Ms.K.Sandeepa

C.C.No.413 of 2025 1 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS ::: JANGAON

Thursday, the 26th day of June, 2025

PRESENT: Ms. K. Sandeepa, Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

CALENDAR CASE No. 413 of 2025

Between: The State of Telangana through the Sub Inspector of Police, PS., Bachannapet.

… Complainant

AND Musammi Asad Ali, S/o.Ibrahim, Age: 37 years, R/o. Bagulamari, Balgaon, District Barpeta, Assam State.

...Accused

-o0o-

This case is coming on 26/06/2025 before me for final disposal in the presence of N. Ramesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri M. Ravinder, learned counsel for the accused and upon considering the material evidence available on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Bachannapet, filed charge sheet in

Cr. No. 19 of 2024 against the sole accused for offences punishable under

Sections. 420 of Indian Penal Code (herein after referred as IPC) and section 66-D IT Act.

The case of the prosecution in brief:

2. This case occurred on 07-12-2023 at Alimpur Village and reported on 09/02/2024 at 2000 hours PW1 came to PS Bachannapet and lodged a telugu written petition in which he stated that he received a whatsapp video call on 07-12-2023 in which one female was nude. He immediately disconnected the call later he received morphed video of his own and

C.C.No.413 of 2025 2 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon unknown persons started blackmailing through calls and messages to upload the video in youtube, out of fear he sent Rs. 34,000/- through phone pay to 7077243699 and later called 1330. Thus, he requested to take necessary action against the accused as per law.

Registration of crime and investigation done:

3. Based on the complaint lodged by PW1, PW4 registered FIR with

Crime No. 19/2024 for offence u/Secs. 420 IPC and section 66-D of IT Act- 2008 issued FIR, dispatched the FIR copies to all concerned and informed to his superior officers about the registration of this case. On receipt of the information about theregistration of this case, PW5 rushed to PS

Bachannapet, collected copy of FIR from PW4, later examined PW1 and

PW2 recorded their statements in detail in part-II case diary. On 10-02- 2024 visited the scene of offence i.e., house of PW1, examined it and drafted crime detail form in the presence of mediators PW3 and LW4/E.

Siddaiah incorporating all the physical features.

The PW5 have served 91 & 102 Cr.P.C notice to the following banks request to furnish the following information about the

Sl.No. Bank Name Suspect bank

account No. 1Nodal oficer, Axis bank913020013682898 (suspect) 2Nodal officer,9747294154 Kotakmahindra bank (Suspect) 3Nodal officer, SBI bank39172191363 (suspect) suspect accounts, and also freeze the suspect accounts.

C.C.No.413 of 2025 3 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

And requested to

1. Debit freeze the suspect account.

2.Provide KYC, account details, Aadhar card details, registered mobile number, mail id.

3. Provide account statement from 01.12.2023 to 31.12.2023.

4. Furnish IP logs which date & time, stamp & available balance in the account.

5. Provide the details, if the beneficiary involved any other crimes mention crime No., Mobile No., mail id

6. Furnish branch mail id, contact number, provide if any other information which is useful for further investigation.

On his requisition, the said bank managers issued the statement of said accounts. He had verified the bank statements of Axis bank (account

No.913020013682989), kotak mahindra bank (Account No. 9747294154) and SBI Bank (account No. 39172191363) which was belongs to accused persons and found as below,

Bank statement:

Date Narrations Chq/ Value Deposit Withdr Closing

Ref.No Date awal balance 08-12-UPI/3342530608-12-07.00 Rs0.0047.21 Rs 2023ALLIJAN/37097562023 834253612/( Kotak PaymentMahindra UPI-bank) 334253069 756 from phone 12-12-NCRPAxis bank12-12-70.00 Rs0.00 2023Ack.No.3372023 122300488

C.C.No.413 of 2025 4 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon 66 07-12-UPI/CR/8829062107-12-1000.000.001016.16 202333414961 (SBI)2023RsRs 253651/Vak il/S URY/88290 62161/Pay ment/009 773516209 8

Accused bank details:

Axis Bank: A/c. No. 913020013682898

Mr. Rajesh,

R/o. Sojiwanlal, Gulpara,

District Bharatpur,

State Rajastan, PIN 321024

Kotak Mahindra Bank A/c.No.9747294154

Mr. Jumrat,

R/o. Tahsil Nagar Kakrala,

District Bharatpur, State Rajastan, PIN 321024.

SBI A/c.No. 39172191363

Mr. AMIN AMIN,

R/o. Dungeja, District Mewat,

State Rajasthan, PIN 122508

And also he had verified the bank statement of victim IDFC Bank

A/c.No.10149274219 and found as below,

Tran Value Transaction Ref. Debit Credit Balan

Date Date details Cheqe ce

and

C.C.No.413 of 2025 5 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

Time 07-12-07-12-UPI/MOB/07-12-11500/0.00- 202320233707787692023 07-12-07-12-UPI/MOB/07-12-22500/0.00- 202320233341365722023 622/UPI

Details: A/c. no. 50100514316094 Mr. Chennu Swamy S/o. Kanakaiah, R/o. Alimpur (V), Bachannapet(M).

On 19.06.2024 he had sent 41 (A) & 91 Cr.P.C notices through register/speed post to suspect 1. Kotak Mahindra bank holder Mr. Jumrat,

R/o.Tahsil Nagar Kakrala, Bharatpur District, Rajastan State, PIN 321024.

Suspect 2. Axis bank holder Rajesh, R/o. Sojiwanlal, Gulpara, Bharatpur

District, Rajasthan State, PIN 321024. Suspect 3. SBI bank holder

Mr.AmimAmin, R/o.Dungeja, Mewat District, Rajasthan State, PIN. 122508.

And seeking an answer with 7 days. But there is no response from them.

As per the statements of bank accounts of accused were involved from other states. On verification with bank account details of the account holder names and accused used mobile numbers CAF details both are not matched.

Inspite of tangible efforts was made to trace out the cyber crime, there is no hope towardsthe tracing of real culprits of this case near in future. As such it is afit case to be referred as “Un-Detectable” temporarily.

Therefore PW5 request the kind officer to accord permission to refer this case as on 24.07.2024 "Un-Detected" for time being vide C.No 55/CD

C.C.No.413 of 2025 6 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon file/DCP-WZJ/2024, Dated: 24.07.2024. with a condition that as and when any clue comes forth, the case will be re-opened.

As per the orders of kind CP sir vide: C.O. No. 3012/2024, C. No. 390/A1-

Estt/2024, Dt: 23-09-2024. He had reported to Narmetta circle and assumed the charge of Narmetta Circle and also took up the investigation into this case peruse the CD file and found in correct lines.

PW6 have received the Information from T4C Hyderabad, in which they stated, that one Musammi Asad Ali, S/o Ibrahim, Age:37 yrs, R/o

Bagulamari, Balgaon, Dist Barpeta, Assam State, PIN Code: 781319 was arrested in Cr.No 250/2023, U/s 420,467,468,120B IPC PS Crime Branch

Delhi, From there Brought to Telangana on PT warrant by Bodhan PS

Cr.No.78/2024 U/s 420 IPC Sec 66-D IT Act and Jakranpally PS

Cr.No.24/2024 U/s 420 IPC, Sec 66-C, 66-D IT Act and lodged in

Chanchalguda Jail, in this connection accused persons used the same mobile IMEI no (355147073178830) with different mobile numbers in the asno above cases. then cited him as accused marked as in Cr.no 19/2024 in this regard based on his confession and available technical data in Cr.

No. 250/2023, U/s 420,467,468,120B IPC PS Crime Branch Delhi it is revealed that accused was involved in this crime. Hence, he requested the superior officers to accord permission to re-open the case in Cr.No 19/2024, U/s 420 IPC, Sec 66-D IT Act of PS Bachannapet for accomplish the further investigation.

On 12.12.2024 he received order from the DCP west zone vide C.No 61/DCP-WZJ/2024 investigation. Dated 12.12.2024 for case reopening for

C.C.No.413 of 2025 7 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon further investigation. For that he had filed the requisition before the

Hon'ble Court with request to issue P.T. Warrants against the accused

Musammi Asad Ali to regularize their arrest in this particular case vide in

Cr.No 19/2024, U/s 420 IPC, Sec 66-D IT Act of PS Bachannapet. On 12.12.2024 he submitted PT warrant at additional judicial first class

magistrate at Jangaon. On 03.01.2025 he served the accused copies to

accused persons at Chanchalguda jail. And took received copy.

On 7.2.2025 he received order from the additional judicial first class

magistrate at Jangaon, to execute the PT warrant on the accused

Musammi Asad Ali. On 07.02.2025 he executed the PT warrant against the

Accused Musammi Asad Ali and produced him before honourable

additional judicial first class magistrate at Jangaon. And remanded for 11

days in the same chanchalguda jail.

After completion of investigation, PW7 filed the charge sheet for offences u/Secs. 420 IPC and section 66-D IT Act against accused.

Cognizance by the court:

4. The case was taken on file in the office for the offences U/ Sections 420 IPC and section 66-D IT Act against accused.

Appearance of accused:

5. On appearance of accused, he was furnished with copies of all necessary documents as required U/Sec.207 Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred as Cr.P.C.).

C.C.No.413 of 2025 8 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

Examination and charge:

6.Accused was examined U/Sec.239 Cr.P.C. for offence u/sec. 420 IPC and section 66-D IT Act by explaining the substance of accusation to him for the said offences in his vernacular language, for which accused pleaded not guilty and charge for the above said offences is framed and read over to which accused claimed to be tried.

Evidence adduced by prosecution:

7. To prove the guilt of the accused the prosecution has cited as many as Seven (07) witnesses out of them the prosecution could examine

Six (6) witnesses PWs1 to 6 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P9.

Examination of accused and defence evidence:

8. After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined

U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating material appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.

Arguments:

9. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused. Perused the record.

10.Now the point for determination is as follows:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish

the guilt of accused for the offences u/Sec. 420

IPC and section 66-D IT Act beyond reasonable

doubt?

Evidence on record:

11. Among the listed (07) prosecution witnesses, the prosecution examined only (6) witnesses. To prove an offence under Section 420 of the

C.C.No.413 of 2025 9 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

Indian Penal Code, it must be shown that the accused cheated someone by dishonestly or fraudulently inducing them to deliver property or to alter or destroy a valuable document. It is essential that the intention to cheat existed at the very beginning, and not developed later. For Section 66-D of the IT Act, it must be proved that the accused used a computer or communication device to cheat someone by impersonating another person. This section mainly deals with online or electronic frauds where a person pretends to be someone else to deceive and gain unlawfully.

12.PW1 stated that he received a WhatsApp video call from an unknown number which displayed a nude woman. He immediately disconnected the call. Later, he received a morphed video showing his image and was asked to pay Rs. 50,000/-. He sent Rs. 34,000/- in two transactions to a PhonePe number. He further stated that he contacted cyber crime and later went to PS Bachannapet to file a complaint.

However, PW1 did not produce the phone on which the alleged call was received, nor did the prosecution file Call Detail Records (CDRs),

WhatsApp chat history, or screenshot evidence to corroborate this central incident. He claimed to have received a threatening message and morphed video, but no such video was produced before the court, nor was any forensic analysis conducted to prove that the video was morphed or sent from a device linked to the accused. The failure to produce the phone, or even its IMEI number as primary evidence, renders PW1’s testimony uncorroborated and unreliable in the absence of any supporting digital forensic material.

C.C.No.413 of 2025 10 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

13.PW2 corroborated the testimony of PW1, stating that PW1 informed him of the incident and money transfers, and that they called cyber crime number 1930 together. However, PW2 did not witness the call, video, or messages directly. His knowledge is hearsay in nature. On cross- examination, PW2 admitted that he did not know to which number the money was sent and did not witness any transaction directly. PW2’s evidence does not strengthen the case it is purely corroborative and based on the complainant's version. Without primary digital evidence, this testimony has limited probative value.

14.PW3 stated he was asked to sign on a paper at PW1’s house and that police had already prepared a sketch. He admitted he was illiterate and did not know the contents of the Crime Detail Form. PW3 did not witness any device or material being seized from the complainant’s house.

15.PW4 admitted there was a two-month delay between the incident and registration of the FIR. He stated PW1 brought a drafted report to the station. No mention was made of retrieving any digital evidence or making efforts to secure the original video or phone. No General Diary (GD) entry was produced to corroborate time or receipt of complaint.

16.PW5 stated he issued 91 and 102 CrPC notices to banks to obtain

KYC, account statements, and IP logs. He admitted that no seizure of video, phone, or communication logs from complainant or accused was done. Crucially, he did not verify or recover any technical device to link the accused directly with the alleged crime. He admitted that the

C.C.No.413 of 2025 11 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon investigation was closed as “Un-Detected” due to lack of evidence, and that he did not verify whether the accused's phone or number was used in this offence. The failure to collect the primary electronic device, digital trail, or verify phone SIM ownership weakens the prosecution case fatally.

17.PW6 reopened the case based on information from Delhi Police that the same IMEI was used by the accused in Cr. No. 250/2023. He relied on

CYCAPS cyber data and a 65-B certificate (Ex.P5) from a Warangal cybercrime officer, linking the IMEI to this case. However, no mobile phone was seized from the accused in this case. There is no direct evidence showing the accused used that number to contact PW1. PW6 admitted he did not speak to the accused, and that the case was entirely based on technical data, without any seizure, confession in this case, or corroborative evidence from service providers. Mere IMEI linkage with another case is insufficient to convict in the absence of recovery of the device, confession in the present case, or forensic evidence linking the accused to the exact messages or transactions.

18.The burden is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. In the present case. The mobile phone of the complainant was not produced. The call logs or WhatsApp message history showing the blackmail or the number used were not filed. The alleged morphed video was not produced in court. The connection between the bank account to which money was transferred and the accused remains circumstantial, and no conclusive proof was provided linking the accused to operation or usage of the said accounts. No

C.C.No.413 of 2025 12 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon recovery of device or SIM was made from the accused. No direct evidence or corroborative material was brought on record to conclusively connect the accused with the incident alleged in Cr. No. 19/2024. In a criminal trial, mere suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute for legal proof. The absence of primary electronic evidence, non-examination of key technical witnesses, and failure to establish chain of custody of the electronic transactions prove fatal to the prosecution’s case.

19.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the charged offences U/Secs. 420 of IPC and Section 66- D of IT act 2008 and he is acquitted U/s 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The accused shall be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required in any other matter. As no property is deposed, hence no orders as to property.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 26 th day of June, 2025.

sd/-xxxxxx

Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum Addl. Junior Judical Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For Prosecution: For Defence:

PW1: Chennu Swamy -- None -- PW2: B. Madhu PW3: E. Yadhagiri PW4: K. Sathish PW5: M. Sai Ramana PW6: M. Abbaiah

C.C.No.413 of 2025 13 of 13 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.26/06/2025 Fair Copy Jangaon

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

Ex.P1: Written Report -- Nil -- Ex.P2: Crime Detail Form, dated 10-02-2024 Ex.P3: FIR Ex.P4: Notice under Section 91, 102 (1) Cr.P.C, dated 15-02-2024 (3) Ex.P5: 65-B Certificate vide dated 15-04-2025 Ex.P6: Crime link date in crime No. 250/2023 crime branch Delhi and this crime No. 19/2024 of PS Bachannapet (pages 11) (secondary evidence) Ex.P7: FIR copy in crime No. 250/2023 crime branch Delhi (pages

7) (secondary evidence) Ex.P8: Confession cum seizure panchanama of accused crime No. 250/2023crime branch Delhi (pages 18 ) ( secondary evidence). Ex.P9: Certified copies of the IDFC bank statement of PW1

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

Nil

sd/-xxxxx

Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum Addl. Junior Judical Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

//True copy//

sd/-xxxxx

Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum Addl. Junior Judical Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

C.C.No.45 of 2017 1 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS :::

JANGAON

Friday, the 15th day of May, 2026

PRESENT: Ms. K. Sandeepa, Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

CALENDAR CASE No. 45 of 2017

Between: The State of Telangana through the Sub Inspector of Police, PS.,Bachannapet.

… Complainant AND

A1.Thaluri Guruvaiah, S/o.Gopaiah, Age:35 years, Occu:Brickslane manufacturing owner at Kodwatur, R/o.Kallurigudem of Vemsuresuru (M). A2. Gunja Srinu, S/o.Pullaiah, Age:25 years, Caste:Waddera, Occu:Brickslane manufacturing owner at Thammadapalli, R/o.Thiruvur Village.

.....Accused

-o0o- This case is coming on 8/05/2026 before me for final disposal in the presence of N. Ramesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri P.Maheedhar Rao learned counsel for the accused and upon considering the material evidence available on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Bachannapet filed charge sheet in Cr.No.4 of 2017 against the accused No.1 and 2 for offence punishable under Section 374 of Indian Penal

Code (herein after referred as IPC) and section 79 of Junvenile Justice Act.

The case of the prosecution in brief:

2. On 7/01/2016 at 2030 hours LW1 lodged a complaint in PS Bachannapet in which he stated that he is working as Out Reach worker in District child protection wing (DCPU) at

Jangaon District. As per the instructions of Central Government, as a part of Operation Smile-

III, on 07-01-2017 Afternoon around 1330 hours he along with his team members i.e. 1)

M.Srinivas. ICPS. Social worker, 2) K. Uppalaiah (NGO), 3) B.Rakesh, PC-385 of PS

Narmetta, 4) R. Lavanya. WPC-33 of Jangaon PS all together conducted Rescue Bachannapet

C.C.No.45 of 2017 2 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon mandal and observed one boy working in the Bricks manufacture company at the outskirts of

Kodavatur. Upon which on enquiry with said boy, he revealed his name as Ursu Joshu Babu,

S/o Ramarao, 16 years, Waddera, R/o Tharuvuru village and Mandal, Krishna dist. Andhra

Pradesh and stated that his owner Thalluri Guruvaiah. S/o Gopaiah, 35 yrs.. R/o

Kallurugudem village, Vemsuru mandal of Khammam dist who kept in said work and providing Rs.2000/- salary per month. On that they taken said boy in to safe custody and while proceeding towards Thammadapally village, they found another two gilrs and boy working in Bricks Company beside the road. On enquiry said girls and boy revealed their names as 1) Kovvuru Manasa. D/o Venkanna, 16 years, R/o Yerragunta, Chandrugonda mandal of Khammam dist. 2) Kovvuru Venkataramani. D/o Mallesham, 17 years, R/o

Rangapuram Village, Chandrgonda Mandal of Khammam Dist, and 3) Kovvuru Satyam

Babu, S/o Venkanna, 14 yrs., R/o Erragunta village, Chandrugonda mandal, Khammam dist and their owner Gunja Srinu, S/o. Pullaiah, 25 yrs., Waddera, R/o Thiruvuru village, Krishna dist, AP who kept them in working along with their parents for which he is providing

Rs.2,500/- each. As such taken said two girls and two boys in to safe custody and sent them to C.W.C Warangal for protection. Thus, he requested to take necessary action.

Registration of crime and investigation done:

3. Based on the complaint lodged by LW1, LW11 registered a case in Crime No.4/2017 for offence u/Sec.79 of Juvenile Justice Act-2015, issued FIR, and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation, examined and recorded the statements of LWs.1 to 5

Part-II CD in detail at PS Bachannapet. Later, LW-11 visited the scene of offence at

Kodwatur and Thammadapalli villages, procured the presence of two mediators in each scene of offence i.e. LWs 7 to 10, drafted rough sketch of scene of offence by incorporating all its physical features in Crime Detail Forms and also examined and recorded the statement of

LW-6. Subsequently LW-12 taken up the investigation of this case, verified the investigation

C.C.No.45 of 2017 3 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon done by LW-11 and found it on correct lines. In this case Lw-12 collected the Adhar cards for

Age proof of the child labour. On 23-01.2017 the accused A-1 and A-2 came to Police station,

Bachannapet and appeared before LW-12 duly introducing their identity and voluntarily admitted their guilt of offence. Upon which LW-12 served notice u/s 41(1)(A)

AMMEDEMENT Cr.P.C.,-2010 to the accused A-1 and A-2 under proper acknowledgement with instructions to appear before the court at the time of trial. After completion of investigation, LW12 filed the charge sheet for offence u/Sec.374 of IPC and section 79 of

Junvenile Justice Act against accused No.1 and 2.

Cognizance by the court:

4. The case was taken on file by one of my learned predecessor in office for the offence

U/ Sections 374 of IPC and section 79 of Junvenile Justice Act against accused No.1 and 2.

Appearance of accused:

5. On appearance of accused No.1 and 2, they were furnished with copies of all necessary documents as required U/Sec.207 Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred as Cr.P.C.).

Examination and charge:

6. Accused No.1 and 2 were examined U/Sec.239 Cr.P.C. for offence u/sec.374 of IPC and section 79 of Junvenile Justice Act by explaining the substance of accusation to them for the said offences in their vernacular language, for which accused No.1 and 2 pleaded not guilty and charge for the above said offences is framed and read over to which accused No.1 and 2 claimed to be tried.

Evidence adduced by prosecution:

7. To prove the guilt of the accused No.1 and 2 the prosecution has cited as many as

Tweleve (12) witnesses out of them the prosecution could examine Five (5) witnesses PWs1 to 5 and got marked Ex.P1 to P5.

C.C.No.45 of 2017 4 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

Examination of accused and defence evidence:

8. After closure of prosecution evidence, accused No.1 and 2 were examined

U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating material appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which accused No.1 and 2 denied the same and reported no defence evidence on their behalf.

Arguments:

9. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused No.1 and 2. Perused the record.

10.Now the point for determination is as follows:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused

No.1 and 2 for the offences u/Sec. 374 of IPC and section 79 of

Junvenile Justice Act beyond reasonable doubt?

Answer to the point

11. In order to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Section 374

IPC and Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P1 to P5. PW1 deposed that during the year 2017 he worked as District Co- ordinator of Divya Dheeksha and as part of Operation Smile-III programme, on 07.01.2017 he along with other team members visited Kodavatoor village and found one child namely

Josh Babu aged about 16 years working in a brick kiln. According to PW1, the said child informed them that accused No.1 was making him work for a monthly salary of Rs.2,000/-.

PW1 further deposed that while returning from there, near Thammadapalli village, they found three more children namely Manasa, Venkata Ramani and Sathyam working in another brick kiln and on enquiry they informed that accused No.2 was engaging them for work by paying

Rs.2,500/- each per month. PW1 stated that thereafter the children were sent to Child Welfare

Committee, Warangal.

C.C.No.45 of 2017 5 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

12.During cross-examination, PW1 admitted that no proceedings copy showing his appointment or constitution of the Operation Smile team was filed before police. He further admitted that no tour record or documentary proof was produced to show that the team visited Kodavatoor and Thammadapalli villages on the alleged date. PW1 also admitted that no statements of other workers were collected and no documentary proof was obtained to establish that accused Nos.1 and 2 were maintaining the brick kilns. He further admitted that the children were not subjected to any medical examination for determination of age and that he had not stated before police that age of the children was ascertained through Aadhaar cards.

13.PW2, who worked as outreach worker at District Child Protection Unit, deposed in tune with PW1 and stated that during Operation Smile programme they found one boy working in the brick kiln belonging to accused No.1 and later found three more children working in another brick kiln belonging to accused No.2. He further stated that the children were rescued and produced before Child Welfare Committee.

14.In the cross-examination, PW2 admitted that no identity card, route book or proceedings relating to constitution of the Operation Smile team were filed before police. He further admitted that there was no documentary proof to show that they visited the alleged places on the relevant date. PW2 also admitted that no documentary proof was produced to establish that accused Nos.1 and 2 were owners of the brick kilns. He further admitted that no photographs or videos of the children working at the brick kilns were taken and no statements of independent witnesses or labourers working there were recorded.

15.PW3, who was working as police constable at Narmetta Police Station, also supported the prosecution version and deposed that during Operation Smile-III programme they found minors working in brick kilns under accused Nos.1 and 2.

C.C.No.45 of 2017 6 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

16.However, in his cross-examination, PW3 admitted that there was no proof to show that accused Nos.1 and 2 were running the brick factories at Kodavatoor and Thammadapalli villages. He further admitted that statements of child labourers and other labourers working at the brick kilns were not recorded. He also admitted that there was no proof to show that he travelled to the alleged places on the date of incident.

17.PW4, who was cited as circumstantial witness to the case, did not support the case of the prosecution and was treated as hostile. PW5, the Investigating Officer, deposed regarding registration of the crime, conduct of investigation and filing of charge sheet against accused

Nos.1 and 2. He stated that he collected age proof documents of the victims and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet. During cross-examination, PW5 admitted that he had not collected any proceedings relating to Operation Smile programme or any details regarding the alleged inspection visit. He further admitted that no documents relating to ownership of the brick kilns or the lands where the kilns were situated were collected during investigation. PW5 also admitted that he had not collected any material to establish that accused Nos.1 and 2 were running the brick kilns and that statements of the minors allegedly working at the kilns were not recorded.

18. Upon appreciation of the entire evidence on record, it is clear that the prosecution mainly relied upon the oral testimony of PWs.1 to 3 to establish that the accused engaged child labourers in the brick kilns. Though PWs.1 to 3 supported the prosecution version in their chief-examination, the prosecution failed to examine any of the alleged child labourers

before the Court. The prosecution also failed to record or produce statements of other workers

allegedly present at the brick kilns. No photographs, videos or independent documentary evidence were produced to establish that the children were actually working in the brick kilns on the alleged date.

C.C.No.45 of 2017 7 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

19.Further, the prosecution failed to establish that accused Nos.1 and 2 were owners or persons in charge of the alleged brick kilns. PWs.1 to 3 admitted in their cross-examination that no documentary proof regarding ownership or management of the brick kilns was collected. Even the Investigating Officer admitted that he had not collected any ownership documents or land records relating to the brick kilns. Thus, the nexus between accused Nos.1 and 2 and the alleged brick kilns was not established by prosecution. The prosecution also failed to produce satisfactory proof regarding age of the alleged victims. Though it is stated that Aadhaar cards were collected, the same was not filed before the court.

20.It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. In the present case, the evidence placed on record is insufficient to conclusively establish that the accused engaged minors as labourers or subjected them to exploitation so as to attract the offences punishable under Section 374

IPC and Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of accused Nos.1 and 2 beyond reasonable doubt and consequently the benefit of doubt shall go in favour of the accused.

21. In the result, accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offences under sections 374 of IPC and section 79 of JJ Act and accordingly he is acquitted for the said offence under

Section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand cancelled and the sureties shall be discharged after expiry of appeal time. As there is no property deposited before this court, there is no order for disposal of property.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 15 th day of May, 2026.

sd/-xxxxxxx

Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum Judical Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

C.C.No.45 of 2017 8 of 8 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/5/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For Prosecution: For Defence: PW1:K.Uppalaiah -- None -- PW2: P.Narsimha Swamy PW3: D.Rakesh PW4: M.Buchireddy PW5: M.Bharath

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

Ex.P1:is the Report - Nil – Ex.P2: is the section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW4 Ex.P3: is the FIR Ex.P4: is the CDF No.1 Ex.P5: is the CDF No.2

Material Objects Marked: - Nil –

sd/-xxxxxxx

Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum Judical Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

//True copy//

sd/-xxxxxxx

Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum Judical Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon.

C.C.No.127 of 2021 1 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS :::

JANGAON

Friday, the 15th day of May, 2026

PRESENT: Ms. K. Sandeepa,

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

CALENDAR CASE No.127 of 2021

Between: The State of Telangana through the Sub Inspector of Police, PS.,Devaruppula.

… Complainant

AND

A1.Akavarapu Rambabu, S/o.Nageshwer Rao, Age:33 years, Caste:SC Madiga, Occu:Driver, R/o.Gokinpally, Mudigonda (M), Khammam District. A2. Annapu Mallikarjun Rao, S/o.Venkanna (Late), Age:46 years, Caste:Boya Valmiki, Occu:Business, R/o.Kaspa Bazar, Khammam (D).

...Accused

-o0o- This case is coming on 11/05/2026 before me for final disposal in the presence of N. Ramesh, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri D.Yugandhar Learned Counsel for the Accused and upon considering the material evidence available on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Devaruppula, filed charge sheet in

Cr.No.110 of 2020 against the accused No.1 and 2 for offences punishable Under

Section.304(A), 337 of Indian Penal Code (herein after referred as IPC) and Section 181 of

MV Act against Accused No.1 and for offence punishable Under Section 180 of MV Act against Accused No.2.

The case of the prosecution in brief:

2. On 02/10/2020 at 10:30 hours the LW1/G.Jilender Chary came to PS and lodged a written complaint in Telugu stating that on 27-09-2020 at about 3:00 P.M his nephew

Muduguloju Vinay Kumar, S/o.Paramathma Chary, Age:23 years, R/o.Singarajupally Village

C.C.No.127 of 2021 2 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon took his grandmother Gudipalli Anjamma, Age:70 years, and Gudipalli Sathwika, Age:11 years, on his Bike No.AP-36/AG-5508 and left from Singarajupally to Mondrai on the way at about 3:30 P.M. at Gollapalli Bus Stand one Ashok Leyland Trolley No.TS-04/UB-8252 coming from back side, its driver drove it in rash and negligent manner at high speed and dashed to their bike, that his nephew, his mother Anjamma and Sathwika fell down, Anjamma received injuries on left hand, back side, his nephew Vinay Kumar received injuries to left hand, left leg. Immediately taken Vinay Kumar, Anjamma and Sathwika to MGM Hospital,

Warangal for treatment. On enquiry came to know the name of said driver is Akavarapu

Rambabu, S/o. Nageshwer Rao, Age:33 years, Occu:Driver, R/o. Gokinpally,, Mudigonda (M) Khammam Dist. As taken treatment delay caused in lodging complaint. Hence requested to take necessary action against said driver and to do justice.

Registration of crime and investigation done:

3. Based on the complaint lodged by LW1, LW19 registered a case in Crime No.110/2020 for offence under section 337 of IPC, issued FIR and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, LW-19 examined LW1 and recorded his statement in detail under section 161 Cr.P.C., at Devaruppula P.S. Subsequently LW19 proceeded to the scene of offence i.e., near Gollapalli Bus stand, where LW19 secured the presence of two mediators LWs12 and 13, in their presence incorporated the physical features of the scene in CDF, later secured the presence of LWs2 to 5, examined and recorded their statements in detail under section 161

Cr.P.C., sent requisitions to the Medical Officer for the treatment of injured and to issue MCs.

On 08.10.2020 served notice under section 41 (A) Cr.P.C., to the accused A1/Akavarapu

Rambabu and A2/Annapu Mallikarjun Rao on their surrender at Devaruppula Police Station with instructions to attend before the court as and when he was summoned and the acknowledgement is enclosed and submitted herewith. On interrogation, the accused voluntarily confessed to have committed this offence. Verfied the documents of crime vehicle

C.C.No.127 of 2021 3 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon found valid. The accused did not poossess driving license. Subsequently on 26.10.2020 at 10:00 hrs LW1 came to PS and lodged further written petition stated that his mother

LW2/G.Anjamma, Age:70 years, was discharged from CC Shroff Memorial Hospital on 19.10.2020 and shifted to their house at Dardapally and while she was undergoing treatment at the house died on 26.10.2020 at 10:00 hrs. Hence requested to conduct inquest panchanama and handed over the dead body. As such the LW19 visited Mortuary, Area hospital, Jangaon secured the presence of LWs1, 6, to 9 photographed the dead body of the deceased by photographer LW10 re-examined and re-recorded the statement of LW1, examined and recorded the statements of LWs6 to 10 in detail under section 161 Cr.P.C., held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of mediators LWs14 and 15 and referred the dead body of the deceased for PME and report to Area hospital, Jangaon to know the exact cause of death. On the strength of the inquest conducted on the dead body of the deceased, evidence collected, added the section of law 337 IPC to 337, 304-A IPC and

Section 180, 181 of MV Act and submitted section adding report to the court on 26.10.2020 and sent the copies to all the concerned. On 07.01.2021 LW11 owner of the vehicle

Komuragiri Laxmi Narsamma, W/o.Venkatachary came to PS along with vehicle releasing order basing on the court vide Dis.No.656/2020, LW19 released the above said vehicle to the

LW11 and LW19 examined and recorded the statement of LW11 under section 161 Cr.P.C.

Subsequently caused the presence of accused and crime vehicle at P.S., sent requisition the

MVI Jangaon to inspect the crime vehicle and to issue inspection report. The LW18 who inspected the crime vehicle issued inspection report opined that the accident occurred was not due to any mechanical defect of the vehicle. The Medical Officer LW17 who treated the LW3 issued MC opined that LW3 received injuries are ‘simple in nature’. The Medical Officer

LW16 who held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased issued detailed PME report opined that the deceased died ‘due to multiple trauma, intracranial hemorrhage, displaced

C.C.No.127 of 2021 4 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon fracture bleeding to death’. After completion of investigation, LW19 filed the charge sheet for offences punishable under sections.304(A), 337 of Indian Penal Code (herein after referred as IPC) and section 181 of MV Act against Accused No.1 and for offence punishable section 180 of MV Act against accused No.2.

Cognizance by the court:

4. The case was taken on file by one of my learned predecessor in office for the offence punishable under section.304(A), 337 of Indian Penal Code, section 181 of MV Act against

Accused No.1 and for the offence punishable under section 180 of MV Act Against Accused

No.2.

Appearance of accused:

5. On appearance of accused No.1 and 2, were furnished with copies of all necessary documents as required U/Sec.207 Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred as

Cr.P.C.).

Examination and charge:

6.Accused was examined U/Sec.251 Cr.P.C. for offence under section.304(A), 337 of

IPC and section 181 of MV Act against Accused No.1 and for offence under section 180 of

MV Act against accused No.2 by explaining the substance of accusation to them for the said offences in their vernacular language, for which accused No.1 and 2 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Evidence adduced by prosecution:

7. To prove the guilt of the accused No.1 and 2 the prosecution has cited as many as

Nineteen (19) witnesses out of them the prosecution could examine Six (6) witnesses PWs1 to 6 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P7.

C.C.No.127 of 2021 5 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

Examination of accused and defence evidence:

8.As there is no incriminating evidence available against the accused No.1 and 2, hence the examination under section 313 Cr.P.C., was dispensed with.

Arguments:

9. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused. Perused the record.

10.Now the point for determination is as follows:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused No.1 for the offences under section.304(A), 337 of IPC, section 181 of MV Act and accused No.2 for the offence under section 180 of MV Act beyond reasonable doubt?

Answer to the point:

11.Among the listed (19) prosecution witnesses, the prosecution examined only (6) witnesses. The Six material witnesses have turned hostile and did not depose anything against the accused person. No direct or circumstantial evidence is available to establish that the accused was responsible for the accident. Hence prosecution utterly failed to prove the guilt of accused persons.

12.Section 304-A IPC which is Causing death by negligence requires proof that the accused’s act was the direct cause of death. No such evidence has been produced. No such evidence has been produced. Therefore, the Accused No.1 and 2 are entitled for acquittal.

13.In the result, the Accused No.1 is found not guilty for offence punishable under section.304(A), 337 of IPC, section 181 of MV Act and accused No.2 is found not guilty for offence punishable under section 180 of MV Act. Accordingly they are acquitted for the said offences under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand cancelled

C.C.No.127 of 2021 6 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon and the sureties shall be discharged after expiry of appeal time. As there is no property deposited before this court, there is no order for disposal of property.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 15 th day of May, 2026.

sd/-xxxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For Prosecution: For Defence:

PW1:G.Jilender Chary -- None -- PW2: G.Sathwika PW3: M.Uma Rani PW4: G.Venkatachary PW5: Theegala Krishna PW6: G.Eshwaramma

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P1:is the Signature of PW1 on report Ex.P2: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW1 Ex.P3: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW2 Ex.P4: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW3 Ex.P5: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW4 Ex.P6:is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW5 Ex.P7: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW6 For Defence : Nil Material Objects Marked: - Nil –

sd/-xxxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon //True copy//

sd/-xxxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon

C.C.No.819 of 2018 1 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS ::: JANGAON

Friday, the 15th day of May, 2026

PRESENT: Ms. K. Sandeepa,

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

CALENDAR CASE No.819 of 2018

Between: The State of Telangana through the Sub Inspector of Police, PS.,Bachannapet.

… Complainant

AND A1. Bodasu Srikanth, S/o.Yadagiri, Age:22 years, R/o.Shabashgudem (V) of Komuravelly Mandal. A2. Bodasu Yadagiri, S/o.Bhumaiah, Age:44 years, R/o.Shabashgudem (V), Komuravelly (M).

...Accused

-o0o- This case is coming on 15/05/2026 before me for final disposal in the presence of N. Ramesh, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri G.Ravinder Learned Counsel for the Accused and upon considering the material evidence available on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Bachannapet, filed charge sheet in

Cr.No.57 of 2018 against the accused No.1 and 2 for offences punishable Under

Section.304(A), 337 of Indian Penal Code (herein after referred as IPC) and Section 181 of MV Act against Accused No.1 and for offence punishable Under Section 180 of MV Act against Accused No.2.

The case of the prosecution in brief:

2. On 15/6/2018 at 18:30 hours the LW1/K.Mallamma lodged a complaint in PS

Bachannapet in which she stated that on 15.06.2018 afternoon at about 1400 hours

C.C.No.819 of 2018 2 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon her husband Kanthri Siddaiah, S/o Abbaiah, Age 60yrs, Madiga, Labour,

R/o.Chinnaramancherla village, Bachannapet mandal left from their house and as usually he fetched empty beer bottles and at about 1530 hours while he was proceeding from SV Gardens to Bachannapet side, at the same time one Pulsar motor cycle number less vide Chassis No.MD2A11CY7HWH20281 and Engine

No.DHYWHH28421 proceeding from Aler to Bachannapet side and its driver drove his bike in rash and negligent manner and dashed against her husband from back side.

As a result of which her husband fell down and received severe injury over his back side of head. Whereas said rider failed to control his bike, where after going to a far of distance, the persons on the bike i.e., Bodasu Yadagiri, Bodasu Anjamma, Kuncham

Vinay, Rishika also received injuries in the meantime when 108 Ambulance arrived all the injured persons were shifted to Jangaon Area Hospital, where while shifting the injured to hospital, on the way after crossing Bachannapet, her husband was died. The same was informed to her by their villager Gadepaka Laxmaiah, S/o.Pentaiah. On enquiry about the bike rider, they came to know his name as Bodasu Srikanth,

S/o.Yadagiri, Age;22 years, R/o.Shabashgudem of Komuravelly Mandal, Siddipet

District. Thus she requested to take necessary action.

Registration of crime and investigation done:

3. Based on the complaint lodged by LW1, LW17 has registered a case in Crime

No.57/2018 for offence under section 304 (A), 337 of IPC at PS Bachannapet, issued

FIR and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, LW-17 has examined and recorded the statement of LW1 at PS Bachannapet. LW17 has filed a requisition to Medical Officer, Area hospital, Jangaon with a request to give treatment

C.C.No.819 of 2018 3 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon to A2, LW9, Komre Reshika, Kuncham Vinay and issued Medical Certificates. Later, he visited scene of offence at Near SV Gardens, Bachannapet, drawn the scene of offence sketch of the scene in CDF in the presence of two mediators LWs.10 & 11, where he secured the presence LWs. 2 & 3, examined them and recorded their detailed statements in Part-II CD. Later, LW-17 visited mortuary of Area Hospital, Jangaon, where secured the presence of LWs.4 to 8, examined them and recorded their statements in part-II CD. Also secured the presence of panchas LWs12 and 13 and in their presence examined the corpse of deceased and held inquest over the corpse of deceased, got the dead body photographed with the help of LW-8 and subjected the corpse for autopsy. After PME the dead body handed over to the blood relatives of the deceased under acknowledgement for final rites, Shifted the crime vehicle Bajaj

Pulsar motor cycle number less vide Chassis No.MD2A11CY7HWH20281 and

Engine No.DHYWHH28421 to PS for MVI inspection. On 11-08-2018 the accused

A1 & A2 came to Police Station Bachannapet appeared before LW-17 duly introducing their identity and voluntarily admitted his guilt of offence. Upon which

LW-17 verified the document pertaining to crime vehicle RC and Insurance found valid, A1 is not having Driving license, served Notice to the accused A1 and A2 U/s 41 (A) Cr.PC under proper acknowledgement with instructions them to appear before the court at the time of trial. Where he secured the presence LW-9/injured and examined & recorded her detailed statement in Part-II CD. As per his transfer to this

PS Bachannapet, he took up the investigation of this case. Filed a reguistion for vehicle inspection to MVI/LW 16. The LW-16 inspected the crime vehicle and given report by stating that "the accident occurred was not due to any mechanical defects of

C.C.No.819 of 2018 4 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon the vehicle. And later collected PME report from the concerned Medical Officer, in which the Medical officer/LW-14 opined that the cause of death of deceased is due to "Cardio respiratory arrest succumbed to head injury and later LW-15 treated the

LWs.9, A2, Komre Reshika, Kuncham Vinay and issued Medical Certificates and opined that they had sustained injuries Simple in nature. Submitted form 54 in District

Court for insurance purpose after collecting all the available documents of crime vehicle. After completion of investigation, LW18 filed the charge sheet for offences punishable under sections.304(A), 337 of Indian Penal Code (herein after referred as

IPC) and section 181 of MV Act against Accused No.1 and for offence punishable section 180 of MV Act against accused No.2.

Cognizance by the court:

4. The case was taken on file by one of my learned predecessor in office for the offences punishable under sections.304(A), 337 of Indian Penal Code, section 181 of

MV Act against Accused No.1 and for the offence punishable under section 180 of

MV Act Against Accused No.2.

Appearance of accused:

5. On appearance of accused No.1 and 2, were furnished with copies of all necessary documents as required U/Sec.207 Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred as Cr.P.C.).

Examination and charge:

6.Accused No.1 and 2 were examined U/Sec.251 Cr.P.C. for offences under sections.304(A), 337 of IPC and section 181 of MV Act against Accused No.1 and for offence under section 180 of MV Act against accused No.2 by explaining the

C.C.No.819 of 2018 5 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon substance of accusation to them for the said offences in their vernacular language, for which accused No.1 and 2 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Evidence adduced by prosecution:

7. To prove the guilt of the accused No.1 and 2 the prosecution has cited as many as Eighteen (18) witnesses out of them the prosecution could examine Five (5) witnesses PWs1 to 5 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5.

Examination of accused and defence evidence:

8.As there is no incriminating evidence available against the accused No.1 and 2, hence the examination under section 313 Cr.P.C., was dispensed with.

Arguments:

9. Heard the arguments of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused. Perused the record.

10.Now the point for determination is as follows:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused No.1 for the offences under sections.304(A), 337 of IPC, section 181 of MV Act and accused No.2 for the offence under section 180 of MV Act beyond reasonable doubt?

Answer to the point:

11.Among the listed (18) prosecution witnesses, the prosecution examined only (5) witnesses. The Five material witnesses have turned hostile and did not depose anything against the accused person. No direct or circumstantial evidence is available to establish that the accused was responsible for the accident. Hence prosecution utterly failed to prove the guilt of accused persons.

C.C.No.819 of 2018 6 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

12.Section 304-A IPC which is Causing death by negligence requires proof that the accused’s act was the direct cause of death. No such evidence has been produced.

No such evidence has been produced. Therefore, the Accused No.1 and 2 are entitled for acquittal.

13.In the result, the Accused No.1 is found not guilty for offence punishable under section.304(A), 337 of IPC, section 181 of MV Act and accused No.2 is found not guilty for offence punishable under section 180 of MV Act. Accordingly they are acquitted for the said offences under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the

Accused shall stand cancelled and the sureties shall be discharged after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 15 th day of May, 2026.

sd/-xxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For Prosecution: For Defence:

PW1:G.Anjaiah -- None -- PW2: G.Laxmaiah PW3: K.Mallesham PW4: B.Anjamma PW5: G.Anjaiah

C.C.No.819 of 2018 7 of 7 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P1:is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW1 Ex.P2: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW2 Ex.P3: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW3 Ex.P4: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW4 Ex.P5: is the Signature of PW5 on inquest panchanama For Defence : - Nil - Material Objects Marked: - Nil –

sd/-xxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon //True copy//

sd/-xxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon

C.C.No.697 of 2021 1 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS :::

JANGAON

Friday, the 15th day of May, 2026

PRESENT: Ms. K. Sandeepa,

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

CALENDAR CASE No. 697 of 2021

Between: The State of Telangana through the Sub Inspector of Police, PS.,Bachannapet.

… Complainant

AND

Sirra Srikanth, S/o.Kumar Goud, Age:28 years, Occu:Business, R/o.Sai Nagar, Khanapur (V & M), Niramal District, N/o.Uppal Depo.

...Accused

-o0o- This case is coming on 15/05/2026 before me for final disposal in the presence of N. Ramesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri N.Siddulu learned counsel for the accused and upon considering the material evidence available on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Bachannapet filed charge sheet in Cr.No.122 of 2021 against the accused for offence punishable under Section.304(A) of Indian Penal Code (herein after referred as IPC).

The case of the prosecution in brief:

2. On 23/06/2021 at 17:30 hours the LW1/G.Parameshwari came to P.S, Bachannapet and lodged a Telugu written petition stating that on 22.06.2021 evening at about 05:00 P.M., she along with her husband G.Srinivas and their two children came to her parents house at

Pochannapet Village to attend 21st day function of her younger brother’s daughter. Today i.e., on 23.06.2021 at about 11:00 A.M her husband went Bachannapet to bring provisions on his

Honda Activa bearing No.TS07 FY 2500 and while coming back to Pochannapet Village on

the way at about 01:30 P.M. when he reached near to Limra Function Hall the driver of

C.C.No.697 of 2021 2 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

Maruthi Suzuki OMNI vehicle bearing No.TS 08 FT 9350 drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner with high speed from Alair towards Bachannapet and dashed her husband vehicle due to which he received severe injuries and died on the spot. Meantime her brother- in-law Chintakindi Satheesh the same informed to her brother Martha Subash informed the same to her over phone. On information she along with her relatives rushed to accident area near Limra garden. The police officers traffic disturbance they were shifted to Government hospital, Jangaon and found her husband died. On enquiry about the driver of OMNI vehicle came to know that his name as Sirra Srikanth, S/o.Kumar, Age:28 years, Occu:Business,

R/o.Uppal Depo. Finally she requested to take necessary legal action against the driver as per law and do justice to her.

Registration of crime and investigation done:

3. Based on the complaint lodged by LW1, LW12 has registered a case in Crime

No.122/2021 for offence under section 304(A) of IPC issued FIR and took up investigation.

During the course of the investigation LW12 has examined LW1 and recorded his statement in detail in part-II cas dairy. Later visited Mortuary room of Area hospital, Jangaon secured the presence of mediators LWs6 and 7, in their presence examined the LWs2 to 5 and recorded their statements in part-II case dairy. Examined the dead body of deceased, held inquest in the presence of mediator after taking the photos of deceased by the assistance of private photographer LW5 and sent a requisition to the Superintendent, Area hospital,

Jangaon with a request to conduct autopsy over the dead body of deceased and issue PME report to know the cause of death of deceased. Thereafter visited the scene of offence and situated at Banadanagaram sub-station along with LW1, examined it and drafted crime detail form in the presence of mediators LWs8 and 9 incorporating all the physical features. In the presence of LWs8 and 9, LW13 has seized the crime vehicle Maruthi Suzuki OMNI vehicle bearing No.TS 08 FT 9350 at crime scene and brought to Police Station for further

C.C.No.697 of 2021 3 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon investigation. Subsequently the LW13 took up the investigation of this case from LW12, verified the investigation done by LW12 and found it on correct lines. On 12-07-2021 the

LW13 served notice under section 41 (1) (A) Cr.P.C., to the accused Sirra Srikanth. After taken the notice the accused given explanation that he undertake himself to not violate the conditions under section 41 (a) to (e) Cr.P.C., and abide by the terms of notice. LW10 is the

Civil Assistant Surgeon, Area hospital, Jangaon who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and opined that the deceased died due to “Head injury causing intra cranial

Hemorrhage leading to death”. LW11 is the MVI, Jangaon who inspected the crime vehicle and issued inspection report and opined that the accident was not occurred due to any mechanical defects of the vehice. After completion of investigation, LW13 filed the charge sheet for offence under section.304(A) of IPC against the accused.

Cognizance by the court:

4. The case was taken on file by one of my learned predecessor in office for the offence

Under Section 304 A IPC against accused.

Appearance of accused:

5. On appearance of accused, he was furnished with copies of all necessary documents as required U/Sec.207 Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred as Cr.P.C.).

Examination and charge:

6. Accused was examined U/Sec.251 Cr.P.C. for offence under section.304 A IPC against accused by explaining the substance of accusation to him for the said offence in his vernacular language, for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Evidence adduced by prosecution:

7. To prove the guilt of the accused the prosecution has cited as many as Thirteen (13) witnesses out of them the prosecution could examine Nine (9) witnesses PWs1 to 9 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P14.

C.C.No.697 of 2021 4 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

Examination of accused and defence evidence:

8.After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined Under Section 313

Cr.P.C. as there was incriminating material appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

Arguments:

9. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused. Perused the record.

10.Now the point for determination is as follows:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused for the offence Under Section 304 A of IPC beyond reasonable doubt?

Answer to point:

11.Among the listed (13) prosecution witnesses, the prosecution examined only (9) witnesses. The Six material witnesses have turned hostile and did not depose anything against the accused person.

12. PW7 inquest panch witness has deposed about conducting of inquest panchanama over the deceased deadbody in his presence. Pw8 and Pw9 are investigating officers and their evidence is formal in nature. From evidence of Pw7 it is only established that inquest panchanama was conducted by the police over the deceased. Apart from evidence of Pw7 to

Pw9 no direct or circumstantial evidence is available on record to establish that the accused was responsible for the accident. Hence prosecution utterly failed to prove the guilt of accused person.

13.Section 304-A IPC which is Causing death by negligence requires proof that the accused’s act was the direct cause of death. No such evidence has been produced. Therefore, the Accused is entitled for acquittal.

C.C.No.697 of 2021 5 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

14.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for offence punishable Section.304 A of

IPC. Accordingly he is acquitted for the said offence under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand cancelled and the sureties shall be discharged after expiry of appeal time. As there is no property deposited before this court, there is no order for disposal of property.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 15 th day of May, 2026.

sd/-xxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For Prosecution: For Defence: PW1:G.Parameshwari -- None -- PW2:Ch.Sathish PW3: M.Venkatesham PW4: Ch.Laxminarayana PW5:Shamsheer PW6:N.Papaiah PW7:M.Rajeshwar PW8:B.Raju PW9:J.Laxman Rao

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P1:is the Signature of PW1 on report, dt.23.06.2021 Ex.P2: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement Ex.P3: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement Ex.P4: is the Section 161 Cr.P.C., statement Ex.P5: is the Signature of Pw4 on inquest panchanama Ex.P6:is the signature of PW5 on Crime Detail Form Ex.P7: is the signature of PW6 on Crime Detail Form Ex.P8: is the Inquest Panchanama Ex.P9: is the report

C.C.No.697 of 2021 6 of 6 A.J.F.C.M, Dt.15/05/2026 Fair Copy Jangaon

Ex.P10: is the FIR Ex.P11: is the inquest panchanama Ex.P12: is the Crime Detail Form Ex.P13: is the PME Ex.P14: is the MVI For Defence : Nil Material Objects Marked: - Nil –

sd/-xxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.

//True copy//

sd/-xxxxxxx

Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Jangaon.