CCNo.226/2018 1 JMFC, Alamuru
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE(JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ALAMURU.
PRESENT: Sri I.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CIVIL JUDGE(JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
FIRST CLASS, ALAMURU
Dated Thursday, this the 08th day of August, 2024
CALENDAR CASE No.226/2018
( Cr.No.118/2018 of Alamuru Police Station) Between: The State-represented by the Inspector of Police, Mandapeta Circle.… Complainant
AND
1. Muthabathula Lakshman, S/o.Naga Raju, A/19 years, C/SC Mala, Coolie, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
2. Saripella Seshubabu, S/o.Burayya, A/30 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
3. Vemuluri Srinu, S/o.Jhon, A/30 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
4. Kallem Raju, S/o.Kantha Rao, A/25 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
5. Dande Sangayya, S/o.Musalayya, A/50 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
6. Dara Yesu, S/o.Arjuna Rao, A/35 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
7. Kothapalli Katama Raju, S/o.Surayya, A/32 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
8. Siddabathula Veera Venkata Rao, S/o.Chinnayya, A/30 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
9. Gunturi Pusendra Kumar, S/o.Venkanna, A/20 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
10. Kadimi Venkata Rao, S/o.Satyanarayana, A/39 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
CCNo.226/2018 2 JMFC, Alamuru
11. Varasala Sudhakar, S/o.Papayya, A/24 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
12. Dande Yesu, S/o.Musalayya, A/45 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
13. Kallaem Prasad, S/o.Kantharao, A/25 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
14. Gundarapu Murali, S/o.Venkatarao, A/27 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
15. Dande Raju, S/o.Chanti, A/19 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
16. Dande Veera Babu @ Pandu, … A1 to A16 S/o.Sangayya, A/22 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
This case was coming on 02.08.2024 for final hearing before me, in the presence of learned Asst. Public Prosecutor for the State, and of Sri
K.Suneel Kumar, learned counsel for the A1 to A16; upon hearing the arguments of both sides and upon perusing the record and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. The Inspector of Police, Mandapeta Circle filed charge sheet in Crime
No.118/2018 against the A1 to A16 for the offence punishable under
Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The case of prosecution, in brief, is as follows: On 13.05.2016 on the eve of Festival (Jathara) of Goddess Kunthidevi at Narsipudi Village, the LW.1 – Peethala Dora Raju, Sub-Inspector of Police, Alamuru Police
Station and his station staff ASI 1034, HC 2596, and Circle staff ASI.,
HC.2575 were attending bundobust duty on the night of 13.05.2018 at 08.00 p.m., onwards at Narsipudi Village. In the evening of 14.05.2018 at about 06.00 p.m., when the festival procession reached to Lord
Anjaneyaswamy Temple, the persons belongs to Dulla Village who are playing garadi play are disputing with each other, then he and his staff ASI
CCNo.226/2018 3 JMFC, Alamuru
1034, HC2596, rushed to the spot to control the same, the persons, who were playing the Garadi in festival all are suddenly attacked him with common intention deterred him and his staff while discharging his legitimate duties, strained them wrongfully and one person thrown stones towards to cause injury to him, the stone has hit over his fore head, caused bleeding injury to him. Then he and his staff tried to caught hold them, but they scampered among them, they caught hold one person. When questioned about his name and he said his name as A1 herein. The
HC.2509 has recorded his statement.
On 14.05.2018 at about 8.00 p.m., on receipt of the hospital intimation, LW.17 – Ch.Sathibabu, HC.2509 of Alamuru Police Station, visited the Government Hospital, Alamuru, recorded the statement of the complainant/LW.1, returned to police station at 08.30 p.m., registered it as
FIR in Cr.No.118/2018 under Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 IPC of Alamuru
Police Station, submitted the original FIR, together with the statement of the complainant/L.W.1 to the Hon'ble Court besides submitted the copies of the FIR, to all the concerned, informed about the registration of this case to LW.18 – K.Lakshmana Reddy, Inspector of Police, Mandapeta Rural
Police Station conducted investigation in this case, visited the Alamuru
Police Station, collected the copy of FIR, took up investigation in this case.
LW.17 staff handed over the A1 in this case in police station, LW-18 kept under the surveillance of staff of Alamuru Police Station for his safe and surveillance.
During the course of investigation, LW.18 examined the complainant/LW.1 and visited the scene of offence, under the assistance of private lighting, minutely examined the scene of offence before mediators/
L.W.14 – Dura Sudharshana Rao, VRO, Narsipudi and L.W.15 – Tatapudi
Issak, VRA of Narsipudi Village, got drafted detailed scene of offence
before mediators, got drafted detailed scene observation report, seized the
crime weapon Stone in the presence of mediators, under the cover of scene observation report, examined all the direct eye witnesses, independent witnesses, LWs.2 to 11 on 14.05.2018 and later examined
L.W.12 – Korupothu Chanti Babu and L.W.13 – Nerthala Rambabu collected evidence against the accused A1 to A16.
CCNo.226/2018 4 JMFC, Alamuru
LW.15 - Dr Tejeswani, CAS, Government Hospital, Alamuru, who treated the injured/LW.1 issued wound certificate that injured sustained simple injuries in nature.
During the course of investigation, LW.18 arrested the accused A1 on 14.05.2018 at 11.50 p.m., while A2 to A15 on 15.05.2018, A16 on 26.06.2018 and sent them to judicial remand, filed charge sheet in this case. Therefore, the A1 to A16 are liable to be punished under Sections 353, 506 r/w.149 IPC.
3.After perusing the material on record, as prima facie case is made out against the A1 to A16 for the offence under Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of
Indian Penal Code, the case was taken on file against the A1 to A16 for the offence punishable under Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code.
4. On appearance of the A1 to A16, the copies of the case documents furnished on them as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter they were examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under
Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code, for which the A1 to A16 denied the offence and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5.During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 14 and the documents such as Ex.P1 to Ex.P14 and MO.1 got marked. The evidence of L.Ws.11, 13, 15, 16, were given up by the learned APP.
6. After closure of the prosecution side evidence, the A1 to A16 were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and the incriminating material available in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses are read over and explained to the A1 to A16 in their vernacular, for which they denied the same and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.
7.Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the counsels for the A1 to A16. Perused the material available on record. The counsel for the A1 to A16 submitted written arguments.
8. Now the point for consideration is:
Whether the Prosecution has proved the guilt of the A1 to A16
beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence punishable under
Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code?
CCNo.226/2018 5 JMFC, Alamuru
9. P O I N T: The evidence of P.W.1 by name P.Dora Raju, who previously worked as Sub-Inspector of Police, Alamuru Police Station deposed that on 13.05.2018, himself and LWs.9 to 11 namely,
B.Venkateswara Rao, S.Satyanarayana and Rajendra went to SC Peta,
Narsipudi village to addend bandobast duty at Kuntidevi Jatara at 08:00 pm, the said Jatara was going on and on 14.05.2018 at 06:00 pm, the procession of Jatara reached Anjaneya Swamy Temple at Narsipudi center, by that time, an altercation took place in between the garadi people, then, himself, and other staff members were controlling the said altercation, then, the said persons could not conclude and one person pelted one brick piece towards him and he received bleeding injury on his forehead, then, he enquired the details of said person through his staff members and he came to know his name as Muttabattula Lakshman i.e. A1 herein of Dulla
Village. All the accused standing in the dock who attacked them, but he cannot specifically say their names, out of them one person is absent today, on that day in total 16 members attacked them, he can identify the said person who is absent today. Later, LW.9 - B.Venkateswara Rao shifted him to CHC, Alamuru, while he was in hospital, his statement was recorded by LW.17 Ch.Sattibabu, Later, LW.18 K. Lakshmana Reddy,
Inspector of Police Mandapeta Rural Circle, came to hospital and recorded his 161 Cr.P.C, statement. Ex.P1 is Statement. He identified A12, the remaining accused were participated in the offence, but he cannot specifically say their names and he further identified the A1 to A16 as participants in commission of offence.
10.During cross-examination he admitted that he did not state in his
Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement that all the 16 accused were attacked him and that his movement was entered in the GD, the staff were deputed to attend duty on 13.05.2018, the same was entered in the
GD, he did not state in his 161 Cr.P.C, statement as well as the statement given to the police that he can identify the accused persons if I saw them. He further admitted that he can say the shape of brick piece if he see it and that he did not see the brick piece and that the
Inspector of Police did not show the brick piece to him. He further admitted that identification parade of accused was not conducted by the
Inspector of Police and that all the accused are belongs to Dulla village of
CCNo.226/2018 6 JMFC, Alamuru
Kadiyam Mandal, they are not residents of the Jurisdiction of this Court and that on receipt of information relating to the altercation between mass gathering they went to the said place and he cannot say the reason for dispute between the gathering and that after the incident, he went to hospital, and after the discharge he joined duty and that he stated before the Medical Officer that known person beat him and that he did not state the physical features of accused persons before the HC who recorded his statement and Inspector of Police, Mandapeta Rural Circle. The P.W.1 further deposed in his cross-examination that he did not state in his 161 statement that all the 16 accused were attacked him and that the scene of offence is situated in a residential locality and that houses are situated around the scene of offence, but he cannot see their names and that the offence took place in front of the temple and that he does not know whether one mosque is situated adjacent to the scene of offence and CC cameras available at that mosque. He denied the suggestion that the scene of offence road is narrow. He further admitted that stone and brick piece are two different items. He denied the suggestion that he has been seeing the accused persons for the first time in the court hall itself.
11.As seen from the testimony of PW.1, it is evident that though his movement was entered in the GD, the staff were deputed to attend duty on 13.05.2018, the same was entered in the GD, but he did not state in his 161 Cr.P.C. statement as well as statement given to the Police that he can identify the accused persons, but P.W.1 did not place any piece of documentary proof to shows that he was engaged in duty. As seen further, it is evident that either prosecution or P.W.1 did not place any general diary entry of the police station, before this Court to show that the duty details of
P.W.1 and his staff and the alleged attack made by the accused against
P.W.1, had mentioned in it, in order to prove the case against the accused.
12.Coming to the evidences of P.W.2 by name Shaik Mohala, PW.3 by name Purapalaka Govindu, P.W.4 by name Dekkapati Surya Prakasha
Rao, P.W.5 by name Mattati Anjaneylu, P.W.6 by name Kondeti Prabhakar,
P.W.7 by name Undamatla Durga Prasad, P.W.8 by name
KarupothuChantibabu, P.W.9 by name Panthala Veera Venkata Surya
CCNo.226/2018 7 JMFC, Alamuru
Bhagavan, who cited as independent witnesses were turned hostile and not supported the case of the Prosecution. Hence, the learned APP declared them as hostile and cross examined them, but no incriminating evidence was elicited from their mouths, except marking their Section 161
Cr.P.C. statements as Ex.P2 to Ex.P9.
13.Coming to the evidence of P.W.10 by name B.Venkateswara Rao, who previously worked as Asst. Sub-Inspector of Police, Alamuru Police
Station deposed that on 13.05.2018, at 8:00 pm, himself, PW.1, LWs.10 and 11 S.Satyanarayana and Rajendra went to Narsipudi village to attend the bandobast duty at Gontelamma Jatara, and on 14.05.2018 at 06:00 pm, while himself, PW.1, LW.10 and L.W.11 S.Satyaranayana and
Rajendra were present at the said village, noticed a dispute between two committees belongs to Ramachandrapuram and Dulla present in the
Jatara, then, the SI of police interfered and pacifying the matter and one person from the mob pelted a gravel stone on PW.1, and that the PW.1 received bleeding injury on his forehead, then, they caught the said person and he revealed his name as Muttabattula Lakshmanarao i.e. A1 herein, he cannot identify the said person due to the lapse of five years. Later, the
PW.1 was shifted to hospital, he cannot identify the persons who were participated in the offence. The Inspector of Police examined and recorded his statement.
14.During cross-examination he admitted that he stated before
Inspector of Police that a teenmar was arranged with the
Ramachandrapuram people and that an altercation took place and that in the Jatara teenmar people of two groups were present and that one
Muttabattula Lakshman belongs to Ramachandrapuram troop and that the stone is gravel stone and it is large stone and he did not measure the weight of stone and that the incident took place in SC Peta and it is narrow road.
15. On combined reading of P.Ws.1 and 10, either P.W.1 or P.W.10 were not identified the accused who involved in the offence and they did not state even the physical features of the accused persons. The evidence of P.W.10 reveals that he cannot identity the accused persons due to lapse
CCNo.226/2018 8 JMFC, Alamuru
of five years and he cannot identify the persons, who were participated in the offence. The evidence of P.W.1 reveals that the A1 pelted brick piece on him and caused injury and he also admitted that stone and brick piece are two different items, whereas the P.W.10, who accompanied with P.W.1 to attend bandobast duty, admitted during his cross-examination that the stone is gravel stone. Hence, there is discrepancy in their evidences that whether the MO.1 is stone or brick piece. The P.W.1 during his cross- examination denied that the scene of offence road is narrow road, whereas the P.W.10 admitted in his cross-examination that the road at SC Peta is narrow road. Hence, there is discrepancy in the evidences of P.W.1 and
P.W.10 that whether the road is narrow road or not. Hence, the evidence of P.W.10 is not supported the version of P.W.1 is fatal to the case of
Prosecution. Hence, there is a doubt arose in the mind of this Court that really the A1 pelted the stone or brick piece on the P.W.1 and caused bleeding injury to him.
16.Coming to the evidence of P.W.11 by name Dara Skudarshana Rao, who has been working as VRO of Narsipudi Village, deposed that on 18.05.2018 at about 10:00 pm, Inspector of Police, Mandapeta called him,
LW.15 to Anjaneya Swamy Temple Narsipudi, there they observed the scene of offence and the Inspector of Police seized one black metal stone from the scene of offence under the cover of mediator report, they mentioned their detailed observation in the scene observation report,
Ex.P10 is Scene Observation Report dated 14.05.2018, MO.1 is one Black
Metal Stone. During his cross-examination, he admitted that the scene of offence is residential area, but he cannot say the particulars of neighbours of scene of offence. As seen from his testimony, this Court found that his evidence shows only seizure of MO.1 black metal stone and no incriminating evidence against the accused was recorded.
17. Coming to the evidence of P.W.12 by name S.Satyanarayana, who previously worked as Head Constable, Alamuru Police Station deposed that on 13.05.2018, PW.1, PW.10, himself, LW.11 M. Rajendra went to
Narsipudi village to attend bando-bast duty at Kuntidevi festival, on 14.05.2018 at about 06:00 pm, noticed an altercation between
Ramachandrapuram and Dulla garady people at Anjaneya Swamy Temple
CCNo.226/2018 9 JMFC, Alamuru
of Narsipudi, the elders of the said village are pacifying the matter then,
PWs.1, 10, LW.11 M. Rajendra and himself went there and trying to pacifying the matter, meanwhile one person pelted gravel stone towards
PW.1 and that the PW.1 received bleeding injury on his forehead, then, himself, and LW.11 M. Rajendra rushed to that person and caught him, when inquired him about his details he revealed his name as Muttabattula
Lakshmana Rao as A1 herein, later, the PW.1 was shifted to Government
Hospital, Alamuru. He can identify the said person, the witness identified
A1 as the person who pelted stone on PW.1, there was a mob and he cannot identify the remaining persons who were present in the mob.
During his cross-examination he admitted that no identification parade was conducted through the accused. As seen his evidence, when no identification parada was conducted on A1, how the P.W.12 came to conclusion that the A1 pelted stones on P.W.1 and the Prosecution failed to explain the same.
18. Coming to the evidence of P.W.13 by name Ch.Sattibabu, who previously worked as Head Constable of Police, Alamuru Police Station deposed that on 14.05.2018, while he was acting as station in-charge at 07:00 pm, he received hospital intimation from Government Hospital,
Alamuru and that he rushed to the hospital and recorded the statement of
PW.1, then, he returned to PS, and registered the said statement as a case in Cr.No.118/2018 under Sections 332, 352 r/w 149 IPC at 08:30 pm,
Ex.P11 is Hospital Intimation, Ex.P12 is Original FIR, issued copies to concerned officers and submitted originals to Hon’ble Court, further investigation done by LW.18. As seen his evidence about receiving hospital intimation, recording statement of P.W.1 and registration of present case only.
19. Coming to the evidence of P.W.14 by name K.Lakshmana Reddy, who previously worked as Inspector of Police, Alamuru Police Station deposed about took up investigation, visiting scene of offence, observing the scene and seized one metal stone which was used for the commission of offence, got drafted Ex.P10 scene observation report, prepared Ex.P13 rough sketch of the scene and recorded the statements of P.Ws.2 to 7 and 9, 10, 12, arrest of A1 at police station on 14.05.2018 and arrest of A2 to
CCNo.226/2018 10 JMFC, Alamuru
A15 on 15.05.2018 and arrest of A16 on 24.06.2018 and produced them
before the Court for judicial remand. During cross-examination he
admitted that Metal stone and brick are different one and that no photographs were taken with regard to seizure of MO.1 and no identity slips affixed on MO.1 and no identification parade conducted for identification of accused with PW.1 after arrest and that no witnesses furnished with regard to physical features of accused persons before him and that in the statement of PW.1 did not disclose that he was attended the duty on 08:00 pm on the said date of incident.
20.The learned APP vehemently argued that the accused intentionally obstructed the legitimate duties of PW.1 by beating him with brick piece when PW.1 discharging his official duty at the scene of offence and that with the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, the offence against the accused has been proved and as such the accused is liable to be convicted. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused would submits that except the general allegations, the prosecution did not place any supporting material to show that the alleged committed offence under
Sections 332, 353 of Indian Penal Code against P.W.1 by obstructing his legitimate duties and by beating him with brick piece at the scene of offence. He further submits that when the prosecution is failed to place sufficient material before this Court showing that P.W1 and even the
P.Ws.10, 12 were in engaged in discharging their official duties at the scene of offence on the date of alleged incident, in such circumstances, the offence under Sections 332, 353 of Indian Penal Code had not sufficiently been proved against the accused and prayed the Court to acquit the accused on this ground.
21.As stated above, the PWs.1, 10 and 12 are the police witnesses in this case and they are the colleagues working in one particular police station i.e, Alamuru police station as on the date of offence in this case and as stated above the evidence of P.Ws.1 10 and 12 have to be seen with great caution and if their testimonies are perused with such great caution, then certainly there could be no doubt before this Court that they supported with each other as they being colleague police personnel, but in
CCNo.226/2018 11 JMFC, Alamuru
their respective cross examinations, the accused successfully elicited the contradiction from their mouths which hit the case of the Prosecution.
Apart from P.Ws.1, 10 and 12, the Prosecution also examined P.Ws.2 to 9 who said to have witnessed the alleged offence in this case. On careful perusal of the testimonies of PWs.2 to 9, it is evident that they turned hostile towards the Prosecution. The P.Ws.2 to 9 never supported the version of P.W.1 to hold the guilt of the accused persons for the charges leveled against them. The P.W.11 is revenue official and his evidence reveals about seizure of material object. The P.W.13 is Head Constable,
Alamuru Police Station and his evidence reveals about receiving hospital intimation and recording statement of P.W.1. Hence, the Prosecution failed to prove its case by adducing independent and cogent material before this
Court.
22.Therefore, after perusal of the testimonies of P.Ws.1 to 14 and other material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no supporting evidence to bring home the accused persons into offense in this case in order to convict them for the alleged charges, when the independent and cogent and also convincing material is lacking in the case. It is settled principles of law that when the Prosecution failed to place a reliable and convincing evidence before this Court, and when the witnesses who were examined are not supported the case of the
Prosecution, in such circumstances it is not safe to convict the accused for the alleged offence. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, this court is of the considered opinion that the Prosecution is failed to prove that the accused were involved in the offence and caused injuries to the P.W.1 at the scene of offence as alleged and in view of these circumstances, certainly the A1 to A16 are entitled for acquittal.
Hence, the point is answered accordingly.
23. In the result, the A1 to A16 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code and thereby they are acquitted for the same under Section 255(1) of Criminal
Procedure Code. The bail bonds of the A1 to A16 and their sureties shall
CCNo.226/2018 12 JMFC, Alamuru
be in force for a further period of 6 months as contemplated under Section 437-A of Criminal Procedure Code. The MO.1 black metal stone is ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 08 th day of August, 2024.
Sd/-I.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CIVIL JUDGE(JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,
ALAMURU.
Appendix of Evidence &
Witnesses examined
For Prosecution
P.W.1/10.04..2023 :P.Dora Raju.
P.W.2/20.06.2023 :Shaik Mohala.
P.W.3/20.06.2023 :Purapalaka Govindu.
P.W.4/28.06.2023 :Dekkapti Surya.
P.W.5/28.06.2023 :Mattati Anjaneyulu.
P.W.6/:28.06.2023 :Kondeti Prabhakar.
P.W.7/06.07.2023 :Undamatla Durga Prasad.
P.W.8/06.07.2023 :Karupothu Chantibabu.
P.W.9/17.07.2023 :Panthala Veera Venkata Surya Bhagavan.
P.W.10/24.07.2023:B.Venkateswara Rao.
P.W.11/02.08.2023:Dara Sudarshana Rao.
P.W.12/11.08.2023:S.Satyanarayana.
P.W.13/14.08.2023:Ch.Sattibabu.
P.W.14/10.07.2024:K.Lakshmana Reddy.
For Defence: - None -
Exhibits Marked
For Prosecution Ex.P1:Statement of P.W.1 dated 14.05.2018. Ex.P2:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.2. Ex.P3:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.3. Ex.P4:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.4. Ex.P5:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.5. Ex.P6:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.6. Ex.P7:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.7.
CCNo.226/2018 13 JMFC, Alamuru
Ex.P8:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.8. Ex.P9:Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.9. Ex.P10 :Scene observation report dated 14.05.2018. Ex.P11 :Hospital intimation. Ex.P12 :Original FIR. Ex.P13 :Rough sketch. Ex.P14 :Wound certificate.
For Defence: - Nil -
MATERIAL OBJECTS
MO.1 is One black Metal Stone.
Sd/-I.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CJ(JD)/JMFC, Alamuru
CCNo.226/2018 14 JMFC, Alamuru
CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE(JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ALAMURU.
PRESENT: Sri I.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CIVIL JUDGE(JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS, ALAMURU
Dated Thursday, this the 08th day of August, 2024
CALENDAR CASE No.226/2018
( Cr.No.118/2018 of Alamuru Police Station)
1. Date of offence:13.05.2018.
2. Date of Complaint :14.05.2018.
3. Apprehension of Accused:14.05.2018, 15.05.2018, 26.06.2018.
4. Released on Bail : A1 to A15 released on 25.05.2018. A16 released on 26.06.2018.
5. Commencement of Trial :10.04.2023.
6. Close of Trial:18.07.2024.
7. Date of order :08.08.2024.
8. Complainant :The State-represented by the Inspector of Police, Mandapeta Circle.
9. A1 to A16 : 1.Muthabathula Lakshman, S/o.Naga Raju, A/19 years, C/SC Mala, Coolie, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
2.Saripella Seshubabu, S/o.Burayya, A/30 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
3.Vemuluri Srinu, S/o.Jhon, A/30 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
4.Kallem Raju, S/o.Kantha Rao, A/25 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
5.Dande Sangayya, S/o.Musalayya, A/50 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
6.Dara Yesu, S/o.Arjuna Rao, A/35 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
7.Kothapalli Katama Raju, S/o.Surayya, A/32 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
8.Siddabathula Veera Venkata Rao, S/o.Chinnayya, A/30 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
Pto...
CCNo.226/2018 15 JMFC, Alamuru
9.Gunturi Pusendra Kumar, S/o.Venkanna, A/20 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
10. Kadimi Venkata Rao, S/o.Satyanarayana, A/39 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
11. Varasala Sudhakar, S/o.Papayya, A/24 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
12. Dande Yesu, S/o.Musalayya, A/45 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
13. Kallaem Prasad, S/o.Kantharao, A/25 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
14. Gundarapu Murali, S/o.Venkatarao, A/27 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
15. Dande Raju, S/o.Chanti, A/19 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
16. Dande Veera Babu @ Pandu, S/o.Sangayya, A/22 years, C/SC Mala, Dulla Village, Kadiyam Mandal.
10.Offence :U/Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 IPC.
11.Plea of A1 to A16:Pleaded not guilty.
12.Finding :Found not guilty.
13.Order/Sentence:
In the result, the A1 to A16 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 332, 353 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code and thereby they are acquitted for the same under Section 255(1) of Criminal Procedure
Code. The bail bonds of the A1 to A16 and their sureties shall be in force for a further period of 6 months as contemplated under Section 437-A of Criminal
Procedure Code. The MO.1 black metal stone is ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
14.Remarks: Nil.
Sd/-I.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CIVIL JUDGE(JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,
ALAMURU.
Copy submitted to the Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate-Cum-Principal Senior
Civil Judge, E.G. District, Rajahmundry for favour of information.