Ms. Jyothsna Gunti

CC.288 of 2019 1 Date: 04-05-2026

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS :: AT MULUGU

Monday the 04th day of May, Two Thousand Twenty Six. Present: Smt. Jyothsna Gunti,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Mulugu.

C.C.No.288 of 2019

Between:

State through & Excise Inspector, Mulugu.

...Complainant

And

A1.Kampati Suresh, S/o.Kondaiah, Age:31 yrs, Occ:Driver, R/o.Venugopal nagar, Khammam.

A2.Kandhi Sadanandham, S/o.Veeramallu, Age:52 yrs, Occ:Business, R/o.Mulugu.

A3. Paidimalla Shiva, S/o.Rajender, Age:55 yrs, Occ:Business, R/o. Mulugu.

...Accused No.1 to 3

***

This case coming up before me for final hearing on 16-04-2026 in the presence of Learned APPO for the State and Sri.Ch.Venugopala Chary, Learned counsel for the accused persons perusing the material papers on 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 Excise Inspector Mulugu filed charge sheet vide COR.No.69/2017 against the accused No.1 to 3 for the offence punishable under sec.34(E) of

A.P Excise Act,.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.03.2017 at about 08:45 hours, PW1, the Excise official, came to the Police Station and lodged a

CC.288 of 2019 2 Date: 04-05-2026

report stating that on the same day at about 07:00 hours, while he along with LW3 and LW4 were on patrolling duty, on receiving reliable information, they proceeded to Thunta Pond outskirts of Mulugu and found one DCM vehicle bearing No. TS04UA1395 with three persons present nearby. On seeing the police party, two persons allegedly escaped, while one person was apprehended. On checking the DCM vehicle, the officials allegedly found 100 kgs of alum (in bags of 40 kgs each) and 200 kgs of black jaggery.

Thereafter, PW1 secured mediators PW2 and LW6, conducted confession- cum-seizure panchanama, and seized the vehicle along with the contraband, that person confessed the names of other two persons. On the basis of the report, the case was registered for the offence punishable under Section 34(e) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused No.1 to 3.

3.On considering the material papers on record, this court has taken cognizance against the accused No.1 to 3 for the offence punishable under sec.34(E) of A.P Excise Act,.

4.On appearance of accused No.1 to 3 the case copies were furnished to them as per section 207 Cr.P.C. The accused No.1 to 3 were examined u/s.239 Cr.P.C., charge was framed for the offence punishable under sec.34(E) of A.P Excise Act,and was explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, For Trial.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW4, and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P6. Ex.P1-Confession-cum-seizure panchanama.

CC.288 of 2019 3 Date: 04-05-2026

Ex.P2 - Report of PW1. Ex.P3 - Signature of PW2 on panchanama. Ex.P4 -

Crime detail form. Ex.P5-FSL report. Ex.P6 - FIR. The evidence of LW2 and

LW8 was closed. LWs 5 and 6 were reported dead. LWs 3 and 4 were given up.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused No.1 to 3 examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. for the incriminating circumstances which appeared in the evidence of prosecution witness were explained to them, they denied and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.

7.Heard the arguments of both sides.

Now, the point for determination :

Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 27.03.2017, the accused persons were found transporting black jaggery and alum, allegedly intended for manufacture of illicit liquor, thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 34(e) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act?

POINT:

8.To establish the offence under Section 34(e) of the Andhra Pradesh

Excise Act, the prosecution must prove that the accused persons were in possession or transporting the seized material, that such material was intended for use in the manufacture of illicit liquor, that the seizure and recovery were proved through reliable evidence.

9.PW1 deposed that while on patrol duty he intercepted the DCM vehicle and found black jaggery and alum in the vehicle. He further stated that he conducted confession-cum-seizure panchanama under Ex.P1 and lodged report under Ex.P2. However, in cross-examination, PW1 admitted several material facts The mediators resided 07 kms and 17 kms away from the

CC.288 of 2019 4 Date: 04-05-2026

scene. There was no prohibition order by the Government against possession of alum and jaggery. A1 was only the driver, and he was not concerned with the purchase of the contraband. No log book of the vehicle was seized. He did not mention in Ex.P2 as to how the contraband was transported to the police station. These admissions materially weaken the prosecution case.

10.PW2, the mediator to Ex.P1, turned hostile and did not support the prosecution version except admitting his signature on the panchanama under Ex.P3. Thus, the seizure panchanama remained unproved, as the independent witness did not support the prosecution.

11.PW3, the Investigating Officer, admitted in cross-examination that

Jaggery and alum are not banned substances. There is no limit prescribed for carrying them. Only when such materials are proved to be intended for preparation of illicit liquor can they be seized. No FJ wash or distillation articles were seized from the scene.

12.These admissions go to the root of the matter. Mere transportation of jaggery and alum, which are lawful commodities, does not by itself constitute an offence unless the prosecution proves intention to use them in illicit distillation.

13.PW4 filed Ex.P5 FSL report, which only states that the seized items were black jaggery and alum. The FSL report does not establish that the items were being used or intended to be used for preparation of illicit liquor.

Further, no material objects were produced before the Court. In the absence

CC.288 of 2019 5 Date: 04-05-2026

of production of the seized contraband, the prosecution version becomes doubtful.

14.The prosecution witnesses admitted that possession and transport of jaggery and alum are not prohibited. No wash, no distillation apparatus, and no other incriminating material was seized.The independent seizure witness

PW2 turned hostile, and no other independent evidence corroborates seizure. The alleged contraband was not marked. PW1 admitted that A1 was merely the driver and was not concerned with purchase of the goods.Thus,

The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the jaggery and alum were intended for manufacture of illicit liquor.

15.It is a settled principle of criminal law that suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof. In the present case, the prosecution has failed to establish the essential ingredients of Section 34(e) of the Andhra

Pradesh Excise Act. Hence, the accused are entitled to benefit of doubt.

Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

In the result, accused No.1 to 3 found not guilty for the offence punishable u/S.34(e) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, accordingly they are acquitted under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds shall be in force for a period of six months as required under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. No property deposited and no order as to property.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 04 th day of May, 2026.)

Sd/-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Mulugu

CC.288 of 2019 6 Date: 04-05-2026

:: Appendix of evidence::

Witnesses examined for

Prosecution Name of Witness Description Witness No.

PW1S.MahendarComplainant/first information

PW2N.RaviPanchwitnessforconfession panchanama

PW3D.Mallesh1st investigation Officer

PW4B.RajuInvestigation Officer filing charge sheet

:: Exhibits marked for ::

Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Arrested by

Ex.P1Confesion panchanama-cum-seizure PW1 panchanama

Ex.P2ReportPW1

Ex.P3Signature on confession cum seizure PW2 panchanama

Ex.P4CDFPW3

Ex.P5FSL ReportPW4

Ex.P6FIRPW4

Material object-Nil

Sd/-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Mulugu

CC.07 of 2026 1 Date: 04-05-2026

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS :: AT MULUGU

Monday the 04th day of May, Two Thousand Twenty Six. Present: Smt. Jyothsna Gunti,

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Mulugu.

C.C.No.07 of 2026

Between:

State through Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station, Mulugu.

...Complainant

And

Jetti Ramaswamy, S/o.Mallaiah, age:46 yrs, Occ:Driver, R/o.H.No.1-49, Jakaram village of Mulugu District.

...Accused

***

This case coming up before me for final hearing on 16-04-2026 in the presence of Learned APPO for the State and Sri.K.Sunil Kumar, Learned counsel for the accused perusing the material papers on 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 Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Mulugu, filed charge sheet in

Cr.No.411 of 2025 of his station against the Accused for the offence punishable under sec.106(1), 125(a) BNS,196 MV.Act,.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that, on 15-09-2023 at 07:30 hours,

LW1/Sammaiah, on 14-09-2025, at about 09:30AM, he went to work as daily laborer. When he returned home around 05:00 PM, his son was not at home.

Later, at around 09:30 PM, his younger brother’s son Thippanapalli Chandu, called him on the phone and informed him as he said, he along with elder brother Shanti Kumar, went from home to Eturnagaram on his motorcycle bearing No.AP36-A-6960 from Eturnagaram, in the evening, they gave a lift

CC.07 of 2026 2 Date: 04-05-2026

to a girl to drop her at Premnagar village of Mulugu mandal at about 07:15

PM, when brother Shanti kumar stopped the motorcycle on the road side at

Premnagar village to let the girl get down, at that time, the accused came from the Mulugu side riding his motorcycle bearing No.AP29 BF 5705 at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and hit their bike from behind. Due to the impact, all three of them were thrown off the bike. He and the girl received minor injuries, but his brother sustained severe bleeding injuries on the back of his head and below his left ear. The local people called the 108 ambulance and while they were taking him to MGM Hospital, Warangal in the said ambulance, he died on the way at about 08:30 PM. They brought his dead body to Mulugu District Hospital and placed it in the mortuary. On receiving this information, the complainant immediately went to Mulugu

District Hospital and found that his son had died and his body was kept in the mortuary.

Basing on the report of LW15/HC, registered a case in Cr.No.411/2025 for the offence under section U/s.106(1),125 (a) BNS and 196 of M.V.Act,. Later

LW16/S.I of Police took up investigation of this case.

3.On considering the material papers on record, this court has taken cognizance against the accused for the offence punishable U/s.106(1),125

(a) BNS and 196 of M.V.Act,.

4.On appearance of accused the case copies were furnished to him as per section 230 BNSS., Accused was examined U/Sec.274 of BNSS explaining the substance of accusation leveled against him for the offence punishable under section.106 (1),125 (a) BNS and 196 of M.V.Act,.for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, For Trial.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW4, and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P5.

CC.07 of 2026 3 Date: 04-05-2026

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, as no incriminating material appeared against the accused, as such, examination contemplated

U/Sec.313 of Cr.PC are dispensed with.

7.Heard the arguments of both sides.

Now, the point for determination :

Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the

accused for the offence punishable 106 (1),125 (a) BNS and 196 and

Sec.180 and 181 of M.V.Act., beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

8.On perusal of the entire material on record PW1 who is the defacto/complainant and father of deceased, deposed that 6 months ago his son died in an accident and he received call from unknown person and informed him about the accident occurred at Premnagar, Mulugu, he rushed to Area Hospital, Mulugu, by the time he reached Mulugu hospital, his son died and after completion of PME, he has taken the dead body of the deceased to his residence. Police obtained his signature on some papers and marked Exs.P1 and P2.

9.PW2 who is mother of deceased, deposed that at the time of accident she was at her resident and LW3 informed her about the accident and she rushed to Area Hospital, Mulugu by the time and she reached Mulugu hospital her son died and after completion of PME, she has taken the dead body of the deceased to her residence and Police did not examine her and recorded her statement and marked Ex.P3.

10.PW3 who is cousin of deceased and PW4 who is friend of deceased, she is injured person, deposed that they do not know anything about this case. Police not examine them and recorded their statements

11.Further the learned APPO given up evidence of LWs.5 to 16.

CC.07 of 2026 4 Date: 04-05-2026

10.There is no iota of evidence against accused, in this case at end, more over, PWs.1 to 3 themselves compromised this case with accused by receiving compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- from the accused. Accordingly accused is acquitted.

Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

In the result, accused is not found guilty for the offence punishable under section.106 (1),125 (a) BNS and 196 of M.V.Act,. and

Sec.180 and 181 of M.V.Act., accordingly he is acquitted of the same under section 271(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of appeal time. The case property if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer G-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 04 th day of May, 2026.)

Sd/-

PrL. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu

:: Appendix of evidence::

Witnesses examined for

Prosecution Name of Witness Description Witness No.

PW1T.SammaiahComplainant/First witness/father of deceased

PW2T.SugunaMother of deceased

PW3T.ChanduEye witness/Cousin of deceased

PW4P.Navya SreeInjured person/Friend of deceased

CC.07 of 2026 5 Date: 04-05-2026

:: Exhibits marked for ::

Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Arrested by

Ex.P1Signature on reportPW1

Ex.P2161 Cr.P.C statementPW1

Ex.P3161 Cr.P.C statementPW2

Ex.P4161 Cr.P.C statementPW3

Ex.P5161 Cr.P.C statementPW4

Material object-Nil

Sd/-

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu

C.C. No.99 of 2023 1 of page 5 Date: 26-11-2025

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

AT MULUGU.

Wednesday, the 26th day of November, Two Thousand Twenty Five.

Present: MS. JYOTHSNA GUNTI,

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu. FAC Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu.

C.C. No.99 of 2023

Between:

State through Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station, Pasra.

...Complainant

And

Thatipalli Raju, S/o. Shakaraiah, Age: 42 years, occu: Business, R/o. Chalvai village of Pasra Mandal.

...Accused.

***

This case coming up before me for final hearing on 26-11-2025 in the pres- ence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri. K. Sunil Kumar, Learned counsel, for accused upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration till this day the court delivered the fol- lowing:- :: J U D G M E N T ::

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Police Station, Pasra laid charge sheet against accused in crime No.94/2022 for the offence U/sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of MV Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 31.10.2022 at 07.30 hours the com- plainant/LW-1 came to PS Pasra and lodged a written petition in Telugu in which

C.C. No.99 of 2023 2 of page 5 Date: 26-11-2025 she stated that her husband Pujari Raju S/o Late Sammaiah. has allowed their vil- lager Karapati Edu Kondalu on his Pulsar bike bearing No.TS25 A 2903 and pro- ceeding at about 06.00 hrs while her husband was taking U-turn, meantime the driver of Bolero Mini Trolley bearing No.TS25 T 1594 which was proceeding ex- tremely wrong side drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner with high speed proceeding from Chalvai to Pasra and dashed the bike of her husband/de- ceased, as a result her husband has sustained severe bleeding injuries on his head and other parts of body and pillion rider Edukondalu sustained fracture of his right leg, immediately neighbors shifted her husband to Area Hospital, Mulugu in 108 Ambulance for treatment, where the duty doctor examined her husband, the condition of him very serious, immediately shifted him to Relief Hospital at

Hanamkonda and admitted for better treatment, while undergoing treatment on 30.10.2022 night 21.30 hours he succumbed with injuries.

3.On receipt of above complaint from LW-1, the LW-14 has registered a case vide Cr.No.94/2022, U/Sec.304(A), 337 of IPC, issued FIR and took up investiga- tion. After the investigation LW-15 filed charge sheet under section U/sec. 304-

A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of MV Act., against the accused.

4. Considering the charge sheet and material on record this Court took cog- nizance for the offence punishable U/sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of MV Act against the accused.

5. On appearance of accused copies were furnished to him U/Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C as required.

6. Accused is examined U/Sec. 251 Cr.P.C the substance of accusation which con- stitutes an offence punishable U/sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of

MV Act, was read over and explained, for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Upon invitation for trial the prosecution examined PWs.1 & 2 and marked Ex.P1 and P2 are marked.

C.C. No.99 of 2023 3 of page 5 Date: 26-11-2025

7. After completion of prosecution evidence, the examination U/Sec.313 of

Cr.P.C dispensed with as there is no incriminating material available against the accused. The defence not chosen to adduce any evidence.

8.Heard arguments on both sides and perused the record.

9.Now, the point for determination is:

i) “Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of accused for the

offence punishable U/sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of MV Act,

beyond reasonable doubt?”

Answer to Point:

10. As per prosecution on 31.10.2022 at 07.30 hours the complainant/LW-1 came to PS Pasra and stated that her husband Pujari Raju/Deceased was allowed their villager Karapati Edu Kondalu on his Pulsar bike bearing No.TS25 A 2903 and proceeding at about 06.00 hrs while her husband was taking U-turn, meantime the driver of Bolero Mini Trolley bearing No.TS25 T 1594 drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed to bike of her husband, as a result her husband has sustained severe bleeding injuries to his head and other parts of body and pillion rider Edukondalu has sustained fracture of his right leg, while undergoing treatment the deceased was died.

11. In order to prove the guilt of the accused the prosecution examined

Pws.1 and 2 Complainant and mother of the deceased. Since PWs-1 and 2 has not supported the case of the prosecution and they stated that they are compromis- ing this case with the accused person.

12. As there is no incriminating material against accused, the learned Assis- tant Public Prosecutor has given up remaining witnesses, including official wit- nesses.

C.C. No.99 of 2023 4 of page 5 Date: 26-11-2025

13.Upon the scrutiny, it shows that the Pws-1 and 2 who are the com- plainant and wife of the deceased have completely turned hostile and did not support the case of prosecution and deposed that they compromised the matter with the accused person.

14. POINT:

Hence, there is no evidence available on record to prove the offence al- leged against the accused. In view of the fact and totally hostile and compro- mised the matter with accused person the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused, U/sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of MV Act., beyond reasonable doubt.

15. In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offences U/sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC., and Sec.181 and 196 of MV Act., Accordingly he is acquitted U/

Sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds bonds shall be in force till expiry of appeal pe- riod. No property is deposited, no order as to property.

(Typed to my dictation by the typist corrected and pronounced by me in open court, on this day the 26 th day of November 2025.)

Sd/-

FAC Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu.

C.C. No.99 of 2023 5 of page 5 Date: 26-11-2025

:: Appendix of evidence ::

Witnesses examined for

Prosecution: Defence:

PW1: P. Sujatha-Nil-

PW2: P. Kalavathi ::Exhibits marked for::

Prosecution: Defence:

Ex.P1:Signature of PW1 on report -Nil- Ex.P2:161 Cr.PC statement of PW2.

Material objects -Nil-

Sd/-

FAC Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu.

CC.447 of 2025 1 Date: 04-05-2026

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS :: AT MULUGU

Monday the 04th day of May, Two Thousand Twenty Six. Present: Smt. Jyothsna Gunti,

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Mulugu.

C.C.No.447 of 2025

Between:

State through Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Mulugu.

...Complainant

And

Banoth Yakub, S/o.Nanya, Occ:Coolie, R/o.Raheemnagarthanda Village, Mulugu District.

...Accused

***

This case coming up before me for final hearing on 13-04-2026 in the presence of Learned APPO for the State and Sri.R.Bixpathi, Learned counsel for the accused perusing the material papers on 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 Prohibition and Excise Inspector Mulugu filed charge sheet vide

COR.No.311/2024 against the accused for the offence punishable under sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act,.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that, on 16-05-2024 at about 06:30 PM,

LW3 received reliable information about illegal transportation and illegal sale of ID liquor at outskirts of inchenchervupally, Venkatapur, as such,LW3 along with staff, went to the spot and secured PW1 and PW3 sand conducted route

CC.447 of 2025 2 Date: 04-05-2026

watch at the spot and found one person in suspicious manner with a bag on bike coming from outskirts of inchenchervupally, Venkatapur. On noticing them the said person tried to flee away, but was apprehended. On search with the bag they found 10 ltrs, of ID liquor in 2 polythene covers on Hero

Honda Splendor Plus bearing No.AP 36 0457. They have seized the

contraband, by drawing two samples of 180 ml. Each for chemical analysis under cover of panchanama, in the presence of PW1 and PW3 handed over this case to him and on enquiry with the accused, they came to know the particulars of the accused. He registered COR No.311 of 2024 dt:16-05-2024, u/S.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act and issued Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C,notice to accused and released him., thereupon he obtained permission from Dy.

Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal on 25-07-2024 and de- stroyed the contraband on 28-08-2024 and also collected the C.E. report on 03-07-2024. The bike was auctioned. After completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet against the accused person.

3.On considering the material papers on record, this court has taken cognizance against the accused for the offence punishable under sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act,.

4.On appearance of accused the case copies was furnished to him as per section 207 Cr.P.C. The accused was examined u/s.239 Cr.P.C., charge was framed for the offence punishable u/S.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act., and was explained to him in Telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, For Trial.

CC.447 of 2025 3 Date: 04-05-2026

5.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW4, and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P8.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused examined under

Sec.313 Cr.P.C. for the incriminating circumstances which appeared in the evidence of prosecution witness was explained to him, he denied and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.

7.Heard the arguments of both sides.

Now, the point for determination :

Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the

accused for the offence punishable u/S.7(A)r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition

Act., beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

8.On perusal of the entire material on record, PWs.1 and 2 who are panch witnesses for scene of offence panchanama and destruction of property and they does not know whether police conducted scene of offence and destruction panchanama and they have appended their signatures at

Mulugu excise police station on blank paper, turned hostile and marked

Ex.P1 to P3.

9.The learned prosecution has given up the evidence of LW3 and LW5.

10.PW3, who is the panch witness for scene of offence panchanama. He does not know whether police conducted scene of offence and destruction panchanama. He appended his signature at Mulugu excise police station on blank paper, turned hostile and marked Ex.P4.

CC.447 of 2025 4 Date: 04-05-2026

11.PW4, who is the prohibition and Excise Sub-Inspector, who investi- gated this case, chronologically deposed about the investigation conducted by him and admitted that LW3 did not mention as to number of vehicles she has checked on that day in Ex.P5 and PW1 & PW2 are not localities and marked Ex.P5 to Ex.P8.

12. Since there are no independent witnesses, who witnessed the case of prosecution about the scene of offence panchanama and the destruction of the property.

13.In view of the above discussion, this court holds that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

In the result,accused found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act., accordingly he is acquitted under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds shall be in force for a period of six months as required under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. No property deposited and no order as to property.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 04 th day of May, 2026.)

Sd/-

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu

CC.447 of 2025 5 Date: 04-05-2026

:: Appendix of evidence::

Witnesses examined for

Prosecution Name of Witness Description Witness No.

PW1N.ChandraiahPanch witness for scene of offece & destruction property

PW2L.RajuPanch witness for scene of offece & destruction property

PW3K.MahenderPanch witness for scene of offence

PW4P.LingaiahInvestigation Officer

:: Exhibits marked for ::

Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Arrested by

Ex:P1signature on panchanamaPW1

Ex:P2signature on destruction panchanamaPW1

Ex:P3signature on destruction PW2 panchanama

Ex:P4signature on panchanamaPW3

Ex:P5CDFPW4

Ex.P6destruction panchanamaPW4

Ex.P7CE reportPW4

Ex.P8CORPW4

Material object-Nil

Sd/-

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu

CC.02 of 2026 1 Date: 04-05-2026

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS :: AT MULUGU

Monday the 04th day of May, Two Thousand Twenty Six. Present: Smt. Jyothsna Gunti,

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Mulugu.

C.C.No.02 of 2026

Between:

State through Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Mulugu.

...Complainant

And

Dharavth Bhanu, S/o.Mangya, age:32 yrs, Occ:Agriculture, Narlapur, Tadvai mandal and Mulugu District.

...Accused

***

This case coming up before me for final hearing on 13-04-2026 in the presence of Learned APPO for the State and Sri.R.Bixpathi, Learned counsel for the accused perusing the material papers on 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 Prohibition and Excise Inspector Mulugu filed charge sheet vide

COR.No.98/2024 against the accused for the offence punishable under sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act,.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that, on 16-02-2024 at about 06:30 PM,

LW3 received reliable information about illegal transportation and illegal sale of ID liquor at Elbaka X Road, Tadvai village, as such, LW3 along with staff, went to the spot and secured PW1 and PW4 and conducted raid a the spot

CC.02 of 2026 2 Date: 04-05-2026

and found one person in suspicious manner with a bag on bike was coming from Elbaka X Road, Tadvai village. On noticing them, the said person tried to flee away, but was apprehended and on search with the bag they found 10 ltrs., of ID liquor in 2 polythene covers on bike bearing No.AP 29 AX 7652.

They have seized the contraband, by drawing two samples of 180 ml. each for chemical analysis under cover of panchanamam, in the presence of

PW1,4.LW3 handed over this case to him. On enquiry with the accused, they came to know the particulars of the accused. He registered COR No.98/2024,

dt:16-02-2024, u/S.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act, and issued sec.41 (A)

Cr.PC. Notice to accused released him, thereupon, he obtained permission from Deputy Commissioner of prohibition and Excise, Warangal on 08-05-2024 and destroyed the contraband on 13-06-2024, and also collected the C.E.report on 10-04-2024. The bike was auctioned. After completion of investigation. He laid charge sheet against the accused person.

3.On considering the material papers on record, this court has taken cognizance against the accused for the offence punishable under sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act,.

4.On appearance of accused the case copies was furnished to him as per section 207 Cr.P.C. The accused was examined u/s.239 Cr.P.C., charge was framed for the offence punishable u/S.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act., and was explained to him in Telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, For Trial.

CC.02 of 2026 3 Date: 04-05-2026

5.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW5, and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P7.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused examined under

Sec.313 Cr.P.C. for the incriminating circumstances which appeared in the evidence of prosecution witness was explained to him, he denied and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.

7.Heard the arguments of both sides.

Now, the point for determination :

Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the

accused for the offence punishable u/S.7(A)r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition

Act., beyond all reasonable doubt?

POINT:

8.On perusal of the entire material on record, PW.1 who is panch witness for scene of offence deposed that he does not know whether police conducted scene of offence and destruction panahanama and he appended his signature at Mulugu excise police station on blank paper, turned hostile and marked Ex.P1

9.PW2 who panch witness for destruction of property deposed that he does not know whether police conducted scene of offence and destruction panchanama and he appended his signature at Mulugu excise police station on blank paper, turned hostile and marked Ex.P2.

CC.02 of 2026 4 Date: 04-05-2026

10.PW3 and PW4 who are panch witnesses for scene of offence and destruction panchanama and they have appended their signatures at Mulugu excise police station on blank papers, turned hostile and marked Exs.P3 and

P4.

11.The learned prosecution has given up the evidence of LW3 and LW5.

10.PW5, who is the prohibition and Excise Sub-Inspector, who investigated this case, chronologically deposed about the investigation con- ducted by him and marked Ex.P5 to Ex.P7.

11. Since there are no independent witnesses, who witnessed the case of prosecution about the scene of offence panchanama and the destruction of the property.

12.In view of the above discussion, this court holds that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

In the result,accused found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act., accordingly he is acquitted under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds shall be in force for a period of six months as required under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. No property deposited and no order as to property.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 04 th day of May, 2026.)

Sd/-

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu

CC.02 of 2026 5 Date: 04-05-2026

:: Appendix of evidence::

Witnesses examined for

Prosecution Name of Witness Description Witness No.

PW1V.NarenderPanch witness for scene of offence

PW2N.ChandraiahPanch witness for destruction of property

PW3L.RajuPanch witness for destruction of property

PW4P.SambarajuPanch witness for scene of offence

PW5P.LingaiahInvestigation Officer

:: Exhibits marked for ::

Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Arrested by

No.

Ex.P1signature on panchanamaPW1

Ex.P2signature on destruction panchanamaPW2

Ex.P3signature on destruction panchanamaPW3

Ex.P4signature on panchanamaPW4

Ex.P5CDFPW5

Ex.P6destruction panchanamaPW5

Ex.P7CORPW5

Material object-Nil

Sd/-

Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu