Sri G.Yagna Narayana

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka) · Visakapatnam · Andhra Pradesh

Sri G.Yagna Narayana, PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION), is posted at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka), Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. 1,027 court orders on record since 2013. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, MC, PRC cases.

1,027

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/200016/2017 Acquitted

The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kanagala Apparao

28 Apr 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE: AT

YELLAMANCHILLI

Present: Sri. G. Yagnanarayana, M.A., B.L., Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Yellamanchili.

Friday this the 28th day of April, 2017.

C.C.No.16/2017

Between:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili police station. … Complainant And:

Konagala Apparao, s/o Ramunaidu, aged about 57 yrs, H.No.2-63, Navy colony, Kalavalapalli village of Rambilli mandal … Accused

This case coming before me for final hearing on 24-04-2017 in the presence of A.P.P. GR.II for the complainant and of Sri.Y. Rajababu, counsel for the accused having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The charge stands against the accused for the offence u/s 34

(a) of AP Excise Act.

2.The Inspector of Police Excise Yellamanchili police station filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. in Cr.No.77/2016-17.

3.The brief facts of the case of prosecution is as follows:

4.The accused Konagala Apparao is resident of Navy colony,

Kalavalapalli village of Rambilli mandal. The offence took place at

Kalavalapalli village of Rambilli mandal which comes under the jurisdiction of this court.

5.On 15-10-2016 at about 06.20 hours while Excise sub-

Inspector of Police Yellamanchili P.S and his staff were conducting rides found the accused at Navy colony, Kalavalapalli village of

Rambilli mandal who was in possession of 12 Nib Bottles without having any authority, then the Excise Sub-Inspector arrested the 2 accused seized case property under cover of occurrence report as no mediator was available later the Excise Sub Inspector register this case in Cr.No.77/2016-17, U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused in judicial remand after receipt of analysis report filed charge sheet against accused.

6.This case was taken on file for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. on appearance of accused case documents given

U/Sec.207 Cr.P.C. later she was examined u/s 239 Cr.P.C in which he denied the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. claim to be tried.

7.In order to prove the case of prosecution prosecution examined Pws.1 and 2 got marked Exs.P1 to P3. and Mos.1 to 3.

Pws.1 and 2 are investigation officers Ex.P1.Occurrence report,

Ex.P2.FIR, Ex.P3 C.E. report. Mos.1 is sample bottle.

8. PW1 deposed before court about arrest of accused on 15-10-2016 at about 06.20 hours the Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili

P.S. were conducting patrolling duties found the accused at Railway station road, Yellamanchili who was in possession of 12 Nib Bottles without any authority, under cover of occurrence report as no mediator was available, later registered this case in Cr.No.77/2016-

17. U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused for Judicial remand after receipt of C.E. Report and after completion of investigation filling of charge sheet etc., facts.

9.After closure of case of prosecution the accused was examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C in which he denied the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 as false reported no defence evidence.

10.Heard arguments from both sides.

11.Now point for determination?

whether prosecution bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

beyond all reasonable doubts or not ?

12.The learned APP contended that prosecution proved this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

from the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 from the material on record she nextly contended all the witnesses deposed cogent and clinching evidence, their evidence is very much corresponding with material on record and also corroborating to each other, though they were cross examined at length nothing was elicited by the counsel for accused hence case against the accused has been proved beyond all reasonable doubt, she pray the court to convict the accused according to law.

13.Whereas counsel for accused contended that prosecution failed to prove this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34

Kalavalapalli village of Rambilli mandal where this offense alleged to have been taken place. He further contended no sketch of place of offense was prepared and no notices were given to persons who were called as mediators and no case property also produced except sample bottles, this is false case filed against accused for statistical purpose, the case against accused has not been proved beyond all reasonable doubts pray the court to acquit the accused in the interest of justice.

14.Adverting to the above said contentions of both parties on careful perusal the material on record and evidence of Pws.1 and 2 this court found as rightly contended by APP the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 are very much corresponding with material on record and also corroborating.

15.However basing on the above said contention of counsel for accused on further scrutiny the material on record and evidence of

PW.1 this court found following:- (A)As rightly contended by counsel for accused the place of arrest is at Navy colony, Kalavalapalli village of Rambilli mandal but the investigation officer Pws.1 and 2 admittedly failed to secure mediators for the arrest of accused and seizure of case property.

(B)It is also nextly found by this court though the investigation officer deposed that no person came forwarded to act as mediator but

Pws.1 and 2 admitted that he cant say names and designations of persons who were called by them to act as mediators, he also admitted that he did not give notices to the persons who were called by them.

(C)It is also nextly found by this court, as rightly contended by counsel for accused the investigation officer admittedly failed to prepare rough sketch of scene of offense where this alleged offense taken place, and also not produced seized case property before this court except sample bottle.

16. All the above said infirmities appearing in the case of prosecution are found fatal thereby prosecution failed to bring home 5 the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence accused is given benefit of doubt.

17.In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence he is acquitted under sec.248 (1)

Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The MO.1 is sample bottle shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to personal assistant, corrected and pronounced by

me in open court, this the 28th day of April, 2017.

Sd/-G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Appendix of evidence No. Of witnesses examined on behalf of

Prosecution:

P.W.1/ B. Srinivasarao

P.W.2/ B. Chinnababu

Accused: Nil

No. of Exhibits marked on behalf of:

Prosecution:

Ex.P1: 15-10-2016 : Occurrence report.

Ex.P2: 15-10-2016 : FIR.

Ex.P3: 17-11-2016 : C.E Report.

Accused:

-Nil-

Material objects

MO.1 is Sample bottle.

Sd/-G. Yagnanarayana

AJFCM/Yellamanchili.

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

(for use in the cases where there is only one or more accused persons) Visakhapatnam district, calendar of cases tried by the Addl. Judicial

Ist Class Magistrate’s Court, Yellamanchili.

1.Date of offence: 15-10-2016 2.Report or complaint: 15-10-2016 3.Apprehension of accused : 14-02-2016 4.Release on bail: 15-10-2016

5. Commencement of trial: 09-03-2017 6.Close of trial: 09-03-2017 7.Sentence or Order: 28-04-2017 8.Explanation of delay: No delay 9.Judgment No.: C.C.16/2017

10. Name of the Complainant:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili police station.

11. Name of the accused,:

Konagala Apparao, s/o Ramunaidu, aged about 57 yrs, H.No.2-63, Navy colony, Kalavalapalli village of Rambilli mandal

12. Offence : u/s 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act. (Having possession Liquor without any Authority)

13. Finding: Not guilty

14. Sentence:

In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence he is acquitted under sec. 248 (1)

Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The Mo.1 is sample bottles shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Sd/-G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Copy to the Hon’ble Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief- Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

CC/200010/2017 Acquitted

The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Dhammu Ramanamma

02 May 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE: AT

YELLAMANCHILLI

Present: Sri. G. Yagnanarayana, M.A., B.L., Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Yellamanchili.

Tuesday this the 02nd day of May, 2017.

C.C.No.10/2017

Between:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili police station. … Complainant And:

Dhammu Ramanamma, w/o late Apparao, aged about 40 yrs, Dimili Road, Yellamanchili village and mandal. … Accused

This case coming before me for final hearing on 01-05-2017 in the presence of A.P.P. GR.II for the complainant and of Sri.P.S.R.C.P. Patnaik, counsel for the accused having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The charge stands against the accused for the offence u/s 34

(a) of AP Excise Act.

2.The Inspector of Police Excise Yellamanchili police station filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. in Cr.No.70/2016-17.

3.The brief facts of the case of prosecution is as follows:

4.The accused Dhammu Ramanamma is resident of Dimili Road,

Yellamanchili village and mandal. The offence took place at Dimili

Road, Yellamanchili village and mandal which comes under the jurisdiction of this court.

5.On 02-10-2016 at about 12.00 hours the Excise task force

Anakapalli were conducting rides found the accused at Dimili Road,

Yellamanchili village and mandal who was in possession of 7 Nib

Bottles without having any authority, then the accused was arrested seized case property under cover of occurrence report as no 2 mediator was available later register this case in Cr.No.70/2016-17,

U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused in judicial remand after receipt of analysis report and filed charge sheet against accused.

6.This case was taken on file for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. on appearance of accused case documents given

U/Sec.207 Cr.P.C. later she was examined u/s 239 Cr.P.C in which she denied the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. claim to be tried.

7.In order to prove the case of prosecution prosecution examined Pws.1 and 2 got marked Exs.P1 to P3. and Mos.1 to 3.

Pws.1 and 2 are investigation officers Ex.P1.Occurrence report,

Ex.P2.FIR, Ex.P3 C.E. report. Mos.1 to 7 are sample bottles.

8. PW1 deposed before court about arrest of accused on 02-10-2016 at about 12.00 hours the Excise task force Anakapalli were conducting rides found the accused at Dimili Road,

Yellamanchili village and mandal who was in possession of 7 Nib

Bottles without any authority, under cover of occurrence report as no mediator was available, later registered this case in Cr.No.70/2016-

17. U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused for Judicial remand after receipt of C.E. Report and after completion of investigation filling of charge sheet etc., facts.

9.After closure of case of prosecution the accused was examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C in which he denied the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 as false reported no defence evidence.

10.Heard arguments from both sides.

11.Now point for determination?

whether prosecution bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

beyond all reasonable doubts or not ?

12.The learned APP contended that prosecution proved this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

13.Whereas counsel for accused contended that prosecution failed to prove this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34

Yellamanchili village and mandal where this offense alleged to have been taken place. He further contended no sketch of place of offense was prepared and no notices were given to persons who were called as mediators and no case property also produced except sample bottles, this is false case filed against accused for statistical purpose, the case against accused has not been proved beyond all reasonable doubts pray the court to acquit the accused in the interest of justice.

15.However basing on the above said contention of counsel for accused on further scrutiny the material on record and evidence of

PW.1 this court found following:- (A)As rightly contended by counsel for accused the place of arrest is at Dimili Road, Yellamanchili village and mandal but the investigation officer Pws.1 and 2 admittedly failed to secure mediators for the arrest of accused and seizure of case property.

(B)It is also nextly found by this court though the investigation officer deposed that no person came forwarded to act as mediator but

beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence accused is given benefit of doubt.

17.In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence he is acquitted under sec.248 (1)

Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The MO.1 to7 are sample bottles shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to personal assistant, corrected and pronounced by

me in open court, this the 02nd day of May, 2017.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Appendix of evidence No. Of witnesses examined on behalf of

Prosecution:

P.W.1/ B. Srinivasarao

P.W.2/ P. Apparao

Accused: Nil

No. of Exhibits marked on behalf of:

Prosecution:

Ex.P1: 02-10-2016 : Occurrence report.

Ex.P2: 02-10-2016 : FIR.

Ex.P3: 17-11-2016 : C.E Report.

Accused:

-Nil-

Material objects

MO.1 to 7 are Sample bottles.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

AJFCM/Yellamanchili.

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

(for use in the cases where there is only one or more accused persons) Visakhapatnam district, calendar of cases tried by the Addl. Judicial

Ist Class Magistrate’s Court, Yellamanchili.

1.Date of offence: 02-10-2016 2.Report or complaint: 02-10-2016 3.Apprehension of accused : 14-02-2017 4.Release on bail: 02-10-2016

5. Commencement of trial: 09-03-2017 6.Close of trial: 27-04-2017 7.Sentence or Order: 02-05-2017 8.Explanation of delay: No delay 9.Judgment No.: C.C.10/2017

10. Name of the Complainant:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili police station.

11. Name of the accused,:

Dhammu Ramanamma, w/o late Apparao, aged about 40 yrs, Dimili Road, Yellamanchili village and mandal.

12. Offence : u/s 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act. (Having possession Liquor without any Authority)

13. Finding: Not guilty

14. Sentence:

In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence she is acquitted under sec. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The Mo.1 to 7 are sample bottles shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Copy to the Hon’ble Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief- Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

CC/200966/2016 Acquitted

The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Thutta Thrimurthulu

02 May 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE: AT

YELLAMANCHILLI

Present: Sri. G. Yagnanarayana, M.A., B.L., Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Yellamanchili.

Tuesday this the 02nd day of May, 2017.

C.C.No.966/2016

Between:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili police station. … Complainant And:

Thutta Thrimurthulu, s/o late Varahala rao, aged about 44 yrs, Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal … Accused

J U D G M E N T

1.The charge stands against the accused for the offence u/s 34

(a) of AP Excise Act.

2.The Inspector of Police Excise Yellamanchili police station filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. in Cr.No.29/2016-17.

3.The brief facts of the case of prosecution is as follows:

4.The accused Thutta Thrimurthulu is resident of Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal. The offence took place at Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal which comes under the jurisdiction of this court.

5.On 24-05-2016 at about 16.00 hours the Excise Sub-Inspector and enforcement staff were conducting rides found the accused at

Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal who was in possession of 9 Nib Bottles without having any authority, then the accused was arrested seized case property under cover of occurrence report as 2 no mediator was available later register this case in Cr.No.29/2016- 17, U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused in judicial remand after receipt of analysis report filed charge sheet against accused.

6.This case was taken on file for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. on appearance of accused case documents given

U/Sec.207 Cr.P.C. later he was examined u/s 239 Cr.P.C in which he denied the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. claim to be tried.

7.In order to prove the case of prosecution prosecution examined Pws.1 and 2 got marked Exs.P1 to P3. and Mos.1 to 3.

Pws.1 and 2 are investigation officers Ex.P1.Occurrence report,

Ex.P2.FIR, Ex.P3 C.E. report. Mos.1 is sample bottle.

8. PW1 deposed before court about arrest of accused on 24-05-2016 at about 16.00 hours the Excise Sub-Inspector of Police and enforcement staff were conducting rides found the accused at

Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal who was in possession of 9 Nib Bottles without any authority, under cover of occurrence report as no mediator was available, later registered this case in

Cr.No.29/2016-17. U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused for

Judicial remand after receipt of C.E. Report and after completion of investigation filling of charge sheet etc., facts.

9.After closure of case of prosecution the accused was examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C in which he denied the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 as false reported no defence evidence.

10.Heard arguments from both sides.

11.Now point for determination?

3 whether prosecution bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

beyond all reasonable doubts or not ?

12.The learned APP contended that prosecution proved this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

13.Whereas counsel for accused contended that prosecution failed to prove this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34

(a) of AP Excise Act either from the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 from the material on record. He nextly contended the investigation officer failed to secure mediators for arrest of accused and seizure of case property though the place of arrest is part and parcel of Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal where this offense alleged to have been taken place. He further contended no sketch of place of offense was prepared and no notices were given to persons who were called as mediators and no case property also produced except sample bottles, this is false case filed against accused for statistical purpose, the case against accused has not been proved beyond all reasonable doubts pray the court to acquit the accused in the interest of justice.

14.Adverting to the above said contentions of both parties on careful perusal the material on record and evidence of Pws.1 and 2 4 this court found as rightly contended by APP the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 are very much corresponding with material on record and also corroborating.

15.However basing on the above said contention of counsel for accused on further scrutiny the material on record and evidence of

PW.1 this court found following:- (A)As rightly contended by counsel for accused the place of arrest is at Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal but the investigation officer Pws.1 and 2 admittedly failed to secure mediators for the arrest of accused and seizure of case property.

(B)It is also nextly found by this court though the investigation officer deposed that no person came forwarded to act as mediator but

16. All the above said infirmities appearing in the case of prosecution are found fatal thereby prosecution failed to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence accused is given benefit of doubt.

17.In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence he is acquitted under sec.248 (1)

Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The MO.1 is sample bottle shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to personal assistant, corrected and pronounced by

me in open court, this the 02nd day of May, 2017.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Appendix of evidence No. Of witnesses examined on behalf of

Prosecution:

P.W.1/ P. Leelarani

P.W.2/ P. Apparao

Accused: Nil

No. of Exhibits marked on behalf of:

Prosecution:

Ex.P1: 24-05-2016 : Occurrence report.

Ex.P2: 24-05-2016 : FIR.

Ex.P3: 10-06-2016 : C.E Report.

Accused:

-Nil-

Material objects

MO.1 is Sample bottle.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

AJFCM/Yellamanchili.

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

(for use in the cases where there is only one or more accused persons) Visakhapatnam district, calendar of cases tried by the Addl. Judicial

Ist Class Magistrate’s Court, Yellamanchili.

1.Date of offence: 24-05-2016 2.Report or complaint: 24-05-2016 3.Apprehension of accused : 30-11-2016 4.Release on bail: 24-05-2016

5. Commencement of trial: 24-01-2017 6.Close of trial: 27-04-2017 7.Sentence or Order: 02-05-2017 8.Explanation of delay: No delay 9.Judgment No.: C.C.966/2016

10. Name of the Complainant:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Yellamanchili police station.

11. Name of the accused,:

Thutta Thrimurthulu, s/o late Varahala rao, aged about 44 yrs, Dharlapudi village of S. Rayavaram mandal

12. Offence : u/s 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act. (Having possession Liquor without any Authority)

13. Finding: Not guilty

14. Sentence:

In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence he is acquitted under sec. 248 (1)

Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The Mo.1 is sample bottles shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Copy to the Hon’ble Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief- Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

CC/200806/2016 Acquitted

The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Bangari Durga

01 May 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE: AT

YELLAMANCHILLI

Present: Sri. G. Yagnanarayana, M.A., B.L., Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Yellamanchili.

Monday this the 01st day of May, 2017.

C.C.No.806/2016

Between:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Payakaraopeta police station. … Complainant And:

Bangari Durga, w/o Ramachandrarao, aged about 24 yrs, Durga colony, Payakaraopeta mandal … Accused

This case coming before me for final hearing on 28-04-2017 in the presence of A.P.P. GR.II for the complainant and of Sri.Y. Rajababu, counsel for the accused having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The charge stands against the accused for the offence u/s 34

(a) of AP Excise Act.

2.The Inspector of Police Excise Payakaraopeta police station filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of

AP Excise Act. in Cr.No.72/2016-17.

3.The brief facts of the case of prosecution is as follows:

4.The accused Bangari Durga is resident of Durga colony,

Payakaraopeta mandal. The offence took place at her village Durga colony, Payakaraopeta mandal which comes under the jurisdiction of this court.

5.On 29-07-2016 at about 06.30 hours LW3 namely B. Srinivas the Excise Sub-Inspector and his staff were conducting patrolling duties found the accused at her house village Durga colony,

Payakaraopeta mandal who was in possession of 7 Nib Bottles without having any authority, therefore the S.I of police arrested the 2 accused seized case property under cover of occurrence report as no mediator was available later register this case in Cr.No.72/2016-17,

U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused in judicial remand after receipt of analysis report filed charge sheet against accused.

6.This case was taken on file for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP

Excise Act. on appearance of accused case documents given

U/Sec.207 Cr.P.C. later she was examined u/s 239 Cr.P.C in which he denied the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. claim to be tried.

7.In order to prove the case of prosecution prosecution examined Pws.1 and 2 got marked Exs.P1 to P3. and Mos.1 to 3.

Pws.1 and 2 are investigation officers Ex.P1.Occurrence report,

Ex.P2.FIR, Ex.P3 C.E. report. Mos.1 is sample bottle.

8. PW1 deposed before court about arrest of accused on 29-07-2016 at about 06.30 hours the Excise Sub-Inspector of Police and his staff were conducting patrolling duties found the accused at her village Durga colony, Payakaraopeta who was in possession of 7

Nib Bottles without any authority, under cover of occurrence report as no mediator was available, later registered this case in

Cr.No.72/2016-17. U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act sent the accused for

Judicial remand after receipt of C.E. Report and after completion of investigation filling of charge sheet etc., facts.

9.After closure of case of prosecution the accused was examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C in which he denied the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 as false reported no defence evidence.

10.Heard arguments from both sides.

11.Now point for determination?

whether prosecution bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

beyond all reasonable doubts or not ?

12.The learned APP contended that prosecution proved this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34 (a) of AP Excise Act.

13.Whereas counsel for accused contended that prosecution failed to prove this case against the accused for the offence U/Sec.34

Payakaraopeta where this offense alleged to have been taken place.

He further contended no sketch of place of offense was prepared and no notices were given to persons who were called as mediators and no case property also produced except sample bottles, this is false case filed against accused for statistical purpose, the case against accused has not been proved beyond all reasonable doubts pray the court to acquit the accused in the interest of justice.

15.However basing on the above said contention of counsel for accused on further scrutiny the material on record and evidence of

PW.1 this court found following:- (A)As rightly contended by counsel for accused the place of arrest is at Durga colony, Payakaraopeta but the investigation officer

Pws.1 and 2 admittedly failed to secure mediators for the arrest of accused and seizure of case property.

(B)It is also nextly found by this court though the investigation officer deposed that no person came forwarded to act as mediator but

beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence accused is given benefit of doubt.

17.In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence she is acquitted under sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The MO.1 is sample bottle shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to personal assistant, corrected and pronounced by

me in open court, this the 01st day of May, 2017.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Appendix of evidence No. Of witnesses examined on behalf of

Prosecution:

P.W.1/ G. Prasannakumar

P.W.2/ S. Picheswararao

Accused: Nil

No. of Exhibits marked on behalf of:

Prosecution:

Ex.P1: 29-07-2016 : Occurrence report.

Ex.P2: 29-07-2016 : FIR.

Ex.P3: 09-08-2016 : C.E Report.

Accused:

-Nil-

Material objects

MO.1 is Sample bottle.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

AJFCM/Yellamanchili.

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

(for use in the cases where there is only one or more accused persons) Visakhapatnam district, calendar of cases tried by the Addl. Judicial

Ist Class Magistrate’s Court, Payakaraopeta.

1.Date of offence: 29-07-2016 2.Report or complaint: 29-07-2016 3.Apprehension of accused : 31-01-2017 4.Release on bail: 29-07-2016

5. Commencement of trial: 16-02-2017 6.Close of trial: 16-02-2017 7.Sentence or Order: 01-05-2017 8.Explanation of delay: No delay 9.Judgment No.: C.C.806/2016

10. Name of the Complainant:

State represented by the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Payakaraopeta police station.

11. Name of the accused,:

Bangari Durga, w/o Ramachandrarao, aged about 24 yrs, Durga colony, Payakaraopeta mandal

12. Offence : u/s 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act. (Having possession Liquor without any Authority)

13. Finding: Not guilty

14. Sentence:

In the result the accused is found not guilty for the offence p.u.s.34 (a) of AP Excise Act. Hence she is acquitted under sec. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of accused shall stands canceled. The Mo.1 is sample bottles shall destroyed after appeal time is over.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Copy to the Hon’ble Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief- Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

CC/200413/2016 Convicted

The SHO Rambilli Police Station, vs Bahoodur

28 Apr 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE: AT

YELLAMANCHILLI

Present: Sri. G. Yagnanarayana, M.A., B.L., Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Yellamanchili. Friday, the 28th day of April, 2017.

C.C.No .413/16

Between:

State represented by the S.I. of Police, Rambilli police station. …Complainant And:

Bahoodur, s/o Rajendra sing, aged about 30 yrs, Alampur village, Gorakhpur District, Uttarapradesh state.

…Accused

This case coming before me for final hearing on 28-04-2017 in the presence of A.P.P. GR.II for the complainant and the accused herein Bahoodur in person having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

2.The S.I. of Police, Rambilli police station filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No. 48/16 for the offence p.u.s. 447

IPC.

3.The brief facts of the case of prosecution is as follows:

4.The accused Bahoodur is resident of Alampur village,

Gorakhpur District, Uttarapradesh state. The offence took place at

NAOB site of Rambilli mandal which comes under the jurisdiction of this court.

5.On 09-06-2016 at 08-00 a.m the accused Bahoodur trespassed into the NAOB site at Rambilli then LW2 Gudinetla

Srinivasaraju and LW3 Biswajit Konurar security guards caught hold accused handed over to LW4 A. Thimmayya Left-nent of NAOB site

Rambilli later LW1 Mantri Ramu VRO gave report to police.

6.On the report of LW1 Mantri Ramu the SHO Rambilli

P.S registered this case in Cr.No.48/16 for the offence u/s 447 IPC 2 investigated into. During the course of investigation in the presence of mediators seized the following properties no.1 Belt, 2. shirt, 3.

cotton pand, 4. towels-2, 5. tape-1, 6. Empty Matchbox-1, 7. Empty cigarette box – 1, 8. Bangles-3, 9. Rubber band-1, 10. Plastic cards-3,

11. Empty album-1, 12. Small wooden stick-1, 13. Bus tickets (TRS)-2,

14. Idea Sim card (64K) S.NO. 89910735509903924930 H6WD 1509- 1, 15. Taveez with paper scroll -1 under cover of mediator report later sent accused for judicial remand after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the accused.

6.This case was taken on file for the offence u/s 447 IPC.

on appearance of accused case documents given later he was examined u/s 251 Cr.P.C in which admitted the offence voluntarily as accused admitted the guilty voluntarily this court found the accused is liable for punishment u/s 447 IPC hence the accused is convicted u/s 252 Cr.P.C for the offence u/s 447 IPC by sentencing him S.I for 3 months.

7.The accused in judicial remand from 09-06-2016 to till this day i.e on 28-04-2017 hence the remand period of accused u/s 448 Cr.P.C shall be set off

8.The accused who is in judicial remand shall be set at liberty if he is not require in any other case.

10.The unmarked case property item no.1 to 15 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Dictated to the Personal-Assistant, transcribed by me,

corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 28nd day of

April, 2017.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Appendix of evidence No. Of witnesses examined on behalf of

Prosecution:

--Nil--

Accused: Nil No. of Exhibits marked on behalf of:

Prosecution:

--Nil--

Accused:

--Nil--

Material objects:

--Nil--

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

AJFCM/Yellamanchili 4

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

(for use in the cases where there is only one or more accused persons) Visakhapatnam district, calendar of cases tried by the Addl. Judicial

Ist Class Magistrate’s Court, Yellamanchili 1.Date of offence: 09-06-2016 2.Report or complaint: 09-06-2016 3.Apprehension of accused : 26-06-2016 4.Release on bail: ----

5. Commencement of trial: ---- 6.Close of trial: ---- 7.Sentence or Order: 28-04-2017 8.Explanation of delay: No delay 9.Judgment No.: C.C.413/16

10. Name of the Complainant:

State represented by the S.I. of Police, Rambilli police station.

11. Name of the accused, age:

Bahoodur, s/o Rajendra sing, aged about 30 yrs, Alampur village, Gorakhpur District, Uttarapradesh state.

12. Offence : Trespassed

13. Finding: guilty

14. Sentence:

In the result the accused is found guilty for the offence u/s 447 IPC hence he is convicted under sec. 252 (2) Cr.P.C by sentencing him S.I for 3 months. The remand period of accused from 01-06-2016 to till this day, hence it shall be set of u/s 428 Cr.P.C The accused who is in judicial remand shall be set at liberty if he is not required in any other case. The unmarked case property no.1 to 15 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Sd/- G. Yagnanarayana

ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:

YELLAMANCHILLI.

Copy to the Hon’ble Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief- Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

Order Record 1,016 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/200010/2017	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Dhammu Ramanamma	02 May 2017	judgement	Acquitted
CC/200966/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Thutta Thrimurthulu	02 May 2017	judgement	Acquitted
CC/200806/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Bangari Durga	01 May 2017	judgement	Acquitted
CC/200016/2017	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kanagala Apparao	28 Apr 2017	judgement	Acquitted
CC/200413/2016	The SHO Rambilli Police Station, vs Bahoodur	28 Apr 2017	judgement	Convicted
CC/200666/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kakara Demudu	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200672/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Gandhi Appala Raju	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200792/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Torra Varalakshmi	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200795/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Pinapatruni Mangayamma	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200799/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Merugu Raja Rao	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200960/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Erupalli Rambabu	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201003/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Pappu Satyanarayana	28 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200357/2013	SHO PAYAKARAOPETA PS vs MARRA ARJUN	26 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200610/2015	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise P.S., vs Karri Sathibabu, Age 18 Yrs,	26 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200944/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Pakkurthi Nookalamma	25 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200804/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Anasuri Srinu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200807/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Palla Durga	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201037/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201038/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201039/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201040/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201041/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201042/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201043/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201044/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201045/2016	The SHO Atchutapuram Police Station, vs Gandikota Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/201058/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Town Police Station, vs Gondi KOta Pandu @ Shivudu	22 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200493/2013	SHO YELAMANCHILI CIRCLE vs DUBASI KOTI	13 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200982/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Pinapatrjuni Babuji	12 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200266/2015	The SHO Rambilli P.S. vs Kadimi Pentamma	11 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200472/2013	SHO Rambili vs Adigarla Demudu	11 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200483/2012	SHO YELLAMANCHILI RURAL PS vs RAVI NOOTHALA SRINU	11 Apr 2017	judgement	—
MC/200012/2016	Thelu Dhana Lakshmi vs Thelu Durga Prsad	10 Apr 2017	order	—
CC/201006/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Kosetti Patalu	07 Apr 2017	judgement	—
CC/200388/2010	SHO RMB PS vs YERIPALLI SATYAM	06 Apr 2017	judgement	—
MC/200014/2015	Pilli Suneetha vs Pilli Venkata Hari Prasad	04 Apr 2017	order	—
MC/200001/2017	Lalam Kumari vs Lalam Srinu	31 Mar 2017	order	—
CC/200449/2013	The SHO Payakaraopeta P.S. vs Paleti Bhushanam, Age 36 Yrs,	30 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200270/2015	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural P.S. vs Kotipalli Prasadarao	28 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200928/2015	The SHO S.Rayavaram P.S. vs Janapureddy Sathibabu	28 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200560/2014	The S.H.O. Nakkapalli P.S. vs Tumu Srinivasarao	27 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200160/2015	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural P.S. vs Tirupathi Harish	25 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200310/2014	Sub Inspectof of Police, Yellamanchili Rural P.S. vs Gunja Hanumayya	24 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200664/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Pirumalla Lakshmi	24 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/201000/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Karri Doraji	24 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200015/2017	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Eagala Pydamma	22 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200002/2017	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Kunduru Suryavathi	21 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200005/2017	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Kosetti Laxmi	21 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200017/2017	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Chukka Laxmi	21 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200981/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Nagala Achiyya Naidu	21 Mar 2017	judgement	—
DVC/200006/2016	Kanithi Uma Vijaya Lakshmi vs Kanithi Buchachari	21 Mar 2017	order	—
CC/200130/2013	SHO S RAYAVARAM PS vs Samangi Kondalarao and 2 others	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200671/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Merugu Nagaraju	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200946/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Dhone Satyaro	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200951/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kanagala Raju	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200954/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Jalumuri Narasinga Rao	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200964/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Marisa Nookaratnam	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200970/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Appikonda Appala Naidu	20 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200666/2014	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural P.S. vs Barri Krishna Rao	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200789/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Doodi Appalanarsa	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200980/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Karri Adi Babu	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200983/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kandepalli Jogi Naidu	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200994/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Sorangi Raju	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200997/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Malla Veerababu	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200998/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kollati Naga Suryanarayana	18 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200086/2015	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural P.S., vs Bollaram Uppalayya, Age 40 Yrs,	17 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200609/2014	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural P.S., vs Asif Ahammad, Age 43 Yrs,	17 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200040/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise P.S. vs Koreddy Veerababu	16 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200352/2014	The SHO Nakkapalli P.S. vs Rayapureddy Jogi Raju, Age 45 Yrs,	16 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200939/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Merugu Somulamma	16 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200519/2013	SHO NAKKAPALLI PS vs ANUSURI NOOKARAJU	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200788/2016	XXXXX vs XXXXX	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200791/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Dimili Srinu	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200988/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Picheti Rambabu	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200990/2016	2gRfK3tbzhGFcOoISf/7o3fKoDTiSFSC3ji1yepcDVNV2OhL65A+s+N8Nsxad8ql vs XXXXX	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200991/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Dharmireddi Nooka Raju	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200996/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Excise Police Station, vs Kadavala Pydiraju	15 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200476/2012	SHO S RAYAVARAM PS vs KOVVURI SUBBA RAJU AND ANOTHER	13 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200502/2015	Kovvuru Subba Raju vs Tanneru Yerakayya	13 Mar 2017	judgement	—
MC/200021/2014	Yelalti Radha vs Yelati Kishore	10 Mar 2017	order	—
CC/200158/2014	Sub Inspector of Police, Payakaraopeta P.S. vs Geddathi Santosh Kumar	09 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200760/2016	The SHO S Rayavaram Police Station, vs Koribilli Kondayya	08 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200135/2013	Sho Payakaraopeta PS vs Chukka Goppal Reddy	07 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200006/2013	SHO PAYAKARAOPETA PS vs SURLA SOMUNAIDU	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200006/2017	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Karri Suribabu	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200355/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise P.S. vs Karri Apparao	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200361/2015	The SHO Nakkapalli P.S., vs Vysyaraju Chaitanya Raju, Age 29 Yrs,	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200685/2016	The SHO Yellamanchilli Rural P.S. vs Appikonda Appalanaidu	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200686/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural Police Station, vs T.Rama Rao	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200730/2016	The SHO Rambilli Police Station, vs Kodamanchili Suri Apparao	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200749/2016	The SHO Nakkapalli Police Station, vs Prasadula Babbji	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200773/2016	The SHO Rambilli Police Station, vs Lokarapu Apparao	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/201014/2016	The SHO Yellamanchili Rural Police Station, vs Senapathi Sivaji	06 Mar 2017	judgement	—
CC/200007/2017	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Prasadula babji	27 Feb 2017	judgement	—
CC/200809/2016	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise Police Station, vs Dlai Lakshmi	27 Feb 2017	judgement	—
CC/200287/2013	SHO ATCHUTAPURAM PS vs PATCHARI GANESH	22 Feb 2017	judgement	—
CC/200527/2013	SHO YELAMANCHILI TOWN PS vs THAGARAMPUDI RAMU	21 Feb 2017	judgement	—
CC/200347/2012	SHO S.RAYAVARAM PS vs UMMIDI TATA RAO	20 Feb 2017	judgement	—
CC/200296/2012	SHO PAYAKARAOPETA PS vs VANKA MANGAMMA AND 3 OTHERS	17 Feb 2017	judgement	—
CC/200386/2015	The SHO Payakaraopeta Excise P.S. vs Yerrapalli Ramana	17 Feb 2017	judgement	—

Showing 100 of 1,016 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2017		3
Apr 2017		33
Mar 2017		58
Feb 2017		33
Jan 2017		47
Dec 2016		32
Nov 2016		39
Oct 2016		27
Sep 2016		24
Aug 2016		54
Jul 2016		34
Jun 2016		42

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri G.Yagna Narayana handled?

Sri G.Yagna Narayana has handled 1027 court orders since 2013 at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka). The average disposal rate is 91 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri G.Yagna Narayana hear?

Based on available records, Sri G.Yagna Narayana primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka).

Where is Sri G.Yagna Narayana currently posted?

Sri G.Yagna Narayana is posted as PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka), Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Sri G.Yagna Narayana available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri G.Yagna Narayana are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri G.Yagna Narayana dispose cases?

Sri G.Yagna Narayana disposes approximately 91 cases per month, based on 1027 orders handled over their tenure at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka).

Since when is Sri G.Yagna Narayana serving?

Sri G.Yagna Narayana has been serving at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka) since 2013.

Case Types

CC 89%

MC 6%

PRC 4%

DVC 1%

STC 0%

Posting History

Apr 2014 — Apr 2014

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)
May 2013 — May 2017

ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) · 1,027 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 4

Convicted 1

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. P.Vijaya

CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

717 orders

Smt. G. Spandana

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

258 orders

Sri. K.ramesh

ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

38 orders

← View all judges at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka)