Smt Kavya Jada

Junior Civil Judge

Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex · Nalgonda · Telangana

Smt Kavya Jada, Junior Civil Judge, is posted at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex, Nalgonda, Telangana, India. 47 court orders on record since 2021. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC, MC cases.

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/396/2014 Acquitted

Nakrekal Police Station vs Yara Sreenu

12 May 2022

CC.No.396 of 2014 Page 1 of 4

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS: AT NAKREKAL

Present:-Smt.B.Soujanya, Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nalgonda.

(Dated this the 12th day of May, 2022)

Calendar Case No.396 of 2014

Between:

The State of Telangana, through, Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Nakrekal. … Complainant

A N D

1.Yara Sreenu, S/o. Rama Lingaiah, Age:28 years, Occ: Agriculture, 2.Yara Rama Lingaiah, S/o. Venkaiah, Age: 56 years, Occ: Coolie, 3.Yara Ramulamma, W/o. Rama Lingaiah, Age: 45 years, Occ: Coolie, 4.Yara Veeraiah, S/o. Venkataiah, Age: 43 years, Occ: Coolie, 5.Yara Pandaiah, S/o. Venkaiah, Age: 40 years, Occ: Coolie, All are R/o. Chandampalli village of Nakrekal mandal.

…Accused A1 to A5.

This case has come up before me on 28-04-2022 for final

hearing in the presence of APPO for the State and of Sri Narsing

Vijay Kumar, Advocate, Counsel for Accused A1 to A5 and having

stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the

following:

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

1. The SI of Police, P.S. Nakrekal filed charge sheet against the accused A1 to A5 for the offence U/sec.326, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal

Code in Cr.No.134/2014 of P.S Nakrekal.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 24-06-2014 at 9.30 AM defacto complainant by name Yara Yadamma gave a report to police stating that on the said date at 06:00 AM when she was cleaning the premises of her house then her villagers Yara Srinu, Yara Rama

Lingaiah, Yara Ramulamma, Yara Veeraiah, Kranthi, Mahesh came to

CC.No.396 of 2014 Page 2 of 4

their house with sticks and rods. They attacked them due to previous enmity which happened 03 years back. Yara Srinu beat her with stick on her hand and caused injury then she made hues and cries and her husband Lingaiah came there to rescue but they also beat him with sticks and iron rod over head and other parts of the body due to which he also received head injury and injury on the left hand, when her son

Kiran came they beat him and he received injury over head, right hand index finger and her brother-in-law Chandraiah also received head injury and right hand index finger injury.

3. Basing on the above report LW11/Shaik Khadeer Ahmed, ASI of police, Nakrekal registered a case in Cr.No.134/2014 U/sec. 326, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and issued FIR.

4. Later Lw.12/B.Prasad Rao S.I of police Nakrekal took up further investigation. In this case he examined and recorded the statements of

Lws.1 to 7 and referred Lws.1 to 4 to Government Hospital for treatment. He visited scene of offence and secured the presence of

Lws.8 to 9 as panchas and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch and seized 03 sticks used in the offence. On 07-07-2014 he arrested A1 to A5 and produced them before court for judicial remand. He collected medical certificate from Lw.10, after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

5. The Court took cognizance for the offence U/sec. 326, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code against the accused A1 to A5. This Court has furnished the copies of documents U/sec.207 Cr.P.C. to the accused

A1 to A5. Accused were examined under Section 239 of Cr.P.C and

CC.No.396 of 2014 Page 3 of 4

substance of the accusation for the offences punishable U/sec. 326, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code was read over and explained to them in Vernacular language, for which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. Prosecution has examined PW1 to PW4 and got marked Ex.P-1 to

P-5. The examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed with, as there is no incriminating material available against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

7. On hearing both the sides, the Court framed the following Points for determination :- “Whether the prosecution has established the guilt

of the accused for the offences U/sec. 326, 324 r/w 34 of

Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubts?”

POINT:-

8. Prosecution examined PW1 to 4 and got marked Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-

5. PW1 is defacto complainant and victim in this case. PW2 to 4 are the injured persons and family members of Pw.1, Ex.P-1 is signature of

Pw.1 on report and Ex.P-2 to P-5 are 161 Cr.P.C statements of Pws.1 to

4. Prosecution given up Lws 5 to 12. All the material witnesses who are examined as Pws.1 to 4 have not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile and clearly admitted that they have compromised this case out of court. Though the said witnesses were declared as hostile and cross examined by APP nothing useful could be elicited in the cross examination, So as to disbelieve the chief examination.

Therefore, there is nothing much to discuss on the point except to say that prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Point is answered against prosecution.

CC.No.396 of 2014 Page 4 of 4

9. In the result, A1 to A5 are found not guilty for the offence

U/sec.326, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and acquitted u/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds and sureties of the accused persons shall stand discharged after appeal time is over. The unmarked case property i.e., 03 Sticks shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

(Dictated to stenographer Gr.-III, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 12 th day of May, 2022).

Junior Civil Judge –cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Nalgonda. FAC: JCJ-CUM-JFCM, Nakrekal

:: Appendix of Evidence ::

Witnesses Examined

Prosecution:-

PW1: Yara Yadamma PW2: Yara Lingaiah PW3: Yara Chandraiah PW4: Yara Kiran

Defence:- -NIL-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution:

Ex.P-1 : Signature of PW1 on the report. Ex.P-2 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.1 Ex.P-3 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.2 Ex.P-4 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.3 Ex.P-5 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.4

For Defence:NIL

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- Nil -

Junior Civil Judge –cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Nalgonda. FAC: JCJ-CUM-JFCM, Nakrekal

CC/318/2014 Acquitted

Nakrekal Police Station vs Akkenapally Sathish

19 May 2022

Page 1 of 5

CC.No.318 of 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS: AT NAKREKAL

Present:-Smt.B.Soujanya, Prl.Junior Civil Judge (Juvenile court)-cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nalgonda. FAC: Junior Civil Judge cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nakrekal

(Dated this the 19th day of May, 2022)

Calendar Case No.318 of 2014

Between:

The State of Telangana, through, Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Nakrekal. … Complainant

A N D

Akkenapally Sathish, S/o.Ramulu, Age:35 years, Occ:Agriculture, R/o.Ogodu village of Nakrekal Mandal. … Accused

This case has come up before me on 12.05.2022 for final

hearing in the presence of APPO for the State and of Sri Janigala

Ramulu, Advocate, Counsel for Accused No.1 to 4 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.Nakrekal filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal

Code in Cr.No.128/2014.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 09.06.2014 at 5.00 PM defacto complainant by name A.Ramulu gave a report to police stating that the said date at 2.00 PM he along with his wife were in front of their house then their son Sathish came there and demanded for Ac.2-20 gts., of agricultural land towards his share out of Ac.4-00 gts., and also to pay his debts of Rs.70,000/-, when he

Page 2 of 5

CC.No.318 of 2014

refused the same he abused him in filthy language beat him with hands, legs and stick on the right hand finger due to which he received injuries. Then his wife Narsamma and neighbor Bradamma came there and rescued.

3. Basing on the above report LW8/M.Nageshwar Rao, Inspector of police, P.S.Nakrekal registered a case in Cr.No.128/2014 u/Sec.324 of

Indian Penal Code and entrusted investigation to

LW9/Ch.Madhusudan. LW9 took up further investigation in this case.

He examined and recorded the statements of LWs1 to 4. He visited scene of offence and secured the presence of LW5 and LW6 as panchas and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch and seized one stick used in the offence. Later LW10 took up further investigation in this case obtained medical certificate from LW7 and altered the Section of law to 326 Indian Penal Code. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

4. The Court took cognizance for the offence u/Sec.326 of Indian

Penal Code against the accused. This Court has furnished the copies of documents u/Sec.207 Cr.P.C. to the accused and he was examined under Sec.239 of Cr.P.C and charge is framed under section 240

Cr.P.C. by explaining the charge in telugu, for which he denied the charge and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Page 3 of 5

CC.No.318 of 2014

5. Prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 6 and got marked Ex.P-1 to

P-8. After closure of prosecution evidence the examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed with, as there is no incriminating material available against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

6. On hearing both the sides, the Court framed the following Points for determination :- “Whether the prosecution has established the guilt

of the accused for the offences u/Sec.326 of Indian Penal

Code beyond all reasonable doubts?”

POINT:-

7. Prosecution has examined PWs1 to 6 and got marked Ex.P-1 to P-

9. PW1 is the defacto complainant and injured in this case. PWs 2, 5 and 6 are the eye witnesses. PW3 and PW4 are the circumstantial witnesses who are the mediators for scene of offence and seizure panchanama. Ex.P-1 is signature of PW1 on report. Ex.P-2 is 161

Cr.P.C., statement of PW1. Ex.P-3 is 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW2.

Ex.P-4 to P-7 are the signatures of PW3 and PW4 on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch. Ex.P-8 and P-9 are 161 Cr.P.C., statements of PW5 and PW6.

8. The prosecution has given up the other witnesses in view of the hostile evidence of PWs 1 to 6. The material witnesses are examined as

PWs 1 to 6 and all of them have not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. Therefore, there is nothing much to discuss on the point except to say that prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Point is answered against the prosecution and accused is entitled for benefit of doubt.

Page 4 of 5

CC.No.318 of 2014

9. In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence u/Sec.326 of Indian Penal Code and he is acquitted u/Sec.248 (1) of

Cr.P.C. The unmarked case property i.e., one stick shall be destroyed after appeal time is over. The bail bonds and sureties of accused shall stand discharged after appeal time is over.

(Dictated to steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 19 th day of May, 2022).

FAC: Junior Civil Judge cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal

:: Appendix of Evidence ::

Witnesses Examined

Prosecution:- PW1: Akkenapally Ramulu PW2: Akkenapally Narsamma PW3: Akkenapally Saidulu PW4: Dandempally Ravikishore Goud PW5: P.Badramma PW6: V.Laxmamma

Defence:- NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P-1 : Signature of PW1 on report Ex.P-2 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW1 Ex.P-3 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW2 Ex.P-4 : Signature of PW3 on scene of offence cum seizure panchanama Ex.P-5 : Signature of PW3 on rough sketch Ex.P-6 : Signature of PW4 on scene of offence cum seizure panchanama Ex.P-7 : Signature of PW4 on rough sketch Ex.P-8 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW5 Ex.P-9 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of PW6

For Defence:NIL

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- Nil –

FAC: Junior Civil Judge cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

Page 5 of 5

CC.No.318 of 2014

OS/154/2020

SINGAM JANAIAH vs MIRYALA NARSIMHA

13 Apr 2022

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.1

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS, AT: NAKREKAL PRESENT:- Smt. Jada Kavya.,

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

Dated this the 13th day of April, 2022

Original Suit No: 154 of 2020

Between:-

Singam Janaiah, S/o. Narsimha, Aged: 26 years, Occ: agriculture, R/o. Adloor village, Shaligouraram mandal, Nalgonda district.

...Plaintiff.

// AND //

Miryala Narsimha, S/o. Venkataiah, Aged: 29 Years, Occ: Business,R/o. Adloor village, Shaligouraram mandal, Nalgonda district.

…Defendant.

This suit came before me for final hearing and disposal on 10-08-2021 in the presence of Sri.V.Surender Reddy learned counsel for the plaintiff and defendant in exparte, having stood over for consideration, this Court delivers the following:-

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

1. This is a suit filed by plaintiff for recovery of an amount of

Rs.3,00,000/- with interest and costs.

2. The suit of plaintiff is that himself and defendant being same village.

So due to the acquaintance the defendant approached him and requested to arrange a hand loan of Rs.3,00,000/- to meet his family and business necessitates and having good faith and belief the plaintiff/Singam Janaiah advanced an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to defendant from his savings on 12-03-2018 at his house Adloor village, Shaligouraram mandal, Nalgonda district. After receipt of the amount the 1st defendant executed demand Promissory note on 12-03-2018 agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest @ 24% per annum on demand or order before the attesters. Thereafter, when the plaintiff demanded the defendant to repay the said

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.2

total amount with interest, defendant dodged the matter on one pretext or other.

3. It is submitted by plaintiff that finally when the plaintiff demanded the defendant for repayment of the said loan amount, the defendant refused to repay the said loan amount. Therefore, vexed with the attitude of the defendant, he filed the present suit and the plaintiff has got issued Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-3.

4. On the other hand, summons are served on the defendant and there was no representation of him either personally or through his counsel. Therefore, the suit is proceeded in ex-parte against him.

5. On behalf of the plaintiff himself was got examined as PW-1 and got marked the Ex.A-1: Promissory note dt. 12-03-2018, Ex.A-2: Ownership Certificate

dt: 02-10-2020, Ex.A-3: E.C Certificate dated: 31-08-2020.

6. Now, the point for determination is:

a.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount ?

b.To what relief ?

POINT No.1 & 2 :-

7. As stated supra, in order to establish the execution of Ex.A-1/ Promissory note by defendant in his favour for an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- as a consideration for the execution of the same, plaintiff himself was got examined as PW-1. The perusal of Ex.A-1 goes to show that it was executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff on 12-03-2018 with a promise to repay the said amount with interest @ 24% per annum. Thus, present suit is filed within the statutory limitation of 3 years from the date of commencement of cause of action. In these circumstances, as the evidence of PW-1 is not challenged by making his appearance and thus, failed to rebut the presumption drawn in favour of the plaintiff U/s.118 of Negotiable

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.3

Instrument Act that until the contrary is proved, it shall be presumed that every

Negotiable Instrument like Ex.A.1/Promissory note in this case was made or drawn in favour of the bearer of it for the consideration reflected in it and further, said instrument was made on the date mentioned on it only, this court has no hesitation to hold that whatever deposed by him has to be treated as true and correct.

8. Admittedly, in order to prove that defendant is liable to repay the loan amount with interest @ 24% per annum, plaintiff again relied upon the

Ex.A1/Promissory note wherein it is clearly reflected that defendant agreed to pay the same. In this regard, Section 79 of Negotiable Instrument Act is also crystal and clear that when interest at a specified rate is expressly made payable on a

Promissory note or Bill of exchange, interest shall be calculated at the rate specified on the amount of principal money due thereon, from the date of instrument until tender or realization of such amount or until such date after the institution of a suit to recover such amount as the court directs. In the present suit, as stated supra, as per Ex.A.1/Promissory note, as the defendant agreed to repay the loan amount with interest @ 24% per annum, plaintiff is entitled for the said interest on the principal amount till the date of decree. Thus, evidence of PW-1 coupled with the Ex.A-1,

Ex.A-2 & Ex.A-3 clinchingly establishes the Point No.1 & 2 in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

In the result:suit is decreed with costs against the defendants to recover an

amount of Rs.4,87,400/- with an interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the filing of the suit to date of decree and with an interest @ 6% per annum on the said

principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from the date of decree to till the realization.

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

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13 th day of April, 2022.

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.4

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of

Plaintiff Defendant

Pw.1: Singam Janaiah/Plaintiff. --None--

Exhibits marked

Plaintiff

Ex.A-1: Promissory note dt. 12-03-2018.

Ex.A-2: Ownership Certificate dt: 02-10-2020.

Ex.A-3: E.C Certificate dated: 31-08-2020.

Defendant --Nill--

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

OS/154/2020

SINGAM JANAIAH vs MIRYALA NARSIMHA

13 Apr 2022

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.1

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS, AT: NAKREKAL PRESENT:- Smt. Jada Kavya.,

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

Dated this the 13th day of April, 2022

Original Suit No: 154 of 2020

Between:-

Singam Janaiah, S/o. Narsimha, Aged: 26 years, Occ: agriculture, R/o. Adloor village, Shaligouraram mandal, Nalgonda district.

...Plaintiff.

// AND //

Miryala Narsimha, S/o. Venkataiah, Aged: 29 Years, Occ: Business,R/o. Adloor village, Shaligouraram mandal, Nalgonda district.

…Defendant.

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

1. This is a suit filed by plaintiff for recovery of an amount of

Rs.3,00,000/- with interest and costs.

2. The suit of plaintiff is that himself and defendant being same village.

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.2

total amount with interest, defendant dodged the matter on one pretext or other.

4. On the other hand, summons are served on the defendant and there was no representation of him either personally or through his counsel. Therefore, the suit is proceeded in ex-parte against him.

5. On behalf of the plaintiff himself was got examined as PW-1 and got marked the Ex.A-1: Promissory note dt. 12-03-2018, Ex.A-2: Ownership Certificate

dt: 02-10-2020, Ex.A-3: E.C Certificate dated: 31-08-2020.

6. Now, the point for determination is:

a.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount ?

b.To what relief ?

POINT No.1 & 2 :-

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.3

Instrument Act that until the contrary is proved, it shall be presumed that every

8. Admittedly, in order to prove that defendant is liable to repay the loan amount with interest @ 24% per annum, plaintiff again relied upon the

Ex.A-2 & Ex.A-3 clinchingly establishes the Point No.1 & 2 in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

In the result:suit is decreed with costs against the defendants to recover an

amount of Rs.4,87,400/- with an interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the filing of the suit to date of decree and with an interest @ 6% per annum on the said

principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from the date of decree to till the realization.

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

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13 th day of April, 2022.

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

O.S. No.154/2020 Page No.4

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of

Plaintiff Defendant

Pw.1: Singam Janaiah/Plaintiff. --None--

Exhibits marked

Plaintiff

Ex.A-1: Promissory note dt. 12-03-2018.

Ex.A-2: Ownership Certificate dt: 02-10-2020.

Ex.A-3: E.C Certificate dated: 31-08-2020.

Defendant --Nill--

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nakrekal.

CC/319/2014 Acquitted

Nakrekal Police Station vs Yara Chandraiah

12 May 2022

CC.No.319 of 2014 Page 1 of 4

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS: AT NAKREKAL

Present:-Smt.B.Soujanya, Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nalgonda.

(Dated this the 12th day of May, 2022)

Calendar Case No.319 of 2014

Between:

The State of Telangana, through, Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Nakrekal. … Complainant

A N D

1.Yara Chandraiah, S/o. Latchaiah, Age:45 years, Occ: RTC conductor of Narkatpalli depot, 2.Yara Lingaiah, S/o. Latchaiah, Age: 54 years, Occ: Coolie, 3.Yara Kiran, S/o. Lingaiah, Age: 28 years, Occ: Coolie, 4.Yara Yadamma, W/o. Lingaiah, Age: 45 years, Occ: Coolie, All are R/o. Chandampalli village of Nakrekal mandal.

…Accused A1 to A4.

This case has come up before me on 28-04-2022 for final

hearing in the presence of APPO for the State and of Sri Sudini

Srinivas reddy, Advocate, Counsel for Accused A1 to A4 and

having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court

delivered the following:

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

1. The SI of Police, P.S. Nakrekal filed charge sheet against A1 to A4 for the offence U/sec.324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code in

Cr.No.135/2014 of P.S Nakrekal.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 24-06-2014 at 10.30 AM defacto complainant by name Yara Srinu gave a report to police stating that on 23-06-2014 at 03:00 PM when he was present in the house then Y.Kiran, Lingaiah, Yadamma came to their house in drunken condition and abused them in filthy language then they kept

CC.No.319 of 2014 Page 2 of 4

quite as they don’t want to quarrel. On 24-06-2014 at 06:00 AM again the three persons came to their house picked up quarrel with him when his father came to rescue, then Lingaiah beat his father with stick on hands and caused bleeding injury Y. Chandraiah also beat him with stick over right shoulder and caused bleeding injuries due to fear they tried to escape from there but they pelted stones on them.

3. Basing on the above report LW.9/Shaik Khadeer Ahmed, ASI of police, Nakrekal registered a case in Cr.No.135/2014 U/sec. 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and issued FIR.

4. Later Lw.12/B.Prasad Rao S.I of police Nakrekal took up further investigation. In this case he examined and recorded the statements of

Lws.1 to 5. He visited scene of offence and secured the presence of

Lw.6 to 7 as panchas and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch and seized sticks from the scene. He collected medical certificate from Lw.8 and referred Lws.1 and 2 to Government

Hospital for treatment. On 11-07-2014 he arrested A1 to A4 and produced them before court for Judicial remand after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

5. The Court took cognizance for the offence U/sec. 324 r/w 34 of

Indian Penal Code against the accused A1 to A4. This Court has furnished the copies of documents u/Sec.207 Cr.P.C. to the accused

A1 to A4. Accused were examined under Section 239 of Cr.P.C and substance of the accusation for the offences punishable U/sec. 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code was read over and explained to them in

CC.No.319 of 2014 Page 3 of 4

Vernacular language, for which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. Prosecution has examined PW1 & PW2 and got marked Ex.P-1 to

P-3. The examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed with, as there is no incriminating material available against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

7. On hearing both the sides, the Court framed the following Points for determination :- “Whether the prosecution has established the guilt

of the accused for the offences U/sec. 324 r/w 34 of

Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubts?”

POINT:-

8. Prosecution examined PW1 and 2 and got marked Ex.P-1 to

Ex.P-3. PW1 is defacto complainant and injured in this case. PW2 is also injured. Ex.P-1 is signature of Pw.1 on report and Ex.P-2 & P-3 are 161 Cr.P.C statements of Pws.1 & 2. APP given up Lws 3 to 10.

Both Pw.1 and 2 have not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. Though admitted that they have compromised this case out of court. Though the said witnesses were declared as hostile and cross examined by APP nothing could be elicited in the cross examination so as to disbelieve the chief examination. Therefore, in view of the hostile evidence of material witnesses this court holds that prosecution has failed to prove guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Point is answered against prosecution.

9. In the result, A1 to A4 are found not guilty for the offence U/sec.

324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and acquitted u/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C.

CC.No.319 of 2014 Page 4 of 4

The bail bonds and sureties of the accused shall stand discharged after appeal time is over. The unmarked case property i.e., 03 Sticks shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

(Dictated to stenographer Gr.-III, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 12 th day of May, 2022).

Junior Civil Judge –cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Nalgonda. FAC: JCJ-CUM-JFCM, Nakrekal

:: Appendix of Evidence ::

Witnesses Examined

Prosecution:-

PW1: Yara Sreenu PW2: Yara Rama Lingaiah

Defence:- -NIL-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution:

Ex.P-1 : Signature of PW1 on the report. Ex.P-2 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.1 Ex.P-3 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.2

For Defence:NIL

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- Nil -

Junior Civil Judge –cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Nalgonda. FAC: JCJ-CUM-JFCM, Nakrekal

Order Record 37 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/318/2014	Nakrekal Police Station vs Akkenapally Sathish	19 May 2022	Judgment	Acquitted
MC/14/2016	Paduri Kalpana vs Panduri Upendra	19 May 2022	Order	—
CC/319/2014	Nakrekal Police Station vs Yara Chandraiah	12 May 2022	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/396/2014	Nakrekal Police Station vs Yara Sreenu	12 May 2022	Judgment	Acquitted
OS/154/2020	SINGAM JANAIAH vs MIRYALA NARSIMHA	13 Apr 2022	Judgment	—
CC/106/2019	Macharla Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay vs Macharla Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay	13 Apr 2022	Judgment	—
CC/293/2014	Shaligouraram Police Station vs Rastalpuram Venkanna	12 Apr 2022	Judgment	—
OS/95/2020	GOLI SATHWIK REDDY ALIAS CHINTU BEING MOINOR REPRASENTED BY HIS GARDIAN MOTHER GOLI SWAPNA vs CHOUGONI ANJAMMA	11 Apr 2022	Judgment	—
OS/5/2015	kapil chit funds vs Vssomasani rajitha	30 Mar 2022	Judgment	—
MC/10/2020	YELLAMULA KALYANI vs KARAMTHOT VENKATESH NAIK	16 Mar 2022	Judgment	—
MC/10/2020	YELLAMULA KALYANI vs KARAMTHOT VENKATESH NAIK	16 Mar 2022	Order	—
OS/131/2018	Manginepally Nagaiah vs Karanati Venkateshwarlu	03 Mar 2022	Judgment	—
OS/110/2019	Kasthuri Madhusudhan vs Yerra Krishna Mohan	02 Mar 2022	Judgment	—
OS/5/2021	Pittala Lamaiah vs Mududdula Srinu	15 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/226/2021	Abbagoni Yadaiah vs Shaik Naseeruddin @ Najeeruddin	15 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/20/2020	Anthati Srinivas vs Pachava Krishan Murthy	14 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/155/2020	BOKKU SRINIVAS REDDY vs JETTI VENKATAIAH AND ANOTHER	14 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/20/2021	Vantepaka Ramesh Babu vs Vantepaka Srinu	10 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/35/2021	Yalagandula Mallikharjun vs Nalabala Anjaneyulu	10 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/177/2020	Sirikonda @ Ravula Pichamma vs Ravula Shiva Kumar	10 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/189/2020	Vantepaka Jayakar vs Vantepaka Nagaiah	10 Feb 2022	Judgment	—
OS/69/2020	Medi Saidulu vs Aithagoni Narsihma	28 Jan 2022	Judgment	—
OS/109/2019	Boilla Renuka vs Jilla Venkata Ramana	28 Jan 2022	Judgment	—
OS/180/2020	Godala Vishu@ Vishnuvardhan Reddy vs Kondi Anji Reddy	24 Jan 2022	Judgment	—
CC/169/2014	Nakrekal Police Station vs Machala Lingaiah	10 Jan 2022	Judgment	—
CC/474/2014	Kattangur Police Station vs Thelu Upender	07 Jan 2022	Judgment	—
CC/50/2021	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Sulmeet Kaur	29 Nov 2021	Judgment	—
CC/517/2021	STATE OF TELANGANAN PS KATTANGUR vs Meda Sailu	25 Nov 2021	Judgment	—
CC/453/2020	BATHINI MOHAN RAJU vs MADA VENKANNA ANDOTHERS	08 Nov 2021	Judgment	—
CC/618/2017	Madagoni Nagamani vs Goti Rama Krishna	01 Nov 2021	Judgment	—
OS/83/2013	Pragadapu Hanumantha Rao vs Vantepaka Mallaiah	25 Oct 2021	Judgment	—
MC/2/2020	Bathula Vakula vs Bathula Srinu	08 Oct 2021	Order	—
MC/2/2021	SULEGAI KAVITHA vs SULEGAI RAGAVENDRA	08 Oct 2021	Order	—
CC/247/2013	SHO, Kattangur vs Sk.Moulana	30 Sep 2021	Judgment	—
CC/661/2018	Narsing Ramulu vs Nursing Bakkaiah	30 Sep 2021	Judgment	—
OS/67/2021	Nookala Vimalamma vs Nakrekanti Ashok	22 Sep 2021	Judgment	—
OS/4/2021	Mekala Sathyanarayana vs Gandamalla Rama Chandru	07 Jun 2021	Judgment	—

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2022		4
Apr 2022		6
Mar 2022		6
Feb 2022		11
Jan 2022		6
Nov 2021		5
Oct 2021		5
Sep 2021		3
Jun 2021		1

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt Kavya Jada handled?

Smt Kavya Jada has handled 47 court orders since 2021 at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 2 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt Kavya Jada hear?

Based on available records, Smt Kavya Jada primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex.

Where is Smt Kavya Jada currently posted?

Smt Kavya Jada is posted as Junior Civil Judge at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex, Nalgonda, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt Kavya Jada available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Smt Kavya Jada are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt Kavya Jada dispose cases?

Smt Kavya Jada disposes approximately 2 cases per month, based on 47 orders handled over their tenure at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex.

Since when is Smt Kavya Jada serving?

Smt Kavya Jada has been serving at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex since 2021.

Case Types

OS 57%

CC 32%

MC 11%

Posting History

Oct 2022 — May 2023

Junior Civil Judge
Jun 2022 — Jun 2022

Junior Civil Judge
Jan 2021 — Jun 2022

Junior Civil Judge · 47 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 3

Other Judges at this Court

Mrs. Neelima Muddasani

Junior Civil Judge

3 orders

Miss S.Manjula

Senior Civil Judge

43 orders

← View all judges at Nakrekal, JCJ Court Complex