1
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS
:: SRIKALAHASTI.
Present: Smt. J.Krishna Priya,
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Srikalahasti.
FAC - Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Srikalahasti.
Friday, the 8th day of May, 2026.
C.C. No.615 of 2025
Between: The state represented by The Inspector of Police, Yerpedu Police Station, Cr.No.293/2024 of Yerpedu Police Station.
...Complainant.
And :
A1Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah, age 45 years, S/o Late K.Munaswamy, native of Pallam Gollapalli Village, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati, now residing at Yerragudipadu village, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District.
A2Kathi Mani, age 39 years, S/o Late K.Seenaiah, R/o D.No.1-12, Yerragudipadu ST Colony village, Muchchivolu post, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District.
A3Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi, age 45 years, S/o Late Subramanyam @ Venkaiah, R/o Poli Bheemavaram village, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District, now residing at Yerragudipadu ST Colony village, Muchchivolu post, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District.
A4Syed Wajid Hussain, age 37 years, S/o S.Shaukat Ali, R/o Pedda Peerla Chavadi street, Tirupati District. … A1 to A4.
2
This case is coming on 01.05.2026 before mefor final hearing in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant and Sri.V.Sairam, Learned Counsel for A1 to A3 and Sri.Nisar Ahmad, Learned Counsel for A4 and upon hearing on both sides and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following :
: : J U D G M E N T : :
The Inspector of Police of Yerpedu Police Station, Srikalahasti filed charge sheet against A1 to A4 in Cr.No.293/2024 for the offence punishable U/Sec.303(2)
BNS, Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS with the following allegations :-
The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant G.Ravikumar, aged 39 Years, S/o. Venkata Krishna Reddy is a resident of Sadasivapuram Village,
Yerpedu Mandal. Besides his cultivation lands, there are cultivation lands pertaining to Rajendra Naidu, Sarveswar Naidu, E.Narasimha Reddy, E.Srinivasa
Reddy, G.Janardhan Reddy, Kumaraswamy, Chandrachary, Subbaiah, Muniratham,
Muneiah, Suseelamma, P.Anand Reddy, G.Ganesh Reddy, Prasad, Bhaskar, Murali and Muni Ramaiah and some others. On 23.12.2024 night at about 07.00 p.m., he along with the above mentioned persons went to their respective houses after completion of work. On the next day i.e., on 24.12.2024 at about 06.00 a.m., when they all reached the above places, by that time Damodaram and others who were their villagers stated that some unknown persons stolen the starters and copper wires from their borewells during the night. When he checked his own borewell, he also found that his starter and motor cable had been stolen. Each stolen unit is estimated worth about Rs.3,000/-. Around 25 people in the village lost similar equipment, bringing the total loss to approximately Rs.75,000/-. On behalf of everyone affected, he and Munishekhar went to the police station to lodge a complaint and requested the police to investigate the matter and recover the stolen items.”
Based on the complaint of LW1/G.Ravikumar on 24.12.2024 at 08.35 p.m., a case in Cr.No.293/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BNS was registered at Yerpedu Police
Station, by LW24 and investigated into.
3
During the course of investigation, LW23 secured the presence of
LW1/G.Ravikumar, LW2/L.Munisekhar, LW3/B.Rajendra Naidu, LW4/B.Sarveswar
Naidu, LW5/E.Narasimha Reddy, LW6/E.Srinivasulu Reddy, LW7/G.Janardhan
Reddy,LW8/G.Kumaraswamy,LW9/A.Chandrachary,LW10/V.Subbaiah,
LW11/G.Munirathnam, LW12/K.Muneiah, LW13/A.Suseelamma, LW14/P.Anand
Reddy, LW15/G.Ganesh Reddy, LW16/M.Bhaskar, LW17/M.Prasad, LW18/K.Murali,
LW19/M.Muniramaiah and LW20/L.Damodaram examined them and recorded their statements vide C.D. part-II separately. Also, LW23 visited the scene of offence and drafted rough sketch of the scene of offence. Subsequently, the investigation was resumed by LW24.
During the course of investigation on 01.06.2025 at 02.00 p.m., while LW24 was present in the police station received credible information about the accused.
Immediately, LW24 secured the presence of panchayatdars i.e., LW21/Madduri
Chandrasekhar and LW22/Gummadi Prasanth through his staff, later LW11 along with staff and panchayatdars i.e., LW21/Madduri Chandrasekhar and
LW22/Gummadi Prasanth left Police Station and reached at TCL Circle,
Vikruthamala panchayat, Yerpedu Mandal. After they reached there, noticed that 3 persons walking, among them 1 person carrying a gunny bag, on seeing the Police party they tried to abscond from the spot, with the active assistance of staff they were surrounded and caught. Later LW24 secured the presence of panchayatdars i.e., LW21/Madduri Chandrasekhar and LW22/Gummadi Prasanth in their presence when enquired about their identities revealed as A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @
Venkataramanaiah, A2/ Kathi Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi.
During interrogation, A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah,
A2/Kathi Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi noted in the margin confessed and admitted their commission of offences which are as follows :
S.No. Police Station Cr. No. & Sec. of law
1.Srikalahasti Rural104/2025 U/Sec.379 IPC, Sec.136(1)(a) Elec. Act
2.Yerpedu190/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BN 4
3.Yerpedu264/2024 U/Sec.136(a) Elec. Act
4.Yerpedu16/2025 U/Sec.136(a) Elec. Act
5.Yerpedu293/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BNS
6.Gajulamandyam146/2025 U/Sec.303(2) BNS, Sec.136(1)(a) Ele. Act
7.Renigunta101/2025 U/Sec.303(2) BNS
8.Yerpedu62/2025 U/Sec.136(1) (a) Elec. Act
After completion of interrogation, LW24 arrested A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah, A2/Kathi Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi on 01.06.2025 at 06.00 p.m., and seized 10 Kgs of copper wire in Cr.No.81/2025
U/Sec.303(2) BNS of Yerpedu Police Station.
Subsequently, when A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah,
A2/Kathi Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi were questioned about the scrap shops where the stolen property had been sold in Tirupati, Srikalahasti and
Venkatagiri on which they stated that 01.06.2025 is Sunday, the shops would be closed and they would be available tomorrow, i.e., on 02.06.2025. Hence, LW24 decided to resume further investigation on 02.06.2025. To the above arrest, confession and seizure a detailed mahazarnama was drafted on 01.06.2025 drafted from 03.00 p.m., to 06.00 p.m., and the same was attested by the panchayatdars i.e., LW21/Madduri Chandrasekhar and LW22/Gummadi Prasanth.
In pursuance of the earlier confession made by the arrested A1/Kankula
Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah, A2/Kathi Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @
Chiranjeevi, LW24 along with his staff reached Scrap shop infront of fish market, near Leelamahal circle, Tirupati town on 02.06.2025 at 09.10 a.m. After reached there, noticed one person tried to abscond from there, with the assistance of staff, surrounded and caught him. Later with the assistance of staff he surrounded and caught him. Later he secured the presence of panchayatdars i.e., LW21/Madduri 5
Chandrasekhar and LW22/Gummadi Prasanth, in their presence enquired about his identity as Syed Wajid Hussain, aged 37 years, S/o S.Shaukat Ali, Pedda Peerla
Chavadi Street, Tirupati, Tirupati District. Further he voluntarily admitted that he received stolen property i.e., 13 Kgs of copper wire in a gunny bag concerned in
Cr.No.293/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BNS of Yerpedu Police Station and 400 Kgs of copper wire concerned in Cr.No.101/2025 U/Sec.303 (2) BNS of Renigunta Police
Station from A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah, A2/Kathi Mani and
A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi. Subsequently, LW24 seized the said property.
So, it has been established that Syed Wajid Hussain, having received the stolen property is liable to be punishable U/Sec.317(2) BNS. After confirmed the above person i.e., Syed Wajid Hussain as accused in Cr.No.293/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BNS of Yerpedu Police Station and Cr.No.101/2025 U/Sec.303 (2) BNS of Renigunta
Police Station. LW24 served notice U/Sec.35(3) BNSS to Syed Wajid Hussain in
Cr.No.293/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BNS of Yerpedu Police Station on 02.06.2025 at 09.45 a.m., with instructions to be present before the Police or Court as and when required. The detailed mahazarnama was drafted on 02.06.2025 between 09.15 a.m. and 09.45 a.m and the same was attested by the panchayatdars i.e.,
LW21/Madduri Chandrasekhar and LW22/Gummadi Prasanth.
Later on 02.06.2025, the arrested A1/B.Venkatesh, A2/M.R.Devan @ Deva were produced before the Hon’ble Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti for remand by LW24 in Cr.No.81/2025 U/Sec.303(2) BNS of Yerpedu Police Station.
On 12.06.2025 A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah, A2/Kathi
Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi noted in the margin were produced
before the Hon’ble Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti from Sub-Jail,
Srikalahasti on P.T. warrant by LW24, for forwarding him to judicial remand and the
Hon’ble Court remanded them in this case.
So, it has been clearly established that A1/Kankula Venkataramaiah @
Venkataramanaiah, A2/Kathi Mani and A3/Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi were involved in a series of thefts of copper wires, electrical starters, and transformers 6 from agricultural lands in Yerpedu, Srikalahasti, Renigunta and Gajulamandyam areas. After committing these thefts, A1 to A3 sold the stolen property to known scrap dealers in Tirupati, Srikalahasti and Venkatagiri. The shop owners, namely
Shaik Khadar Basha, Syed Wajid Hussain, Shaik Basid, Shaik Husman and Satna
Gopal Krishna, knowingly purchased the stolen items and are therefore found to be receivers of stolen property U/Sec.317(2) BNS. All accused acted in coordination, indicating the existence of an organized criminal network. The repeated and coordinated nature of these crimes clearly shows that these are not isolated incidents but part of an organized crime group. Accordingly, Sec.112(2) BNS is applicable against the accused. Hence, LW24 added the relevant sections of law 317(2) and 112(2) BNS. In this connection, a memo was filed before the Hon’ble
Court with regard to adding the section of law. Subsequently, the arrested A1 to A3 were remanded to judicial custody.
During the course of investigation, on 30.07.2025, LW24 secured the presence of LW1/ G.Ravi Kumar, handed over the case property i.e., 13 Kgs of
Copper wire with instructions that property should be produced as and when required by the court under proper acknowledgment which is enclosed for favor of kind perusal.
Thus, the accused noted in the margin committed an offence punishable
U/Sec.303(2) BNS for committing theft or U/Sec.317(2) BNS for having possession of stolen property and Sec.112(2) BNS for committing petty organized crime.
Hence the charge.
02.This Court took cognizance for the offence U/Sec.303(2) BNS, Sec.317(2)
BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS against A1 to A4.
03. On appearance of A1 to A4, copies of documents were furnished to them and they were examined U/Sec.262 BNSS. A charge is framed for the offences
U/Sec.303(2) BNS, Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS against A1 to A4, read over and explained to them in vernacular language, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
7
04.On behalf of the prosecution PW1 to PW19 were examined and marked
Ex.P1 to Ex.P6. The learned APP given up the evidence of LW9, LW10, LW13,
LW16 and LW21. Prosecution evidence is closed.
05.After closure of prosecution evidence, A1 to A4 were examined U/Sec.351
BNSS, by explaining the incriminating material available against them, for which they denied the same and reported no defence evidence.
06.Heard both sides.
07.Now the point for determination is:
“Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of A1 to A4 for the offence U/Sec.303(2) BNS, Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS beyond reasonable doubt?”
08.POINT: -
To prove the offence U/Sec.303(2) BNS, Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2)
BNS, the prosecution has to establish that A1 to A3 herein committed theft of copper wires of defacto-complainant and other persons and A4 received stolen property from A1 to A3.
09.(a)PW1 who is defacto complainant deposed that he know LW2 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 at evening hours he did his cultivation work in his fields and went to house. On 24.12.2024 at about 6 a.m, he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders, hence he gave report. Total 24 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. PW1 identified his signature on report. Ex.P1 is Report. Police examined him. Later police handed over copper wire in the above crime belongs to him, LW2 to LW20. A starter cost is approximately Rs.3,000/-.
PW1 deposed that Ex.P1 was written by one person and the said person explained and read over the contents of Ex.P1 to him and after that he affixed his signature in Ex.P1. He did not mention the descriptive particulars of the 8 starter i.e., Company model and capacity of the starter. He did not witness the person who stolen the 24 starters. He do not know the person who stolen his starter. It is not mentioned in Receipt of Property acknowledgment that copper wire was recovered. Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons, but said fact is not mentioned in Ex.P1. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from A1 to A3.
(b) PW2 deposed that he know PW1, LW3 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 at evening hours he did his cultivation work in his fields and went to house. On 24.12.2024 at about 6 a.m, he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders, hence they gave report. Total 24 starters were stolen by unknown offenders worth of Rs.75,000/-. PW2 identified his signature on report. Police examined him. Later police handed over copper wire in the above crime belongs to them.
PW2 deposed that Ex.P1 was written by him and he affixed his signature in Ex.P1. It is not mentioned in Ex.P1 about the descriptive particulars of the starter i.e. Company model and capacity of the starter. He do not know the person who stolen his starter. He admitted that he did not affix his signature in
Property acknowledgment receipt. Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons, but said fact is not mentioned in Ex.P1. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(c) PW3 deposed that he know PW1, PW2, LW3, LW4, LW6 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 at evening hours he did his cultivation work in his field and went to house. On 24.12.2024 at about 6 a.m, he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by 9 unknown offenders worth of Rs.75,000/-. Police did not examine him.
PW3 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(d) PW4 deposed that he know PW1, PW2, LW3, LW4, LW6, LW8 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 at evening hours he did his cultivation work in his fields and went to house. On 24.12.2024 at about 6 a.m, he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Police examined him.
PW4 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(e)PW5 deposed that he know PW1 to PW4, LW3, LW4, LW8 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 at evening hours he did his cultivation work in his field and went to house. On 24.12.2024 at about 6 a.m, he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Police examined him.
PW5 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(f) PW6 deposed that he know PW1 to PW5, LW4, LW8 to LW20, as they are 10 having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 24.12.2025 at about 6 a.m, he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Worth of his starter is about Rs.3,000/-. Report was lodged by PW1.
Police examined him.
PW6 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(g)PW7 deposed that he have agricultural lands in Sadasivapuram village. He know PW1 to PW6, LW8 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 he came to know some of the starters were stolen in nearby fields. On 24.12.2024 he came to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was also missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Worth of his starter is about Rs.4,000/-. Police examined him.
PW7 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(h)PW8 deposed that he know PW1, PW3 to PW7, LW9 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. He do not know PW2.
About one year ago on one day he completed his agricultural works at his field and returned to his home at about 6 p.m. On the next day he went to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Worth of his starter 11 is about Rs.4,000/-. Police examined him.
In cross examination, PW8 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter. Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from A1 to A3.
(i)PW9 deposed that he know PW1 to PW8, LW9 to LW11, LW13 to
LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 he completed his agricultural works at his fields and returned to his home. On the next day he went to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Worth of his starter is about Rs.4,000/-. Police examined him.
PW9 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
Except copper wire the remaining unwanted pieces of starter were left at the fields by unknown persons. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(j)PW10 deposed that he know PW1 to PW9, LW9 to LW11, LW13 to
LW16, LW18 to LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 23.12.2024 he completed his agricultural works at his fields and returned to his home. On the next day he went to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 23 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Worth of his starter is about Rs.4,000/- to
Rs.5,000/-. Police examined him.
PW10 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from A1 to A3.
(k)PW11 deposed that he know PW1 to PW5, PW7 to PW10, LW9 to 12
LW11, LW13 to LW16, LW18 and LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. He do not know PW6. On 23.12.2024 he completed his agricultural works at his fields and returned to his home. On the next day he went to his agricultural field and noticed that his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. Worth of his starter is about Rs.4,000/-. Police examined him.
In cross examination, PW11 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter. He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from
A1 to A3.
(l)PW12 deposed that he know PW1 to PW11, LW9, LW10, LW13 to
LW16, LW18 and LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. In the year 2024 on one day he went to his agricultural field, started his motor and observed his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. He did not sign in the report. Worth of his starter is about Rs.6,000/-. Police examined him.
PW12 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from A1 to A3.
(m)PW13 deposed that he know PW1 to PW12, LW10, LW13, LW16,
LW18 and LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land.
In the month of December, 2024 on one day he went to his agricultural field, started his motor and observed his two starters were missing and he searched for his starters in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his 2 starters was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. He did not sign in the report. Worth of his starter is about Rs.4,000/-. Police examined him.
PW13 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starters.
13
He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from A1 to A3.
(n)PW14 deposed that he know PW1 to PW13, LW9, LW10, LW13 to
LW16 and LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land.
On 24.12.2024 he went to his agricultural field and observed his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 20 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. He did not sign in the report. Worth of his starter is approximately Rs.4,000/- - 5,000/-. Police examined him.
PW14 deposed that he do not know the person who stolen his starter.
He do not know whether A4 purchased the copper wire from A1 to A3.
(o)PW15 deposed that he know PW1 to PW14, LW9, LW10, LW13, LW16 and LW20, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. On 24.12.2024 he went to his agricultural field and observed his 2 starters were missing and he searched for his starters in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starters were stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. He did not sign in the report. Worth of his starter is approximately Rs.3,000/-. Police did not examine him.
(p)PW16 deposed that he know PW1 to PW15, LW9, LW10, LW13 and
LW16, as they are having agricultural fields beside his agricultural land. About 5-6 months back, on one day he went to his agricultural field and observed his starter was missing and he searched for his starter in his neighboring fields and confirmed that his starter was stolen by some unknown offenders. Total 25 starters were stolen by unknown offenders. He did not sign in the report. Worth of his starter is approximately Rs.4,000/- to 4,500/-. Police did not examine him.
(q)PW17, VRO deposed that at present he is working as VRO to Chelluru
Panchayath of Yerpedu Mandal since October, 2024. He know LW8
M.Chandrasekhar who is working as VRO to Vikruthamala village of Yerpedu
Mandal. On 01.06.2025 he received a phone call from their MRO informing that the 14
Yerpedu police requested to act as mediators and to follow up the same, meanwhile police also made a call to him and pick him at Musilipedu village and went to
Yerpedu Police station by 1 p.m and from there. He along with 7 police officials left the police station by 2 p.m in two police jeeps went to TCL circle situated at
Vikruthamala, there they observed three persons were passing through among them one person was possessing a gunny bag in his hand and police got them and observed the gunny bag which contains copper wire. Upon questioning one
Venkataramana who is holding gunny bag by a police constable, to which he revealed that on 25th May they committed theft of starters at M.D.Puttur village and hided the copper wire collected from it and took to sell the same. Upon further questioning he revealed that on July, 2024 they committed theft of starters at
Modugulapalem village and in the month of December, 2024 they committed theft of 20 starters at Sadasivapuram village, later police weighed the copper wire and it is total 10 kgs. Further he confessed that to eak out their livelihood as they are having bad vices inorder to fulfill the same they are committing thefts and also confessed that previously they involved in red sander cases. Further confessed that they sell the thefted copper wire at Tirupati and upon further questioning to show the shops where they sell the copper wire, to which they stated that the shops will be closed on sunday as such police officials took them to Yerpedu Police station. On the next day police called him at 8.30 a.m and at 9 a.m the three persons along with police officials took them to one scrap shop situated opposite to fish market at Leelamahal, there the accused shown the scrap shop, by that time a person present in the scrap shop tried to run away, however the police detained him. On questioning he revealed that he have acquaintance with A1 to A3 as he purchased copper wire from them from the year 2024 and further stated that he purchased copper wire for lesser price, by that time police served notice to the person present in the scrap shop. From there by 9.30 a.m, they came to scrap shop situated near Area hospital, Srikalahasti, there also the person present in the shop tried to ran away, however the police detained him. On questioning he revealed that he have acquaintance with A1 to A3 as he purchased copper wire 15 from them and further stated that he purchased copper wire for lesser price, by that time police served notice to the said person present in the scrap shop. From the scrap shop situated in Tirupati police collected 2 bags of copper wire, in one bag there is 400 kgs of copper wire and another bag contains 13 kgs of copper wire.
From the scrap shop situated in Srikalahasti police collected 2 bags of copper wire, in one bag there is 84 kgs of copper wire and another bag contains 10 kgs of copper wire. PW17 identified A1 to A3 present in the court hall. Police prepared three mahazarnamas in his presence, first Mahazarnama at TCL circle, 2nd mahazaranama prepared at scrap shop at Fish market near Leelamahal circle,
Tirupati and 3rd mahazarnama prepared at scrap shop near Area hospital,
Srikalahasti. Ex.P2 is Certified copy of Confession cum Arrest cum Seizure mahazarnama dated 01.06.2025 at about 3 p.m. Ex.P3 is Certified copy of
Confession cum Arrest cum Seizure mahazarnama dated 02.06.2025 at about 9.15 a.m at Fish Market, Tirupati.
PW17 deposed that he is not working as VRO for M.D.Puttur village of
Yerpedu Mandal. VRO is present for M.D.Puttur village. He admitted that while he was present at my house at Musilipedu village, police pick him. It is the duty of
VRO to inform about the crimes to our superior, but he did not inform to his superiors about the crime. Tahsildar did not serve any written summons to him. He stated that that in case of emergency Tahsildar will inform orally and they attend to act as mediators. He deposed that he orally informed to Tahsildar that he acted as mediator for 3 mahazarnamas. Police prepared three mahazarnamas, among them one is Arrest mahazarnama and other two are seizure mahazarnamas. The police prepared 6 mahazarnamas in his presence i.e. Arrest cum confession cum seizure mahazarnama. Places i.e. Yerpedu, Tirupati and Srikalahasti mentioned in
Mahazarnamas are in busy locality. He deposed that at the time of arrest of A1 to
A3 he did not affix his signature in Arrest cards. He admitted that A1 to A3 affixed their thumb impressions and they are illiterates. He admitted that it is not mentioned in Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 that the above contents are read over and explained 16 to A1 to A3. Copies of Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 are not given to A1 to A3 at the time of arrest.
(r)PW18, Assistant Sub-Inspector deposed that on 24.12.2024 at about 8.30 p.m., while he was present in police station, PW1 came to the police station and presented Ex.P1/Report, he informed the details of report to his superior/Inspector of Police and on his instructions he registered a case in
Cr.No.293/2024 for the offences U/sec.303(2) BNS and issued FIR. Ex.P4 is FIR.
He secured the presence of PW1 and LW2/Munisekhar, examined them and recorded their Sec.161 Cr.P.C statements. On the next day he visited the scene of offence i.e., agricultural fields situated at Sadasivapuram and after observing the scene of offence he came know that the motor starters were committed theft then he prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence. Ex.P5 is Rough sketch. At the scene of offence he secured the presence of LW3 to LW18 who are victims in the above crime and also LW19 and LW20, examined them and recorded their Sec.161
Cr.P.C statements. Further investigation handed over to his superior officer/LW28.
PW18 admitted that it is mentioned in Ex.P4 in column No.9 that
Electric starters and starter cables 25 in number were stolen. PW18 stated that the stolen property is electric starters and starters cable number is 25, but not 25 number of starter cables were stolen. He did not prepare scene observation mahazarnama. He did not seize any property at the scene of offence. He did not collect any chance prints at the scene of offence and also he did not obtain any finger prints of the accused persons. He do not know who arrested the accused persons. PW18 stated that he have not taken any photographs at the scene of offence. He admitted that Ex.P1 is silent about model and capacity of the starters.
(s)PW19, Inspector of Police deposed that on 17.05.2025 he received CD file in above Cr.No.293/2024 from PW18, he verified the investigation done by him.
On 01.06.2025 he received information with regard to the accused in above crime, immediately he left the police station along with Panchayatdars by name PW8 and
PW9, went to TCL circle of Vikruthamala village and arrested A1, A2 and A3 in the 17 presence of mediators and recovered 10 kgs of copper wire and he recorded the confession of A1 to A3. On 02.06.2025 basing on the confession of A1 to A3, he along with Panchayatdars visited the scrap shop near Leelamahal circle at Fish market, Tirupati, where he arrested the owner of the scrap shop by name Syed
Wazeed Hussain as he received copper wire from A1 to A3 and recovered 13 Kgs of copper wire from his possession, then he served Sec.35(3) BNSS notice to Syed
Wazeed Hussain after recording his confessional statement and Panchanama.
Later he produced A1 to A3 before Hon’ble court seeking judicial remand in
Cr.No.81/2025. During the course of further investigation he filed requisition before the Hon’ble court against A1 to A3 requesting to issue P.T warrant in this crime.
During the course of investigation he handed over 13 kgs of copper wire recovered in crime no.293/2024 to the defacto complainant and obtained receipt from PW1.
Ex.P6 is Receipt. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.
PW19 deposed that he did not video-graphed during seizure of property even though he know the procedure of BNSS. He did not upload the scene of offence photos in E-shaksha portal. He admitted that he did not obtain signatures of witnesses at the time of arrest of accused persons in Arrest form.
Yerpedu police station is situated on the main road. He did not secure any VRO or
Surpanch from Yerpedu to act as mediators. PW19 stated that he secured mediators from MRO office, said fact is not mentioned in the charge sheet. He did not file 8 FIRs regarding 8 crimes along with charge sheet. He deposed that accused names were not mentioned in 8 FIRs which were produced by him. He collected chance prints from A1 to A3, but he did not tally the finger prints of A1 to
A3 in other crimes. He did not video-graph in other crimes. On 02.06.2025 he visited the places for investigation which are in busy locality. He did not secure any mediators at place of arrest and at seizure of property.
10.To prove the offence U/Sec.303(2) BNS, the prosecution has to prove the following ingredients:
1) the subject matter of the offence is movable property; 18
2) it was moved out of the possession of any person without his consent;
3) the accused did it with a dishonest intention.
11.A perusal of evidence, PW1 is the Defacto complainant who gave complaint.
PW2 to PW16 are hearsay witnesses. PW17 acted as mediator at the time of arrest, confession cum seizure mahazarnama of A1 to A4. PW18 is Assistant Sub-
Inspector of Police registered the crime, prepared rough sketch and investigated the case. PW19 is Inspector of Police arrested A1 to A3 and recovered the property and handed over the property to PW1 and filed charge sheet.
12.A perusal of evidence, PW1 stated in Ex.P1 that on 23.12.2024 at evening hours, some unknown persons came to his field and committed theft of his starter.
When he went to search for his starter, he came to know that some unknown persons also committed theft of starters in the fields of PW2 to PW16. Total 24 starters were committed theft by unknown persons. Whereas PW1 in his chief never deposed that the unknown persons committed theft in the fields of PW2 to
PW16 which is contradictory. He deposed that police handed over copper wire belongs to him, PW2 to PW16 but in Ex.P6, PW2 to PW16 did not affix their signatures. It creates doubt whether the recovered property was given to PW2 to
PW16 by PW1. On which date the property is handed over to PW1 is not mentioned in Ex.P6 which creates doubt on prosecution. In Ex.P6, it is clearly mentioned 13 kgs of copper wire was handed over to PW1 but in Ex.P1, PW1 never stated that unknown persons committed theft of starters containing approximately 13 kgs of copper wire. In Ex.P6, it is mentioned that whenever court asks to produce the copper wire, he should produce before the court but PW1 failed to produce 13 kgs of copper wire before the court. It creates doubt whether the police handed over 13 kgs of copper wire to PW1. He did not mention in Ex.P1 about the descriptive particulars of the starters i.e., company model and capacity of the starter.
19
13.PW2 to PW16 deposed that some unknown persons committed theft in their fields. PW3, PW15 and PW16 deposed that police did not examine them but PW1 stated that police handed over the 13 kgs of copper wire to PW1 which also belongs to PW3, PW15 and PW16. PW1 to PW16 deposed that they do not know whether A4 purchased copper wire from A1 to A3. On careful scrutiny of evidence of PW1 to PW16, they stated that their starters were stolen by unknown offenders.
Even they did not identify the accused persons. Further PW18 also stated that basing on the report of PW1, the case was registered. FIR also discloses that the case was registered against unknown accused persons.Therefore, prosecution failed to prove the offence U/Sec.303(2) BNS against A1 to A3.
14.To prove the offence U/Sec.317(2) BNS, the prosecution has to prove the following ingredients:
1. The accused must have possession of the property, either by receiving it or retaining it.
2. The property must have been transferred through theft, extortion, robbery, or criminal misappropriation.
3. The possession must be dishonest, implying a deliberate intention to keep the property from its rightful owner.
4. The accused must know or have enough information to reasonably believe the property was stolen at the time of possesion,
5. The “reason to believe” is the core element – meaning a reasonable person would have understood it was stolen.
15.To substantiate the ingredients u/sec.317(2) BNS, the prosecution relied on the evidence of PW19/Investigating Officer in whose presence A1 to A3 alleged to confess about receipt of stolen property under Ex.P2 and Ex.P3. Here as per the evidence of PW19, in the presence of mediators he got recovered 13 kgs of copper wire basing on the confession of A1 to A3. PW17 who acted as mediator deposed that police picked him at Musilipedu village and went to police station by 1.00 p.m.
whereas PW19 deposed that he along with LW21 and PW17 left the police station to the scene of offence. PW17 deposed that he along with 7 police officials left the police station by 2.00 p.m., to the scene of offence but he never stated that LW21 20 also came to scene of offence along with them. Therefore, the presence of LW21 at the scene of offence is doubtful but LW21 affixed his signature in Ex.P2 which creates doubt on prosecution. Except PW19, other police officials did not affix their signatures in Ex.P2 and Ex.P3. It creates doubt whether other police persons were present at the time of arrest of A1 to A3. PW18 registered FIR and deposed that he did not prepare any scene observation mahazarnama at the scene of offence and also did not seize the empty broken pieces of starters in the presence of mediators.
PW19 who arrested A1 to A3 deposed that he did not video-graph during seizure of property eventhough he know the procedure of BNSS and also did not upload the scene of offence photos in E-Sakshi portal. He deposed that he collected chance prints from A1 to A3, but he did not tally the finger prints of A1 to A3 with those chance prints. Eventhough, property is recovered by PW19, it is not produced
before this court and hence, the recovery of 13 kgs of copper wire is doubtful.
PW19 stated that he handed over the recovered property to PW1 but PW1 did not produce the said property before this court. Therefore, the recovery of 13 kgs of copper wire from A4 is doubtful. PW1 to PW16 deposed that they do not know whether A4 purchased the 13 kgs of copper wire from A1 to A3. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the recovery of property U/Sec.317(2) BNS against A4.
16.Here this Court relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
Navaneetha Krishnan vs State By Inspector Of Police, 2018(2) ALT Crl. SC 60
wherein it was held that “ Section 27 of the Evidence Act is applicable only if the confessional statement leads to the discovery of some new fact. The relevance is limited as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered. Though the 13 kgs of copper wire is recovered from A4, but there is no evidence on record establishing the fact of that recovery”.
17.Moreover as per Sec. 27 of Indian Evidence Act, “how much of information received from accused may be proved, provided that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of police officer, so much of such information, whether it 21 amounts to confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved”.
18.The truth of the confession is guaranteed by the discovery of the facts consequent to the information given by the accused to the police officer. “The condition necessary to bring the section 27 of Indian Evidence Act into operation is that discovery of a fact in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence in the custody of police officer and thereupon so much of the information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered is admissible in evidence against the accused whether it amounted to a confession or not” held in
Pulukuri Kottaya and Others Vs. Emperor AIR 1947 Privy Council 67.
19.Further this court also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
Jafarudheen and Others Vs. State of Kerala in Crl.A.No.430-431/2021, dated
22.04.2022 that “recovery U/Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act must satisfy court’s conscience regarding the credibility of witness”.
20.Thereby Ex.P6 as to the recovery of 13 kgs of copper wire from A4 basing on the confession of A1 to A3 U/Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 herein is inadmissible and not proved, thereby the recovery of 13 Kgs of copper wire under
Ex.P6 itself is doubtful.
21.Also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Bijender alias
Mandaar Vs. State of Haryana (2022) 1 SCC 92 held that “in order to sustain the guilt of an accused, the recovery should be unimpeachable and not be shrouded with elements of doubt”. But the prosecution in the present case utterly failed on that aspect. Hence, this Court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove that stolen property is seized from the possession of A4 and thereby failed to prove the offence under Sec. 317(2) BNS.
22.To prove the offence U/Sec.112(2) BNS, the prosecution has to prove the following ingredients:
22
1) The offence must be committed by a person acting as part of a group, gang, or a mobile organized crime group.
2) The group must commit specific offences, including theft (trick theft, vehicle theft, pickpocketing, card skimming), snatching, cheating, unauthorized ticket selling, or unauthorized betting/gambling.
3) The acts must be done with the intent to, or result in, creating a general feeling of insecurity among citizens.
4) It involves a network of contacts, anchor points, or logistical support to carry out offences, often moving from region to region.
23.A perusal of record, as per Sec.25 of Indian Evidence Act, the confession deposed by A1 to A3 before the police officer is inadmissible under the law as the recovery of property from A4 is not proved by the prosecution. Even PW1 did not produce 13 kgs of copper wire before this court. Therefore, prosecution failed to prove the offence U/Sec.112(2) BNS against A1 to A4.
24.Therefore, there is no cogent and reliable evidence to implicate A1 to A4 in the commission of the offence. It is well known that the penal statute should be strictly construed and the prosecution needs to prove the alleged offence beyond a reasonable doubt, which is lacking in the present case on hand. The material produced by the prosecution is not sufficient to bring home the guilt of A1 to A4 beyond reasonable doubts.
25.Basing on the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the light of the variant versions on record, and latches on the part of investigation, failure to establish the confession of A1 to A3 which leads to recovery of 13 Kgs of copper wire from the possession of A4. Any amount of doubt that arises in the facts and circumstances of the case has to be bestowed in favour of A1 to A4. Hence, A1 to
A4 are entitled for the benefit of doubt.
26.In view of my foregoing discussion the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of A1 to A4 beyond reasonable doubt for the offence under section 303(2) BNS or Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS.
23
27.In the result, A1 to A4 are found not guilty for the offences
U/Sec.303(2) BNS or Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS and accordingly, A1 to
A4 are acquitted U/Sec.271(1) BNSS. The bail bonds of A2 to A4 if any shall remain in force for six months as per Sec.481 of BNSS. Since no property is produced before this court, no property order is passed.
The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Srikalahasti is hereby informed that A1 shall be released forthwith, if he is not required in any other cases.
Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 8 th day of May, 2026.
Sd/- J.Krishna Priya,
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Srikalahasti. FAC - Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikalahasti.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:
PW1 : G.Ravi Kumar. - NONE -
PW2 : L.Munisekhar.
PW3 : C.Narasimha Reddy.
PW4 : G.Janardhan Reddy. Srikalahasti.
PW5 : C.Srinivasulu Reddy.
PW6 : B.Rajendra.
PW7 : B.Sarveshwar Naidu.
PW8 : T.Kumaraswamy.
PW9 : K.Munaiah.
PW10 : M.Prasad.
PW11 : M.Muniramaiah.
PW12 : G.Munirathnam.
PW13 : P.Anand Reddy.
PW14 : K.Murali.
24
PW15 : K.Ganesh Reddy.
PW16 : N.Damodaram.
PW17 : Gummadi Prashanth.
PW18 : P.Jaganmohan, Assistant Sub-Inspector.
PW19 : B.Srikanth Reddy, Inspector of Police.
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P1 : Report given by PW1.
Ex.P2 : Certified copy of Confession cum Arrest cum Seizure mahazarnama dated 01.06.2025 at about 3.00 p.m.
Ex.P3 : Certified copy of Confession cum Arrest cum Seizure mahazarnama dated 02.06.2025 at 9.15 a.m., at Fish market, Tirupati.
Ex.P4 : FIR in Cr.No.293/2024 U/Sec.303(2) BNS.
Ex.P5 : Rough Sketch.
Ex.P6 : Receipt.
FOR DEFENCE : - - None -
MATERIAL OBJECTS :- - NIL -
Sd/-JKP.
AJMFC, SKHT
FAC. PJMFC, SKHT
//TRUE COPY//
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Srikalahasti. FAC - Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikalahasti.
25
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS
:: SRIKALAHASTI.
CALENDAR
in
C.C.No. 615 of 2025
DATE OF :- Offence: 23.12.2024
Filling: 24.12.2024
Apprehension of A1 to A3: 01.06.2025
Apprehension of A4: 02.06.2025
Released on Bail of A1: Judicial Custody
Released on Bail of A2 and A3 : 11.09.2025
Commencement of trial: 17.11.2025
Close of trial: 07.04.2026
Sentence or order: 08.05.2026
Explanation for delay: ----- Name of the Complainant : The Inspector of Police, Yerpedu Police Station, (Cr.No.293/2024) Name of A1 to A4 : A1Kankula Venkataramaiah @ Venkataramanaiah, age 45 years, S/o Late K.Munaswamy, native of Pallam Gollapalli Village, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District, now residing at Yerragudipadu village, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District.
A2Kathi Mani, age 39 years, S/o Late K.Seenaiah, R/o D.No.1-12, Yerragudipadu ST Colony village, Muchchivolu post, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District.
A3Jenda Venkatesh @ Chiranjeevi, age 45 years, S/o Late Subramanyam @ Venkaiah, R/o Poli Bheemavaram village, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District, now residing at Yerragudipadu ST Colony village, Muchchivolu post, Srikahalasti Mandal, Tirupati District. Srikalahasti.
26
A4Syed Wajid Hussain, age 37 years, S/o S.Shaukat Ali, R/o Pedda Peerla Chavadi street, Tirupati District.
Offence: U/Sec.303(2) BNS or Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS.
Finding: Found not guilty
Sentence:
In the result, A1 to A4 are found not guilty for the offences
U/Sec.303(2) BNS or Sec.317(2) BNS and Sec.112(2) BNS and accordingly, A1 to
A4 are acquitted U/Sec.271(1) BNSS. The bail bonds of A2 to A4 if any shall remain in force for six months as per Sec.481 of BNSS. Since no property is produced before this court, no property order is passed.
The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Srikalahasti is hereby informed that A1 shall be released forthwith, if he is not required in any other cases.
Sd/- J.Krishna Priya,
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Srikalahasti. FAC - Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikalahasti.
//TRUE COPY//
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Srikalahasti. FAC - Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikalahasti.v