he reported that on dt.17-2-2017 he along with his deceased father came to Dhone

Town to attend marriage. After completion of marriage while he and

LW.2 were proceeding on one motor cycle and his deceased father was also proceeding on another motor cycle and when they reached near

YSR statue on NH-44 road at about 2.40 p.m., one car bearing No.AP 21

L 7573 came behind them in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motor cycle of his father. As a result his father sustained severe bleeding injuries and they all shifted his father to Government Hospital,

Dhone. Thereby after examination the doctor declared his father has died. He further stated that he do not know the driver of the crime vehicle, he did not give any report to the police. Except to the marking of Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, no incriminating material against accused could be elicited in his evidence. However, the brother of the deceased was examined as PW.2 and he also corroborated the version of PW.1 and stated that on 17-2-2017 he along with his deceased brother and PW.1 came to Dhone Town to attend marriage. After completion of marriage he and PW.1 were proceeding on one motor cycle and his deceased brother was also proceeding on another motor cycle and when they reached near YSR statue on NH-44 road at about 2.40 p.m., one car bearing NO.AP 21 L 7573 came behind them in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motor cycle of his brother. As a result his brother sustained severe bleeding injuries and they all shifted him to

Government Hospital, Dhone. Therein after examination the doctor declared his brother as died. During his cross examination, except to the marking of Ex.P3 nothing could be elicited against the accused in his evidence. However, the wife of the deceased was examined as

PW.3 and she also corroborated the version of PW.1 and stated that she came to know about the accident of the deceased and stated that she 5

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

do not know the accused in the present case and she do not know who was driver of the said crime vehicle. Therefore, except to the marking of Ex.P4 nothing could be elicited in her evidence. Furthermore, the prosecution examined PW.4 who was one of the inquest panchayathdars who attended inquest panchanama over the dead body of the deceased and he stated that the deceased died due to a road accident. Therefore, the said inquest panchanama was marked as

Ex.P5. However, in the light of above evidence which is let in, the prosecution witnesses did not support the case of prosecution and none of the witness could identify the accused as driver of the crime vehicle. Furthermore, though the prosecution established the death of the deceased as in road accident but failed to establish the connecting link that the accused herein is the driver of the said crime vehicle bearing No.AP 21 L 7573 and due to his rash and negligent driving resulted in death of the deceased. Therefore, the accused is entitled for benefit of doubt and thereby acquitted. Accordingly, the point is answered.

11.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/s.304-A of Indian Penal Code and thereby he is acquitted

U/s.255(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Thebail bonds of the accused shall be treated as bail bonds as u/s 437 (A) of Cr.P.C. to appear before the Higher Court as and when such court requires in respect of any appeal or petition against the judgment of this court and the same shall be in force for a period of six months from 12-07-2018.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, this the 12th day of July, 2018.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Dhone.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

P.W.1: K.Sanjeevudu. -None-

P.W.2: K.Ramanjaneyulu.

P.W.3: K.Lakshmi Devi.

P.W.4: M.Venkatesh.

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P.1: Signature of PW.1 on the Report.-NIL-

Ex.P.2: Section 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of P.W.1.

Ex.P.3: Section 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of P.W.2.

Ex.P.4: Section 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of P.W.3.

Ex.P.5: Inquest Report.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

-NIL-

J.M.F.C., Dhone.

JMFC, DHONE. C.C.No.253 of 2017.

C ALENDAR AND J UDGMENT

I N THE COURT OF THE J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF FIRST C LASS :: DHONE .

C ALENDAR C ASE N O .253/2017

DATEOFOFFENCE.: 17-02-2017 DATEOFCOMPLAINT.: 17-02-2017 DATEOFAPPREHENSIONOFACCUSED : 18-02-2017 DATEOFRELEASEONBAIL.: 18-02-2017 (STATIONBAIL) DATEOFCOMMENCEMENTOFTRIAL.: 10-07-2018 DATEOFCLOSUREOFTRIAL.: 10-07-2018 DATEOFSENTENCEORORDER.: 12-07-2018 EXPLANATION.: ----

COMPLAINANT: STATE: REPRESENTEDBYTHE SUB-INSPECTOROF POLICE, DHONE TOWN P.S. IN CR.NO.57/2017.

S.NAMEFATHER’SNAMERELIGIONOCCU-RESIDENCEAGE NO PATIONyrs. M.RAMADASUM.RAMANJANEYULUHINDUDRIVERUNGARANIGUNDLA (V)37

DHONE MANDAL

YEARS

O FFENCE.: CAUSINGDEATHBYNEGLIGENCE. S ECTION OF L AW: SEC.304-A OF IPC.

F INDING: Found not guilty.

S ENTENCE OR ORDER: INTHERESULT, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/s.304-A of Indian Penal Code and thereby he is acquitted U/s.255(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

The bail bonds of the accused shall be treated as bail bonds as u/s 437 (A) of Cr.P.C. to appear before the Higher Court as and when such court requires in respect of any appeal or petition against the judgment of this court and the same shall be in force for a period of six months from 12-07-2018.

J UDICIAL M AGISTRATE OF F IRST C LASS ,

DHONE .

Copy submitted to The Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate - Cum –

Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool.

Dis.No.

Order Record 1,586 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/251/2016	S.M.M.Hussain, vs Vs1. S.Narasimha Reddy and 5 others.	15 Apr 2020	copy of judgement	Acquitted
PRC/12/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Balija Ala Venkataramana @ Ramana	23 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
PRC/9/2019	Inspector of police vs Chiruthala Swamulu	20 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
PRC/3/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Golla Gumma Ramesh Babu	18 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
PRC/22/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Kamma Molakala Ayyappa	16 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
CC/32/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Avula Nagaiah	13 Mar 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/494/2015	Shaik Hussain Vali vs V.Raja Gopal	13 Mar 2020	copy of judgement	—
PRC/20/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Thathireddy Subba Reddy	13 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
PRC/24/2016	Madiga Kommu Maremma vs Vs1. Golla Bala Maddaiah and 5 others	13 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
MC/12/2017	Bo Reddy Rajitha vs Vs	12 Mar 2020	copy of judgement	—
PRC/23/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Harijana Arjun	12 Mar 2020	copy of order	—
DVC/3/2017	B.Saraswathi vs M.Ramanjineyulu	10 Mar 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/885/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Rodda Rama Krishna@Ramu@Lodda Ramu@Nese Ramu	06 Mar 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/850/2018	Inspector of Police vs Kakani Sambashiva Rao @ Samba	05 Mar 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/246/2014	CHENCALA MENI NAGESESHULU vs BAKKA SURI	28 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/368/2018	Sub Inspector of Police vs Madiga Ramalakshmanna	27 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/796/2014	S.PRAKASH BABU vs Vs1. M.SRINIVASULU AND 4 OTHERS	20 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/1174/2018	Sub Inspector of police vs Ediga Yashodamma and 8 others	20 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/160/2016	Nayakanti Anil KUmar vs Boya Medagattu Chinna Venkata Ramudu	19 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/778/2015	M.Chennaiah vs Vs1. Madiga Chinna and 3 others	19 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/200/2014	VADDE SRINIVASULU vs Vs1. GOLLA SREERAMULU AND THREE OTHERS	14 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/442/2015	Kothagolla Sriramulu vs Vs1. Vadde Lakshmana swamy and four others	14 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
PRC/13/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Vadde Mahesh	14 Feb 2020	copy of order	—
CC/894/2015	Vunnam Gayathri vs Vs1.Boya Madhu and another	11 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/546/2016	Besta krishnamurthy vs M.Gnaneswar	10 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/844/2018	Sub Inspector of Police vs Dudekula Masthan	07 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/793/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Kuruva Kupendra	05 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
PRC/17/2019	Inspector of police vs Singa Rama Subbaiah	05 Feb 2020	copy of order	—
CC/691/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Boya Beedugalla Shivudu	03 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/817/2017	LE.Murali Goud vs G.Sreeramulu	03 Feb 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/562/2016	Vadde Parvathi vs Harijana Nadipi Yellaiah	31 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/870/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Konikanti Pulli Sekhar Reddy	31 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/885/2016	Inspector of Police vs Challa Srinivasulu	31 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/996/2015	A.Bla Ganeshaiah vs Rasipogula Surendra	31 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/223/2016	Boya Venkatesh vs Muthyala Thomas	30 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/586/2015	G.Vishnuvardhana Reddy vs Vs1. Musali Rama Chandra rao and 5 others	30 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/829/2018	Inspector of Police vs Kakani Sambashiva Rao @ Samba	30 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/830/2018	Inspector of Police vs Kakani Sambashiva RAo @ Samba	30 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
MC/20/2018	Boya Mandla Aruna vs Boya Mandla Nanda Kumar	30 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/418/2019	Inspector of police vs D.Raja Sekhar	29 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/489/2015	Shaik Rasoolbee vs Shaik Mohammed rafi	29 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/834/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Ala Pullaiah	29 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/253/2016	K.Venkateswara Reddy vs L.Purusotham Reddy	28 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
DVC/1/2019	Golla Boina Koteswari vs Golla Boini krishna	28 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/280/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Boya Rangapuram Mallikarjuna	27 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/601/2016	B.Murali vs Vs1. Ediga Seshanna and Siddaiah	27 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/338/2018	Sub Inspector of Police vs Paladhi Vijaya Kumar	24 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/556/2016	Boya Krishnaveni vs Yerukali Papanna	23 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/378/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Boya Sekhar	22 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/402/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Kuruva Kavali Surendra	22 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/240/2016	T.Sujatha vs Vs1.Y.B.Lakshmaiah and 5 others	21 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/391/2017	Sub Inspector of police vs Dudekula Raju	20 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/296/2016	T,Rangaswamy vs Vs1. D.Lal Basha and another	17 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/335/2018	Asst., Director of mines and Geology, T.Nagaraju vs Shiva Lakshmi Minerals, R.Rama Mohan Reddy,	17 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
PRC/45/2018	Inspector of police vs Vemula Laxmi Narayana	17 Jan 2020	copy of order	—
PRC/18/2019	Inspector of police vs V.Madhusudhana Reddy	09 Jan 2020	copy of order	—
PRC/19/2019	Inspector of police vs Remata Manohar Reddy	07 Jan 2020	copy of order	—
CC/970/2018	Sub Inspector of Police vs G.Indiradevi	06 Jan 2020	copy of order	—
CC/600/2018	Boyini Ramakrishna vs CS.Shali Basha	03 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
CC/601/2018	Maddaiah vs CS.Shali Basha	03 Jan 2020	copy of judgement	—
PRC/5/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Rajput Ravi Pratap	03 Jan 2020	copy of order	—
CC/714/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Boya Kokku Madhava Krishna	31 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/706/2015	S.Gousulvara vs Vs1. Buggan Rajendranatha reddy and 13 others	27 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
MC/12/2018	Yerukali Lath vs Vs	27 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/66/2016	Gongalla Varalakshmi vs Vs1. B.Nadipi Rangaswamy and 5 others	20 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/786/2017	K.Chandrasekhar Reddy vs S.Anki Reddy	20 Dec 2019	copy of order	—
CC/900/2019	Inpector of police vs Vadde Shiva Shankar	20 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
MC/10/2019	Ganakala Eswari @ Nalabolu Eswari vs Nalabolu Prasad	20 Dec 2019	copy of order	—
CC/182/2017	Sub-Inspector of police vs Chintala Narayana Reddy	19 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/474/2015	B.Venkateswarlu vs Uppara Maddulety	19 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/161/2016	Boya Daile Sivalakshmi vs Vs1. Harijana Chinna Naganna and 4 others	18 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/809/2015	P.C.2901 K.Maddikerappa vs B.Raavindranatha reddy	18 Dec 2019	copy of order	—
CC/726/2015	Maila Lakshmidevi vs Maila Venkatesh	17 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/54/2019	Sub Inspector of Police vs Jakkala Malikarjuna	12 Dec 2019	copy of order	—
CC/805/2016	Forest Range officer, Dhone vs Vs1.Mangali M.Suresh and Boya Chinna Gopal	12 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/575/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs M.Pavan Kumar	11 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/703/2019	Inspector of police vs Matteddula Pavan Kumar@ Pavan	11 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
PRC/11/2019	Inspector of police vs Muddavaram Maddilet@ Madhu	09 Dec 2019	copy of order	—
CC/60/2014	RASIPOGULA SAROJA vs RASIPOGULA RAJA MOHAN	06 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/293/2016	S.shahanaz vs Vs1. S.Anwar Basha and 4 others	04 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/1134/2016	Sub Inspector of Police vs Eddupenta Saddam Hussain @ Saddam	04 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/156/2016	B.Madhusudhana Naik vs Kalla Sreenath Reddy.	03 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/398/2017	DV.Ranga Reddy vs Goplal Goud.E	03 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/805/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Boya Naga Surendra	03 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/76/2018	Inspector of Police vs Muddavaram Vijay Kumar	02 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/704/2019	Inspector of Police vs K.Ramudu	02 Dec 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/812/2018	Sub Inspector of Police vs Mutyala Rangaswamy	22 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/216/2018	Assistant proh and Excise Supdt, Nandyal vs V.Venkateshwarlu	20 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/36/2016	harijana Theliki Lakshmidevi vs K.Sreenath Reddy	19 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/1027/2016	M.Darma Reddy vs Gorantla Mallaiah	18 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/168/2019	M.Rajeswara Reddy vs Jaya Prakash	15 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/285/2014	DR. RAMA DEVI vs Vs1. SYED NASIRUDDIN AND TARKI SALEEM	14 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/693/2017	Sub Inspector of Police vs Uppari Anjaneyulu	14 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/282/2019	Sub Inspector of police vs Rasipogula Pasala Pedda Mallappa	13 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/673/2016	VSeshanna vs Vs1. Mangali Murali and 3 others	13 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/91/2016	K.Pushpavathi vs Vs1. K.Ramanaiah and 3 others	12 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/541/2014	KURUVA LALITHAMMA vs Vs1. BOYA VENKATESH AND 4 OTHERS	11 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
CC/554/2014	BOYA SAVITHRI vs Vs1. KURUVA KARIVEMULA LINGANNA AND 4 OTHERS	11 Nov 2019	copy of judgement	—
PRC/40/2017	Inspector of Police vs TE.Keshanna Goud	11 Nov 2019	copy of order	—
CC/378/2014	DUBBA SANJEEVA vs GANGA SANTHOSH	06 Nov 2019	copy of order	—

Showing 100 of 1,586 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2020		1
Mar 2020		13
Feb 2020		16
Jan 2020		36
Dec 2019		29
Nov 2019		21
Oct 2019		25
Sep 2019		33
Aug 2019		28
Jul 2019		34
Jun 2019		30
May 2019		28

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana handled?

Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana has handled 1614 court orders since 2017 at Prl JCJ Court Dhone. The average disposal rate is 112 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana hear?

Based on available records, Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Original Suits) at Prl JCJ Court Dhone.

Where is Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana currently posted?

Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana is posted as Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone at Prl JCJ Court Dhone, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana available online?

Yes. 17 judgments by Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana dispose cases?

Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana disposes approximately 112 cases per month, based on 1614 orders handled over their tenure at Prl JCJ Court Dhone.

Since when is Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana serving?

Smt.G.C.Asifa Sulthana has been serving at Prl JCJ Court Dhone since 2017.

Case Types

CC 87%

PRC 9%

MC 2%

DVC 1%

EP 0%

STC 0%

OS 0%

Posting History

Jul 2018 — Jul 2018

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone · 7 orders
Jul 2018 — Apr 2020

Addl.Junior Civil Judge cum JMFC · 1,054 orders
Mar 2018 — Jul 2018

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone · 302 orders
Jul 2017 — Sep 2017

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone · 57 orders
Jul 2017 — Jul 2017

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone
Jul 2017 — Jul 2017

Additional Junior Civil Judge, Dhone
May 2017 — Jul 2017

Additional Junior Civil Judge · 194 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 7

Convicted 3

Other Judges at this Court

Palamanglam Vinodh

Principal Junior Civil Judge

477 orders

Sake Jyothi

Addl.Junior Civil Judge cum JMFC

46 orders

← View all judges at Prl JCJ Court Dhone