Sri G.Manohara Reddy

1

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

-CUM- SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF OFFENCES AGAINST WOMEN,

PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE

Present : Sri G. Manohara Reddy,

Judge, Family Court – cum – VIII Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge,

FAC - II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole.

Monday, this the 7th day of December, 2020

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 692 / 2020

( In Cr. No.255/2020 of Pamur Police Station )

Between :-

1. Katam Thirupalu (A1) S/o Chinna Malakondaiah, 26 years, R/o Nuchupoda (V), Pamur (M), Prakasam District.

2. Darsi Yedukondalu (A4) S/o Rattaiah, 26 years, R/o Ankalamma Street, Pamur (V) & (M), Prakasam District.

3. Guthi Malyadri (A5) S/o Narasaiah, 24 years, Working in Axis Bank, Nellore Road, Pamur (V) & (M), Prakasam District.

4. Kotapati Naveen Reddy (A9) S/o Venkateswarlu, 22 years, R/o Kothapalli (V), Pamur (M), Prakasam District.

5. Yalamandala @ Shaik Raheem (A13) S/o Badulla, 20 years, R/o Kandukur Road, Pamur (V) & (M),

Prakasam District. .. Petitioners / Accused

AND The State, S.H.O., Pamur Police Station,

Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Ongole... Respondent / Complainant

The above numbered Criminal Miscellaneous Petition presented before me on 04.12.2020 for final hearing in the presence of Sri D.Subba Reddy, Advocate

for Petitioners/Accused and of Additional Public Prosecutor for the State -

Complainant / Respondent, the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the court made the following :-

// O R D E R //

This is a petition filed by the petitioners/A1, A4, A5, A9 & A13 u/s.439 of Cr.P.C. requesting this court to grant bail that they have been falsely implicated in a case registered as Cr. No.255/2020 of Pamur P.S. for the offences publishable u/s.307, 341 r/w.34 of Indian Penal Code and that they have been remanded to judicial custody on 23-11-2020.

2

2.Notice furnished to learned Additional Public Prosecutor and filed counter by the prosecution.

3.POINT : The facts of the case are that, it is a case of attempt to murder and wrongful restrain with common intention by the petitioners herein against one Bandi Ramesh(brother-in-law of the A3 in the crime) and his friends. There are some previous disputes pertain to the marital life of the A3’s sister and her husband(Bandi Ramesh). In this connection, all the accused are with an intention to kill Bandi Ramesh and his friends and the accused are already involved in the crime for the offences punishable u/s.448, 363, 324 r/w.34 IPC of Pamur P.S. In continuation to the above dispute, on 21.11.2020 at about 20.20 hours, when the complainant alongwith Bandi Ramesh proceeding on a motorcycle and when he reached Statue Center, Kandukur, the Accused No.1 pulled the complainant from the motorcycle and beat him with sticks on his head and the other accused who are having sticks and knives, attacked him and tried to stab the complainant and caused bleeding injury. Thus, the police registered a case in Cr. No.255/2020 U/Sec.307, 341 r/w.34 IPC and investigated into.

4.During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer arrested the A1, A4 & A9 on 22.11.2020 and the A5 & A13 on 23.11.2020 and produced before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kanigiri.

5.Heard both sides through Video conference.

6.The learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused submitted that, originally this case was registered under section 324 r/w.34 of IPC only, but at the time of remand of the accused, section of law altered to sec.307 of IPC and the injured was treated as out patient only and he was discharged from the hospital. The learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused further submitted that, the petitioners/Accused are innocent and they are no way concerned with the alleged offence. The learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused further submitted that, the alleged scene of offence is infront of the police station, which is highly doubtful and falsely implicated the accused in this crime and that material part of investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet and requested to enlarge the petitioners/Accused on bail.

7.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the Bail application stating that, the accused are already involved in a major crime of Pamur P.S. and some of the accused are yet to be arrested and investigation is pending to that extent. If the petitioners/Accused are released on bail in this crime, there is every probability that the petitioners may threaten the witnesses and tamper the evidence and requested to dismiss the bail.

3

8.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as the injured is discharged from the hospital, this court is inclined to grant of bail to the petitioners/Accused by imposing condition.

9.In the result, the petition is allowed and the petitioners/A1, A4, A5, A9 & A13 shall be released on bail on their executing personal bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Kanigiri.

The petitioners/A1, A4, A5, A9 & A13 shall not enter into Pamur Village and they shall report before the S.H.O., Ongole I Town P.S. on every Sunday and Wednesday in between 4.00 PM to 7.00 PM, for a period of two months or until further orders.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me, this the 7th day of December, 2020.

Sd/- G. Manohara Reddy

VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, FAC - II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam District at Ongole.

Copy to

1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kanigiri.

2. The Station House Officer, Ongole I Town P.S.

3. The Station House Officer, Pamur P.S.

4. The counsel for the petitioners.

// t..c.f.b.o. //

Chief Administrative Officer II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam District at Ongole.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,

PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE.

Present : Dr.S.Md.Fazulullah, VII Additional Distric & Sessions Judge, Ongole. I/C - VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District.

Friday, this the Thirtieth (30th) day of July, 2021.

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION Nos.516 of 2021 & 517 of 2021

in Crime No.523 of 2021 of Ongole Taluka Police Station.

Crl.M.P.No.516 of 2021:-

Between:

Shaik Akram Ali @ Akram, son of Khajavali, aged 29 years, Resident of Bandlamitta, Ongole, Prakasam District. … Petitioner/A1

A N D

The State, Station House Ofcer, Ongole Taluka Police Station, Rep. by Addl. Public Prosecutor, Ongole. … Respondent/Complainant

Crl.M.P.No.517 of 2021:-

Between:

Punuri Sai Avinash Reddy, son of Chandrasekhara Reddy, Hindu, aged 23 years, Out sourcing employee in Agricultural Department, Resident of Near Sarma College, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. … Petitioner/A2

A N D

The State, Station House Ofcer, Ongole Taluka Police Station, Rep. by Addl. Public Prosecutor, Ongole. … Respondent/Complainant

The above numbered two Criminal Miscellaneous Petition presented before me on this day for fnal hearing in the presence of Sri I.Venkateswarlu, Advocate for the petitioner/A1 in Crl.M.P.No.516 of 2021 and Sri I.Mallikarjuna Reddy, Advocate for the petitioner/A2 in

Crl.M.P.No.517 of 2021 and of learned Additional Public Prosecutor for

the State – Complainant/Respondent in both the applications, the matters having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court made the following:-

// COMMON ORDER //

These two bail applications fled by the petitioners/A1 & A2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., requesting this Court to grant them bail that they 2 have been falsely implicated in a case registered as Cr.No.523 of 2021 of Ongole Taluka Police Station, for the ofences punishable under Sections 436, 427 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and that they have been remanded to judicial custody on 21.07.2021.

2.Notice furnished to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, he opposed the grant of bail.

3.Per contra, the counsel for the petitioners/A1 & A2 requested this

Court to grant bail.

4.Heard through Video Conference.

5.Now the point for consideration is: Whether the petitioners/A1 & A2 are entitled for grant of bail or otherwise?

6.POINT:

This Court has perused the crime records, read the bail application and has given a thoughtful consideration, on such evaluation, it is found that, it is a case of mischief by fre that occurred in the wee hours of 13.07.2021 at Balaji Revenue Colony, Ongole, whereby fve miscreants said to have pelted bottles with petrol on the house of the defacto complainant due to grudge among them in connection with fnancial matters and that in the incident glass of the main door of the house and water tap damaged. Thus, the case.

Anent to the above, the petitioners are in jail from 21.07.2021. In the investigation, the investigating ofcer has examined 13 material witnesses, so also took the assistance of two mediators for preparation of scene observation report, as such, in the investigation, the investigating ofcer has examined 15 material witnesses. There appears disputes between the complainant party and accused party anent to some fscal matters. That is the reason, the complainant has exaggerated the role of the fve accused. But the police on due investigation deleted the names of four suspects and this gives rise to the occasion that the complainant has exaggerated the facts by adding as many suspects as possible due to previous grudges. Now that, considerable investigation is over and all the accused involved in this case nabbed, the case of the petitioners for grant of bail can be considered positively, especially in those circumstances where the detention of the petitioners not necessary for any custodial interrogation and that the petitioners are said to have got permanent abode and solvent sureties and that there is no fight risk. Thus, felt expedient to grant bail to the petitioners for afording them an opportunity to defend their case in the ensuing trial on bail rather in jail. Therefore, found case for grant of bail on certain conditions. Accordingly, the point is answered.

3

7.In the result, both the petitions in Crl.M.P.Nos.516 of 2021 and 517 of 2021 are allowed ordering the release of the petitioners/A1 & A2 on bail, subject to the following conditions:

i) The petitioners/A1 & A2 shall furnish their personal bonds for Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned III-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole.

(ii) The petitioners/A1 & A2 shall appear before the S.H.O., Ongole Taluka Police Station, on every Thursday in between 10.00 AM to 2.00 PM till 30.09.2021 or otherwise ordered by this Court, whichever is earlier.

(iii) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against them so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofcer.

(iv) That in case if the petitioners/A1 & A2 failed to comply with any of the above directions, the police agency are at liberty to fle application for cancellation of bail.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me virtually, this the 30th day of July, 2021.

Sd/- G. Manohara Reddy

VII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Ongole. I/C - VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District. Copy to

1. The III-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole.

2. The SHO, Ongole Taluka Police Station.

3. The counsel for the petitioners.

// t..c.f.b.o. //

Chief Administrative Ofcer

Judge, Family Court – cum -

VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam District at Ongole.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,

PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE.

Present : Dr.S.Md.Fazulullah, VII Additional Distric & Sessions Judge, Ongole. I/C - VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District.

Friday, this the Thirtieth (30th) day of July, 2021.

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION Nos.516 of 2021 & 517 of 2021

in Crime No.523 of 2021 of Ongole Taluka Police Station.

Crl.M.P.No.516 of 2021:-

Between:

Shaik Akram Ali @ Akram, son of Khajavali, aged 29 years, Resident of Bandlamitta, Ongole, Prakasam District. … Petitioner/A1

A N D

The State, Station House Ofcer, Ongole Taluka Police Station, Rep. by Addl. Public Prosecutor, Ongole. … Respondent/Complainant

Crl.M.P.No.517 of 2021:-

Between:

Punuri Sai Avinash Reddy, son of Chandrasekhara Reddy, Hindu, aged 23 years, Out sourcing employee in Agricultural Department, Resident of Near Sarma College, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. … Petitioner/A2

A N D

The State, Station House Ofcer, Ongole Taluka Police Station, Rep. by Addl. Public Prosecutor, Ongole. … Respondent/Complainant

The above numbered two Criminal Miscellaneous Petition presented before me on this day for fnal hearing in the presence of Sri I.Venkateswarlu, Advocate for the petitioner/A1 in Crl.M.P.No.516 of 2021 and Sri I.Mallikarjuna Reddy, Advocate for the petitioner/A2 in

Crl.M.P.No.517 of 2021 and of learned Additional Public Prosecutor for

the State – Complainant/Respondent in both the applications, the matters having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court made the following:-

// COMMON ORDER //

These two bail applications fled by the petitioners/A1 & A2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., requesting this Court to grant them bail that they 2 have been falsely implicated in a case registered as Cr.No.523 of 2021 of Ongole Taluka Police Station, for the ofences punishable under Sections 436, 427 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and that they have been remanded to judicial custody on 21.07.2021.

2.Notice furnished to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, he opposed the grant of bail.

3.Per contra, the counsel for the petitioners/A1 & A2 requested this

Court to grant bail.

4.Heard through Video Conference.

5.Now the point for consideration is: Whether the petitioners/A1 & A2 are entitled for grant of bail or otherwise?

6.POINT:

This Court has perused the crime records, read the bail application and has given a thoughtful consideration, on such evaluation, it is found that, it is a case of mischief by fre that occurred in the wee hours of 13.07.2021 at Balaji Revenue Colony, Ongole, whereby fve miscreants said to have pelted bottles with petrol on the house of the defacto complainant due to grudge among them in connection with fnancial matters and that in the incident glass of the main door of the house and water tap damaged. Thus, the case.

Anent to the above, the petitioners are in jail from 21.07.2021. In the investigation, the investigating ofcer has examined 13 material witnesses, so also took the assistance of two mediators for preparation of scene observation report, as such, in the investigation, the investigating ofcer has examined 15 material witnesses. There appears disputes between the complainant party and accused party anent to some fscal matters. That is the reason, the complainant has exaggerated the role of the fve accused. But the police on due investigation deleted the names of four suspects and this gives rise to the occasion that the complainant has exaggerated the facts by adding as many suspects as possible due to previous grudges. Now that, considerable investigation is over and all the accused involved in this case nabbed, the case of the petitioners for grant of bail can be considered positively, especially in those circumstances where the detention of the petitioners not necessary for any custodial interrogation and that the petitioners are said to have got permanent abode and solvent sureties and that there is no fight risk. Thus, felt expedient to grant bail to the petitioners for afording them an opportunity to defend their case in the ensuing trial on bail rather in jail. Therefore, found case for grant of bail on certain conditions. Accordingly, the point is answered.

3

7.In the result, both the petitions in Crl.M.P.Nos.516 of 2021 and 517 of 2021 are allowed ordering the release of the petitioners/A1 & A2 on bail, subject to the following conditions:

i) The petitioners/A1 & A2 shall furnish their personal bonds for Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned III-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole.

(ii) The petitioners/A1 & A2 shall appear before the S.H.O., Ongole Taluka Police Station, on every Thursday in between 10.00 AM to 2.00 PM till 30.09.2021 or otherwise ordered by this Court, whichever is earlier.

(iii) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against them so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofcer.

(iv) That in case if the petitioners/A1 & A2 failed to comply with any of the above directions, the police agency are at liberty to fle application for cancellation of bail.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me virtually, this the 30th day of July, 2021.

Sd/- G. Manohara Reddy

VII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Ongole. I/C - VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District. Copy to

1. The III-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole.

2. The SHO, Ongole Taluka Police Station.

3. The counsel for the petitioners.

// t..c.f.b.o. //

Chief Administrative Ofcer

Judge, Family Court – cum -

VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam District at Ongole.

1

BEFORE THE II -ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-CUM-SPECIAL

JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF OFFENCES AGAINST WOMEN; PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT

ONGOLE.

Present: Sri G. Manohara Reddy II-Additional District & Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge For Trial of Offences Against Women; Prakasam District, Ongole.

Wednesday, this the 21st day of August, 2019.

Crl.M.P No.772 of 2019

(Cr.No.71/2019 of Kothapatnama Police Station)

Between : Pasupuleti Nagamma, W/o.Late Jaggaiah, Aged 46 years,(A2) R/o.Sri Ram Colony, Ongole, Prakasam District. … Petitioner/A2 A N D The State:SHO Kothapatnam P.S. Rep. By Public Prosecutor, Ongole.… Respondent/Complainant.

The above numbered Criminal Miscellaneous Petition coming on this day for final hearing before me, in the presence of Sri.N.Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the petitioner/Accused, and of Sri.Y.Konda Reddy, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State-Complainant/Respondent, the Court made the following:-

// O R D E R //

1. This, is the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking bail to enlarge the Petitioner/A2 in Cr.No.71/2019 for the offences U/sec.376, 420, 506 & 109 IPC of Kothapatnam Police Station.

2.Notice is given to the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and he opposed the application.

3.The case of the prosecution is that on 12-04-2019 the complainant gave report to police alleging that she is resident of Motumala village and eking out their livelihood by attending coolie works in salt fields, her husband doing Mason works. She had two daughters, among them younger daughter Anusha aged 20 years is studying Nursing in Madhu College of Nursing at Ongole. In view of General Elections on 11-04-2019, she came to their house for casting vote. At about 10-00 they slept in their house at about 12-30 hours she has to go work and found that her younger daughter was missing, then she along with her husband enquired about her daughter, but in vain. Accordingly the complainant reported the matter to police.

4.On the strength of the report of complainant, on 12-04-2019, S.I. of Police Kothpatnam Police station registered the case in Cr.No.71/2019 for the offence Under Woman Missing. During the course of investigation, the complainant further revealed that they traced their daughter at Kallanagar area, Bangalore city and brought her to the Kothapatnam police station on 27-04-2019. Basing on the statement of victim she has fallen into love with Accused No.1, due to that A1 promised her that to marry her by suppressing his marriage. While so, on 11-04- 2019 night at 11-00 P.M., A1 and his friend came to their village by private car by 2 informing the same to her, she boarded the car, went to A1 house, later they along with A1 mother (A2) left Ongole by RTC bus and got down at Tirupathi. On 12-04- 2019 at 10-30 hours, from there, again they left Tirupathi by RTC Bus and reached Bangalore city on the same day evening at 4-00 P.M., they stayed in a room provided by A1 friend at Kallanagar. Later, A1 tied nuptial knot on her neck against her will, forcibly committed rape on her by saying that they are wife and husband. Later, the S.I. of police filed a memo for adding the Sections U/sec.376, 420, 506 & 109 of IPC against the petitioner/A2. The S.I. of Police arrested the petitioner/A2 on 05-08-2019 and sent her to Judicial Custody and since then she is in jail.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 submitted that the Petitioner never committed any offence and he is falsely implicated. The facts of the case does not attract Sec.376, 420, 506 & 109 of IPC. He further submitted that the petitioner is woman and aged 46 years and she is not the prime Accused. The Learned Counsel

for Petitioner further submitted that the investigation is almost all completed and

even if the accused has been released on bail there is no possibility to tamper the evidence.

6.On the other hand the Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation in this case is pending and some more witnesses have to be examined by the investigating Officer.

7.Perused the record, as per the C.D file, the investigating Officer had examined as many as Lws. 1 to 6 and also recorded their statements U/sec. 161 Cr.P.C. The investigating Officer had prepared the scene observation report and rough sketch of scene of offence. It seems that, material part of the investigation has been completed and considering the age of the petitioner/A2 and facts of the case, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/A2 by imposing conditions.

8.In the result, the petition is allowed. The Petitioner/A2 shall be released on bail on her executing bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the II-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Ongole. The petitioner/A2 is directed to co-operate with the investigating Officer as and when his presence is required for the purpose of Investigation. The Petitioner/A2 is further directed to attend before the Kothapatnam Police Station on every Monday between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m for a period of Two (2) months or till filing of charge sheet, which ever is earlier. Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 21st day of August, 2019.

Sd/-.G.Manohara Reddy

II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS

JUDGE-CUM-SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF

OFFENCES AGAINST THE WOMEN,ONGOLE.

Copy to:

1. The II-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Ongole

2. Station House Officer, Ongole Kothapatnam Police Station,

3. Sri.N.Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the petitioner, Ongole.

3 // True copy //

Chief Administrative Ofcer, II-Addl. Dist. & Sessions Court-cum- Spl. Judge for trial of ofence against women Court, Prakasam District, Ongole.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-

VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, PRAKASAM AT ONGOLE.

Present : Sri G.Manohara Reddy

Judge, Family Court – cum - VIII Addl. District Judge

Monday, this the 26th day of July, 2021.

D.O.P.NO. 26/2021

Between :-

Kola Anusha, W/o. China Babu, aged 25 years, Christian, House Wife, R/o. D.No.37-3-46, Samykyatha Nagar, Uracheruvu Village, Ongole, Prakasam District – 523 001. ….Petitioner AND

Kola China Babu, S/o. Yakobu, aged about 28 years, Christian, Coolie, R/o.D.No. 6-452, Jayaprakash Colony, Near Wood Complex, Ongole, Prakasam District – 523 002. …. Respondent

This petition filed by the petitioner under section 10(1)(ix) and (x) of Indian Divorce Act, 1869 prays to pass a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage dt.20.05.2015 of the petitioner and respondent on the ground of desertion, cruelty and for costs of the petition.

This petition coming today before me in the presence of Sri Yadavalli Ramesh, Advocate for petitioner and the respondent appeared in person and when the petition is coming up for mediation for recording settlement agreement, after the matter settled

before Mediation Centre under 24 of Mediation Rules, this court delivered the following :-

// O R D E R //

Settlement Agreement between parties to the petition from Mediation Centre, Ongole, is received and this court is satisfied that the petitioner and the respondent have amicably settled the dispute between petitioner and the respondent and buried the hatchet. I am satisfied that the ANNEXURE-D, dated 23.07.2021 is on the basis of compromise arrived at in the presence of the trained mediator and it appears to be in the interest of petitioner and the respondent declare that both parties agreed to give up all their claims present and future against each other. Both parties agreed that they will not initiate any kind of civil or criminal cases against each other and also against their family members. Both parties agreed to settle the case by way of Decree of Divorce by dissolving their marriage held on 20.05.2015 because there is no possibility for reunion and they are living separately. The petitioner agreed that, she is relinquished her wife status against the respondent. By signing this agreement the parties hereto state that they have no further claims or demands against each other with respect to this case and all disputes and all differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties.

In the result, the petition is allowed in terms of the Settlement Agreement dt.23.07.2021 and the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent on 20.05.2015 is hereby dissolved by granting decree of divorce.

Typed to my dictation to the Typist directly on system, corrected and pronounced, this the 26th day of July, 2021.

Judge, Family Court – cum -

VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

- No Oral or documentary evidence adduced on either side -

Judge, Family Court – cum -

VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-

VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, PRAKASAM AT ONGOLE.

Present : Sri G.Manohara Reddy

Judge, Family Court – cum - VIII Addl. District Judge

Monday, this the 26th day of July, 2021.

D.O.P.NO. 26/2021

Between :-

Kola Anusha, W/o. China Babu, aged 25 years, Christian, House Wife, R/o. D.No.37-3-46, Samykyatha Nagar, Uracheruvu Village, Ongole, Prakasam District – 523 001. ….Petitioner AND

Kola China Babu, S/o. Yakobu, aged about 28 years, Christian, Coolie, R/o.D.No. 6-452, Jayaprakash Colony, Near Wood Complex, Ongole, Prakasam District – 523 002. …. Respondent

This petition filed by the petitioner under section 10(1)(ix) and (x) of Indian Divorce Act, 1869 prays to pass a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage dt.20.05.2015 of the petitioner and respondent on the ground of desertion, cruelty and for costs of the petition.

Petition presented on : 06.02.2021Petition filed on : 12.02.2021

A fixed court fee of Rs.30/- is paid Under Schedule-II, Article-I(iii) of A.P.C.F. and S.V. Act by affixing the C.F. labels.

Cause of action for the petition arose on 20.05.2015 when the marriage was solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent, when the petitioner joined to matrimonial home at Ongole, when the marriage was consummated, when the respondent started harassment against the petitioner, when the respondent necked out the petitioner from the house of the respondent without any fault on the part of the petitioner and when the petitioner tried her level best for conjugal life with the respondent personally and through elders but failed and subsequently at Ongole within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.

This petition coming today before me in the presence of Sri Yadavalli Ramesh, Advocate for petitioner and the respondent appeared in person and upon perusal of material available on record and Annexure-D dt.23.07.2021 and upon considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this court DOTH ORDER AND DECREE :-

i)that the petition be and is hereby allowed by dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent on 20.05.2015 by granting decree of divorce.

ii)that there be no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal of the court, this the 26th day of July, 2021.

Judge, Family Court – cum -

VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole.

Table of Costs - No C.M. & F C. filed on either side -

Judge, Family Court – cum -

VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole.