Sri G. Venkateswarlu

1 S.C.No.119/2017

IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE :

NARASAPURAM

Present: Sri G.Venkateswarlu, Assistant Sessions Judge, Narasapuram

Thursday, this the 10th day of June, 2021

SESSIONS CASE No.119 OF 2017

(P.R.C.No.6 of 2017 of Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol connected with Crime No.132 of 2016 of Palakol Town Police Station).

Name of complainantThe State: Represented by Inspector of Police, Palakol Town Police Station

Name of the accused1.Kandapu Satyanarayana alias Sathish, S/o.Ramulu, age 25 years, Caste: Srisayana, Gandhi Nagar, Saladivari Thota, Palakol. 

2.KandapuNarayanamma, W/o.Ramulu, Age 52 years, Caste: Srisayana, House wife, Gandhi Nagar, 20th ward, Saladivari Thota, Palakol. (Not Proved) 3.Kapiri Surya Kumari, alias Kumari, W/o.Yedukondala Rao, age 36 years, Caste:Srisayana, Saladivarithota, 20th Ward, Palakol. (Not proved).

The Prosecution conducted byMr. Ch.V.Vamsidhar Additional Public Prosecutor Assistant Sessions 

Judge’s Court, Narasapuram. 

The accused is defended by Sri.M.Venkata Rama Reddy Counsel for the accused

OffenceAbetment of Suicide­punishable under Section 306 IPC.

Taking of Any Dowry – Punishable under Sec.3 of D.P.Act. 

Plea of AccusedFound not guilty

Finding of the JudgeFound not guilty 2 S.C.No.119/2017

Sentence or OrderIn the result, the A1 is not found guilty for the charges under Section 306 I.P.C and Sec.3 of The Dowry Prohibition Act. Hence, A1 is acquitted for the said charges under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. His bail bonds shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months period as per Sec.437­A Cr.P.C. M.O.1­Half sari (Chunni) shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. M.O.1 shall be returned to the committal Court (Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Palakol). The committal Court is directed to destroy M.O.1­Half sari (Chunni) as per the procedure.

This case coming before me on 09.06.2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Ch.V.Vamsidhar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the complainant and of Sri M.Venkata Rama Reddy, Advocate for the accused and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the following: 

J U D G M E N T

The sessions case arises out of the Preliminary Registered Case

No.6/2017 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palakol under

Section 306 I.P.C. which was committed to the Hon’ble Principal Court of

Sessions by virtue of its order dated 12.04.2017 and thereupon it was

assigned sessions case No.119/2017 and made over to this Court as per the proceedings of the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari,

Eluru in Dis.No.2832, dated 26.04.2017 for disposal according to law.

2.The case of the prosecution made out in the charge sheet in brief is that deceased Ravali (aged about 20 years) is the elder daughter of PW.1.

PW.1 is doing electrical work and his wife PW.2 is working in a steel shop 3 S.C.No.119/2017 and their daughter PW.3 is working in a provisions store and the deceased was working in a cloth shop and they eking out their livelihood.

Every day morning all of them leave their house for attending their works and in the after noon they are coming to their home for lunch. Since two years the deceased and A1 are in love and they are talking in the mobiles. The deceased also informed to her parents that A1 promised her that he would marry her. The parents and elders sister of A1 also came to know about their love affair and they also expressed their willingness to perform their marriage. While so, the A1 demanded the deceased to give Rs.2 lakhs as dowry to marry her for which the deceased was vexed on her life. On 20.07.2016 at about 6 pm., when she was alone in the home she committed suicide by hanging to a ceiling fan with her half sari (Chunni) and died on the spot. Subsequently, on the report presented by PW.1 on the next day i.e., on 21.07.2016 at 9.00 am., PW.4 registered the case in Cr.No.132/2016 under Sec.306 and

Sec.3 of Dowry Prohibition and investigated into the case. During the course of investigation on 26.07.2016 he arrested the A1 and sent him for remand. His investigation reveals that the A2 and A3 did not commit the offence. After completion of the investigation he laid charge sheet.

3. On appearance of the accused and on hearing the learned A.P.P., and the learned defence counsel the charges under Section 306 I.P.C.

and Sec.3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act were framed against the A1 under

Section 228 Cr.P.C, read over and explained to him in Telugu for which he denied and claimed to be tried.

4 S.C.No.119/2017

4.The point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution is able to bring home the guilt of the

A1 for the charges under Section 306 I.P.C. and Sec.3 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act beyond reasonable doubt? 

5.During the course of trial, to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.P1 to P13 and M.O.1.

6.After completion of the prosecution evidence, the A1 was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating material appearing in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses against the A1, read over and explained to him in Telugu, for which the A1 denied the same. When the A1 was called upon to enter upon his defence, he reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel. Perused the material record.

8. P O I N T:

 P.W.1/the defacto complainant, PW.2 the wife of PW.1 and PW.3 the daughter of Pws.1 and 2 did not support the case of the prosecution.

The evidence of PW.1 is that he is an electrician. He knows the accused present in the court, who is residing in their (PW.1) street. About five years ago the Palakol Town Police came to their home and obtained his signature on a written report. He is an illiterate, but he can sign. The 5 S.C.No.119/2017 signature shown to him on the report dated 21.07.2016 is of him, but he does not know the contents therein. Ex.P1 is his signature on the report

dated 21.07.2016. The police did not examine him in this case. His

elder daughter Ravali was suffering from stomachache. So she swallowed some tablets and died. The accused is no way concerned with death of his daughter Ravali. The accused never demanded his (PW.1) daughter for dowry.

9. Like wise the evidence of Pws.2 and 3 is also on the same lines as that of PW.1. The evidence of PW.2 is that they did not give any report to the police regarding death of their daughter. The police did not examine her in this case. The accused never promised to marry Ravali and never demanded their (PW.2) daughter for dowry. The evidence of PW.3 is that she knows the accused, who is present in the Court. He is residing in their (PW.3) street. The accused is no way concerned with the death of their (PW.3) sister Ravali. The police did not examine her in this case.

The accused never promised to marry Ravali and never demanded her sister for dowry.

10. The learned A.P.P., treated Pws.1 to 3 as hostile witnesses and cross examined them by obtaining permission from the Court. But nothing useful was elicited in their cross examination to support the case of the prosecution except marking Exs.P2 and P3 their Sec.161 Cr.P.C statements respectively. It is settled law that the statement recorded

U/Sec.161 Cr.P.C is not a substantiative piece of evidence. It can used only to elicit the omissions and contradictions from the evidence of the 6 S.C.No.119/2017 witness when the witness contradicts his/her statement given to the police.

11. The evidence of PW.4, the Investigating Officer is that previously he worked as Inspector of Police, Palakol Town Police Station since 18.12.2014 to 27.04.2017. On 21.07.2016 at 9.00 am., while he was in the police station PW.1 came to the Police Station and presented a written report under Ex.P5. Basing on the said report he registered a case in Cr.No.132/2016 U/Sec.306 IPC and Sec.3 of Dowry Prohibition

Act and issued Ex.P6 FIR. He examined PW.1 and recorded his statement. He went to the scene of offence situated at the house of

PW.1. He examined Pws.2, 3 and Lws.4 and 5 (Mannem Leelavathi,

Nakka vijaya Lakshmi) and recorded their statements. He examined the crime scene and prepared Ex.P7 crime scene observation report. He conducted the inquest over the corpse of the deceased Makka Ravali in the presence of the mediators i.e., Lws.10 to 12 (K.Ravi Shankar,

I.Srinivasa Rao and K.Surya Kumari) and prepared Ex.P8 inquest report.

He also prepared Ex.P9 rough sketch of the scene of offence. He photographed the crime scene with the station camera under Ex.P10 (4 photographs and CD).

12. He further deposed that he seized the half sari (blue and red colour) used by the deceased for hanging under M.O.1. He sent the corpse of the deceased to CHC, Palakol. On 26.07.2016 he arrested the accused at his house and sent him for remand. On 30.07.2016 he received the P.M certificate from LW.9 (Dr.K.Y.N.Varma) under Ex.P11.

7 S.C.No.119/2017

He sent the viscera of the deceased to RFSL., Vijayawada through their

SDPO. Later, he received the RFSL report under Ex.P12. As per Ex.P12 no poisonous substance is found. Subsequently LW.9 gave final opinion basing on RFSL report under Ex.P13. The offence against A2 and A3 was not proved. After completion of the investigation he laid the charge sheet. Pws.1 to 3 stated to him as in Exs.P2 to P4. In his cross examination he denied the suggestions given by the learned defence counsel as to the case of the accused.

13.In view of the evidence of Pws.1 to 3 the material witnesses, the learned APP., has given up Lws.4 to 12 (M.Leelavathi, N.Vijaya

Lakshmi, N.Veera Venkata Rama Rao, P.Ramya, P.Krishna,

Dr.K.Y.N.Varma, CAS., K.Ravi Shankar, I.Srinivasa Rao, K.Surya

Kumari) representing that no purpose will be served even if they are examined, except wasting the precious time of the Court. 

14. As per the record, Lws.4 to 8 are the witnesses to the offence.

LW.9 is Medical Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy over the corpse of the deceased and issued P.M certificate and final opinion after receiving the RFSL report. Lws.10 to 12 are the mediators for crime scene observation report and inquest report. So it is obvious that the evidence of Pws.1 to 3 is not at all helpful to the prosecution case. Basing on the testimony of the prosecution witnesses the criminal liability cannot be fastened on the A1 for the above said charges.

15. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the light of the evidence let in and for the foregoing reasons, it is held that the 8 S.C.No.119/2017 prosecution failed to bring home the guilt of the A1 for the charges under

Sec.306 IPC and Sec.3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, this point is answered accordingly.

16. In the result,theA1 is not found guilty for the charges under

Section 306 I.P.C and Sec.3 of The Dowry Prohibition Act. Hence, A1 is acquitted for the said charges under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. His bail bonds shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months period as per

Sec.437­A Cr.P.C. M.O.1­Half sari (Chunni) shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. M.O.1 shall be returned to the committal Court (Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Palakol). The committal Court is directed to destroy M.O.1­Half sari (Chunni) as per the procedure.

Dictated to Stenographer Grade – II, transcribed by him, corrected

and pronounced by me in open court on this the 10th day of June, 2021.

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE

NARASAPURAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUITON:FOR DEFENCE:

P.W.1 : M.Nageswara RaoNone. P.W.2 : M.Venkata Lakshmi P.W.3 : M.Ramya P.W.4 : K.Rajani Kumar 

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION

Ex.P1/21.07.16/Signature on the report of P.W.1 

Ex.P2/21.07.16/Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.1

Ex.P3/21.07.16/Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.2 

Ex.P4/21.07.16/Scene observation report of P.W.3

Ex.P5/21.07.16/Report of S.I of Police (PW.4)

Ex.P6/21.07.16/F.I.R., of PW.4 

Ex.P7/21.07.16/Scene observation report of PW.4 9 S.C.No.119/2017

Ex.P8/21.07.16/Inquest of PW.4 

Ex.P9/21.07.16/Rough sketch of PW.4

Ex.P10/21.07.16/Photos of PW.4

Ex.P11/29.07.16/Postmortem certificate of PW.4

Ex.P12/18.11.16/R.F.S.L Report of PW.4

Ex.P13/21.07.16/Final Opinion of PW.4.

FOR DEFENCENil.

MATERIAL OBJECTS 

M.O.1 – Half sari (Chunni).

A.S.J., Narasapuram.

10 S.C.No.119/2017

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

Tabular form annexed to the Judgment in Sessions Case No.119/2017 on the file of the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Narasapuram, West Godavari District under Rule 318 of Criminal Rules of Practice.

Sessions Case Number andS.C. No.119/2017

Name of the Sessions CourtAssistantSessionsJudge, Narasapuram.

P.R.C. Number and P.R.C. No.6/2017 Name of the committal CourtJudicial I Class Magistrate’s Court, Palakol.

Crime Number andCrime No.132 of 2016 Name of the Police StationPalakol Town police Station

Name of the complainantState, Sub­Inspector of Police, Palakol Town Police Station

Name and address of the accused1.Kandapu Satyanarayana alias Sathish, S/o.Ramulu, age 25 years, Caste: Srisayana, Gandhi Nagar, Saladivari Thota, Palakol. 

2.KandapuNarayanamma, W/o.Ramulu, Age 52 years, Caste: Srisayana, House wife, Gandhi Nagar, 20th ward, Saladivari Thota, Palakol. (Not Proved) 3.Kapiri Surya Kumari, alias Kumari, W/o.Yedukondala Rao, age 36 years, Caste:Srisayana,Saladivarithota, 20th Ward, Palakol. (Not proved).

Date of offence20.07.2016

Date of complaint21.07.2016

Date of apprehension26.07.2016

Date of release on bail12.04.2017

Section of lawSection 306 I.P.C and Sec.3 of The Dowry Prohibition Act. Date of commencement of trial17.05.2021

Date of closure of trial09.06.2021 11 S.C.No.119/2017

Date of judgment10.06.2021

SentenceIn the result, the A1 is not found guilty for the charges under Section 306 I.P.C and Sec.3 of The Dowry Prohibition Act. Hence, A1 is acquitted for the said charges under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. His bail bonds shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months period as per Sec.437­A Cr.P.C. M.O.1­Half sari (Chunni) shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. M.O.1 shall be returned to the committal Court (Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Palakol). The committal Court is directed to destroy M.O.1­Half sari (Chunni) as per the procedure. 

Explanation for the delayNo avoidable delay

Remarks prescribed under Rule 319 ofNo delay Cr.P.C. with regard to submission ofDiary extract enclosed record by the Committing Magistrate

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE

 NARASAPURAM.

Copies submitted to (1)The Hon'ble Registrar (Judicial) High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi Through The Hon'ble District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru. (2)The Hon'ble District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru (3)The Director of Prosecution, D.No.24­19­12/A, Durgapuram, Vijayawada. Copies to (4)The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Palakol (5)Additional Public prosecutor, Narasapuram (6)The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, Eluru (7)The District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru (8)The Station House Officer, Palakol Town Police Station (9)The Public Prosecutor, West Godavari, Eluru.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NARSAPUR.

Present : Sri G.Venkateswarlu,

Senior Civil Judge, Narsapur

Friday, this the 13th day of August,2021

O.S. No.130/2017

Between:

Yeluri Krishna Rao … Plaintiff

And

Kodavati Adi babu … Defendant

This suit is filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.3,82,333-00 being the

principal and interest due on promissory note dated.15.08.2015 executed by

the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.2,50,000-00 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% p.a. and for costs of the suit.

This suit is coming on this day for hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Karun Kumar,Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant set exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

Plaintiff filed not press memo that the matter was settled out of court.

Heard the counsel for plaintiff through the mobile of Bench Clerk Mr. G.

Pradeep. Suit is dismissed without costs.

Pronounced by me in open Court, this the 13th day of August, 2021.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

NARSAPUR.

No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on either side.

SCJ, NSP

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NARSAPUR.

Present : Sri G.Venkateswarlu,

Senior Civil Judge, Narsapur.

Friday, this the 7th day of May,2021

O.S. No.127/2016

Between:

Kattula Sri Satya Vara Prasad … Plaintiff

And

Meka Srinivasa Rao … Defendant

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of Rs.8,30,400/- and for costs of the suit.

This suit is coming on this day for hearing before me in the presence of Sri N.Srinivasa Rao,Advocate for the plaintiff and Sri K.Soma Sekhar, Advocate for defendant and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

P.W.1 and Plaintiff counsel present. Plaintiff filed F.S.Memo. Heard.

F.S.recorded. Suit is dismissed without costs.

Pronounced by me in open court, this the 7th day of May,2021.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

NARSAPUR.

No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on either side.

SCJ, NSP

In the Court of :Senior CIvil Judge

Case No. :SC/0000119/2017 S.I of Police. Vs Kandapu Satyanarayana alieas Sathish.

Date : 10-06-2021

Accused present. Judgment pronounced (VSJ.,). In the result, the A1 is not found guilty for the charges under Section 306 I.P.C and Sec.3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Hence, A1 is acquitted for the said charges under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. His bail bonds shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months period as per Sec.437-A Cr.P.C. M.O.1-Half sari (Chunni) shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. M.O.1 shall be returned to the committal Court (Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Palakol). The committal Court is directed to destroy M.O.1-Half sari (Chunni) as per the procedure.

In the Court of :Senior CIvil Judge

Case No. :S.O.P/0000001/2021 Nimmakayala Satyanarayana Vs Nil

Date : 12-08-2021

In the result, The Succession OP is allowed without Costs. Succession Certificate is issued infavour of the petitioner declaring that the petitioner is entitled to receive the amount shown in the petition schedule i.e., the amount lying is savings bank account in SBI, Palakol Branch, the share amounts invested in SBI mutual Fund and also the share amounts invested in UTI Fund.