Khushboo Upadhyay

PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL

Parkal, JCJ Court Complex · Hanumakonda · Telangana

Khushboo Upadhyay, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL, is posted at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex, Hanumakonda, Telangana, India. 261 court orders on record since 2018. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, EP cases.

261

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/11/2019

SIRI CHANDANA HIRE PURCHASE FINANCE BY KOLA THIRUPATHI vs ESLAVATH RAVINDER

06 Mar 2019

O.S. No. 11 of 2019

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT PARKAL

Wednesday, this the 06th day of March, 2019

Present : KHUSHBOO UPADHYAY,

FAC. Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Parkal.

O.S.No. 11 OF 2019

Between:

Siri Chandana Hire Purchase & Finance rep., by its Managing Director, Kola Thirupathi … Plaintiff

A n d

1)Eslavath Ravinder

2)Daitha Srikanth

... Defendants

This Suit is coming up before me for disposal on this day in the presence of Sri D. Ramesh, Learned Advocate for plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 remained ex-parte and upon perusing the entire material available on record, and hearing the arguments and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

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

The suit is filed by the plaintiff to pass a decree for Rs. 1,83,000/- (Rupees One lakh eighty three thousand only) against the person and properties of the defendants holding that the defendants are liable to pay the amount and to grant interest @ 2 percent per month on Rs. 1,50,000/- from the date of suit till the realization of total decreetal amount and to award costs of the suit.

2.The brief averments of the plaintiff is that:-

The plaintiff is Managing Director of Siri Chandana Hire Purchase &

Finance register under Indian Partnership Act, 1932 with its Registration No.

280 of 2016. The plaintiff and defendants are well acquainted with each other since long time, out of such acquaintance the defendant No.1 2

O.S. No. 11 of 2019

borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One lakh fifty thousand only) and executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff firm on 21.03.2018 for which defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor agreeing to repay the said amount in the event of non-payment of the same amount by defendant No.1.

3. Further the plaintiff submits that in-spite of several repeated demands made by the plaintiff, the defendants dodged the repayment of amount as such the plaintiff got issued legal notice on 28.12.2018. The defendant No. 1 & 2 refused to receive the same and did not pay any amount covered under the promissory note dated: 21.03.2018, as such the plaintiff filed the present suit for recovery of money of Rs. 1,83,000/-(Rupees One lakh eighty three thousand only) along with interest @ 2% per month from the date of the suit till the date of realization.

4. Defendant No.1 and 2 failed to appear before this Court and were set exparte.

5. On behalf of the plaintiff he got himself examined as PW-1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.6 and since the defendants were set exparte, the evidence of PW.1 is unchallenged. As such, it appears that they are admitting the case of the plaintiff.

6.Heard the counsel for the plaintiff.

7. POINT:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for?”

8. It is the contention of the plaintiff was that the plaintiff’s partnership wad registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 with Registration No.

280 of 2016 and is doing business at its Registered Office at Main Road, 3

O.S. No. 11 of 2019

Bhupalpally Village and Jayashankar Bhupalpaly District. The plaintiff and defendants are well acquainted with each other since long time. Out of such acquaintance the defendant No.1 borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One lakh fifty thousand only) and executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff on 23.01.2018 for which defendant No.2 stood as guarantor to the said amount agreeing to repay the said amount, in the event of failure of payment by defendant No.1. On several demands the defendants did not repay the same, for which the plaintiff got issued legal notice on 28.12.2018 demanding the defendants to repay the amount along with interest. The defendant No.1 and 2 refused to receive the legal notice.

Hence, the plaintiff filed the present suit for recovery of money of Rs.

1,83,000/-(Rupees One lakh eighty three thousand only) along with interest @ 2% per month from the date of the suit till the date of realization.

9. PW-1 reiterated the facts of the plaint in his chief affidavit and got marked Ex. A1 to A6. The oral and documentary evidence i.e., Ex.A.1 is the Original Promissory Note, dt.21.03.2018, Ex.A.2 is the Office copy of

Legal Notice, dt.28.12.2018, Ex.A.3 is the Postal Receipt (2 Nos.), Ex.A.4 is the Returned Postal Covers (2 Nos.), Ex.A.5 is the Original Mee-Seva

Acknowledgement of Registration of Firm and Ex.A.6 is the Letter of

Authorization of firm respectively adduced by the plaintiff proves the execution of Ex. A1 and the borrowing transactions there under. The oral evidence of PW-1 stood un-rebutted and unchallenged. And since the defendants remained ex-parte, it appears that they are admitting the case of the plaintiff. Therefore, this court is satisfied that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit claim amount.

O.S. No. 11 of 2019

10. In the result, the suit is decreed without costs against the defendant No.1 and 2 for Rs. 1,83,000/-(Rupees One lakh eighty three thousand only) along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.

1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only).

(Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 06 th day of March, 2019).

FAC. Principal Junior Civil Judge, Parkal

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendants:-

PW.1: Kola Thirupathi - NIL -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A.1:- Original Promissory Note, dt.21.03.2018.

Ex.A.2:- Office copy of Legal Notice, dt.28.12.2018.

Ex.A.3:- Postal Receipt (2 Nos.).

Ex.A.4:- Returned Postal Covers (2 Nos.)

Ex.A.5:- Original Mee-Seva Acknowledgement of Registration of Firm

Ex.A.6:- Letter of Authorization of firm

For Defendants - None -

FAC. Principal Junior Civil Judge, Parkal.

CC/100410/2014 Acquitted

P.S Regonda vs SURAM SAMMAIAH

12 Jun 2019

C.C.No. 410 OF 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, PARKAL

Wednesday, this the 12 th day of June, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

Addl.Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Parkal.

CALENDER CASE No. 410 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 317 of 2013

BETWEEN:

The State of Telangana through SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda … Complainant

AND

A1: Suram Sammaiah,S/o.Muthaiah,Age: 26years, Occu: Lorry rriver, A2: Vattepally Sammaiah,S/o.Sammaiah,Age: 28years, Occu: Coolie, both are R/o. Chennapur village of Regonda Mandal. … Accused

This case is coming up for hearing on 12062019 before me in the presence of Sri K.Muralidhar Rao, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri. G. Rajender, Learned Advocate for the accused, and upon perusing the material papers available on record and upon hearing the Counsel on both sides, and the matter having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

01.The SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda filed a charge sheet against A1 and A2 for the offences punishable U/Sec. 324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C. in Crime

No.133/2013.

02.The brief allegations in the charge sheet as follows :

On 05062013 at 2230 hours, the complainant /LW1Lingampally Ravinder came to the PS and lodged a report in which he stated that, he is working as a driver in

APSRTC. On 05062013 in the evening hours, while he

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No. 410 OF 2014

2

started from Bhupalpally to Hanamkonda and reached Chennapur village to drop two passengers , the accused boarded the bus on which LW2/the conducter told them that this is express bus and he cannot issue tickets here and that the SR is also closed. Despite saying the same, the accused forcibly entered into the bus by obstructing the duties of

LW1 and LW2. When LW1 questioned the accused about the same, the accused beat LW1 with hands and fling his head to the bus pole, due to which LW1 received bleeding injury to his head which was witnessed by LW2 to LW4. along with LW2 were waiting at the bus stop, they found one lorry

03. On the receipt of the above complaint, LW8/ M.A. RahamaanASIof Police registered a case in Crime No.133/2013 for the offences punishable U/Sec. 324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C., issued F.I.R. and took up the investigation.

During the course of investigation, LW8 has examined and recorded the statement of LW1 to LW4/Lingampally Ravinder, Md. Ankus, Peddapuri Revanth and

S.V.S.N. Murthy at the PS. Later he visited the scene of offence, conducted the scene observation panchnama in the presence of LW5 and LW6/Panchagiri Babu Rao and

Muduthanapally Damodar, drew the rough sketch of the scene of offence duly incorporating the same in the CDF.

04. The cognizance was taken for the offences punishable U/Sec.324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C., by this Court.

05. On appearance of the accused, the copies of relevant documents were furnished to them as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No. 410 OF 2014

3

06. Accused were examined U/Sec. 239 of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable U/Sec. 324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C. Charges were framed, read over and explained to them in the vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

07. The prosecution did not examine anyone on its behalf.

08. Sec.313 Cr.P.C. examination was dispensed with as there were no incriminating substances available in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

09. Now the point for determination is : “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the

offences punishable under Sec. 324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C. as alleged

beyond all reasonable doubt ?

10. Heard arguments from both sides.

11. POINT :

To bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences U/Sec.324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of

I.P.C., the prosecution shall establish that the accused obstructed LW1 and LW2 from performing their duties, beat LW1 thereby causing bleeding injury to LW1.

12. To establish the above offences against the accused, the prosecution failed to examine any of the witnesses on its behalf. The evidence of LW1 to LW9 was closed by this Court since the police has failed to produce them before this Court despite several adjournments and conditional orders.

13. In the absence of any evidence, this Court has not found a single attribution attributed against the accused, that the accused have committed the alleged acts in this

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No. 410 OF 2014

4

case. In the absence of evidence, the accused cannot be convicted for the offences charged and this Court opines that the prosecution did not show any interest in prosecuting its matter and thereby it has ineptly failed to establish its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. As such the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused as contemplated under criminal jurisprudence, hence the accused are entitled for clean acquittal.

14. IN THE RESULT, the accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Sec.324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and accordingly, they are acquitted for the same U/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused No. 1 and 2 shall stand canceled after appeal time is over. The unmarked case property, if any, shall be destroyed after the appeal time is over.

(Typed, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open Court on this the 12 th day of June2019)

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

– None – – None –

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

– Nil –

MATERIAL OBJECTS:

– Nil –

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No. 410 OF 2014

AJFCM,PARKAL

CC/100264/2014 Acquitted

P.S REGONDA vs CHERALA MALLAIAH

19 Jun 2019

C.C.No.264 of 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, PARKAL

Tuesday, this the 19 th day of June, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

Addl.Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Parkal.

CALENDER CASE No. 264 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 305 of 2013

BETWEEN:

The State of Telangana through SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda … Complainant

AND

Accused: Cherala Mallaiah,S/o.Gattaiah, Age: 32 years, Occu: Tractor driver, R/o. Kashimdevipet village of Mulugu mandal.

… Accused

This case is coming up for hearing on 19062019 before me in the presence of Sri K.Muralidhar Rao, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.N.Vishnuvardhan, Learned Advocatde

for the accused, and upon perusing the material papers available on record and upon hearing the Counsel on

both sides, and the matter having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

01.The SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 304A of I.P.C. in Crime No.191/2012.

02.The brief allegations in the charge sheet as follows :

On 15112011 at 0900 hours, the complainant /LW1Gaddam Madhava

Swamy came to the PS and lodged a report in which he stated that, on 14112012 in the eveining hours, while the deceased along with LW3 to LW5 were returning to Koppula village in a tractor, in the meantime, the accused drove the tractor in a

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.264 of 2014

2

rash and negligent manner with high speed and in order to avoid hitting a buffalo, the accused lost control over the driving and run into a pit due to which the deceased and LW3 to LW5 fell on the ground and the engine of the tractor fell on the head of the deceased due to which he died instantaneously.

03. On the receipt of the above complaint, LW14/ K.ThirupathiSIof Police registered a case in Crime No.191/2012 for the offences punishable U/Sec. 304A of

I.P.C., issued F.I.R. and took up the investigation.

During the course of investigation, LW14 has examined and recorded the statement of LW1/Gaddam Madhava Swamy at the PS, later he visited the mortuary at CHC, Parkal, examined and recorded the statments of LW2 toLW6/

Gaddam Uma, Chetti Bhaskar, Samala Venu, Vadishalam Sahnti Kumari and

Devaraneni Swamy, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of LW8 and LW9/Macharla Linga Murthy and Kinnera Srinivas, duly obtaining the photographs over the dead body of deceased with the help of the photographer LW7/Sanaboina Prashanth and the body was subjected for autopsy.

Later he visited the scene of offence and conducted the scene observation panchnama duly drafting it in the CDF and drew rough sketch of the scene of offence in the presence of LW10 and LW11/MA. Hameed and Sudaraboina Om

Prakash and took the accused into his custody.

04. The cognizance was taken for the offences punishable U/Sec.304A of I.P.C., by this Court.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.264 of 2014

3

05. On appearance of the accused, the copies of relevant documents were furnished to him as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

06. Accused was examined U/Sec. 251 of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable U/Sec.

304A of I.P.C. Charge was orally framed, read over and explained to him in the vernacular language for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

07. The prosecution failed to examine any witnesses on its behalf.

08. Sec.313 Cr.P.C. examination was dispensed with as there were no incriminating substances available in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

09. Now the point for determination is : “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused

for the offences punishable under Sec. 304A of I.P.C. as alleged

beyond all reasonable doubt ?

10. Heard arguments from both sides.

11. POINT :

To bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences U/Sec.304A of I.P.C., the prosecution shall establish that the accused drove the tractor in a rash and negligent manner resulting in the death of the deceased.

12. To establish the above offence against the accused, the prosecution has

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.264 of 2014

4

failed to examine any witnesses on its behalf. The evidence of LW1 to LW15 was closed by this Court since the police has failed to produce them before this Court despite several adjournments and conditional order.

13. Perused the record, no material is available against the accused in this case. In the absence of any evidence, this Court has not found a single attribution attributed against the accused, that the accused have committed the alleged acts

Considering the same this Court opines that the prosecution did not show any interest in prosecuting its matter and thereby it has ineptly failed to establish its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. As such the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused as contemplated under criminal jurisprudence, hence the accused is entitled for clean acquittal.

14. IN THE RESULT, the accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable

U/Sec. 304A of I.P.C. and accordingly, he is acquitted for the same U/Sec.255(1) of

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after appeal time is over. The interim custody order shall be made absolute after the appeal time is over. The unmarked case property, if any, shall be destroyed after the appeal time is over.

(Typed, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open Court on this the 19 th day of June2019)

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.264 of 2014

5 APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

– None – – None –

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

– Nil –

MATERIAL OBJECTS:

– Nil –

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.264 of 2014

AJFCM,PARKAL

CC/100372/2014 Acquitted

P.S regonda vs REGULA MAHENDER BABU

12 Jun 2019

C.C.No.1122 of 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, PARKAL

Wednesday, this the 22 nd day of May, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

Addl.Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Parkal.

CALENDER CASE No. 112 2 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 412 of 2014

BETWEEN:

The State of Telangana through SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda … Complainant

AND

A Party A1: Lenkala Srinivas Reddy,S/o.Kaniki Reddy,Age: 40years, A2: Ammulu Poshalu,S/o.Mallaiah,Age: 38years, A3: Arutla Sattaiah,S/o.Iylaiah,Age: 40years, A4: Billa Narsimhha Reddy,S/o.Raji Reddy,Age: 35years, A5: Chelukala Rakesh,S/o.Rajaiah,Age: 22years, A8: Gottimukula Sai Reddy,S/o.Raji Reddy,Age: 30years, A9: Lenkala Thirupathi Reddy,S/o.Kaniki Reddy,Age: 45years, A6: Pingili Srinivas Reddy,S/o.Raji Reddy,Age: 50years, A7: Gopu Devender Reddy,S/o.Yadava Reddy,Age: 40years, A10: Lenkala Mallareddy,S/o.Kaniki Reddy,Age: 40years, A11: Lenkala Raji Reddy,S/o.Thirupathi Reddy,Age: 40years, A12: Lenkala Raghava Reddy,S/o.Linga Reddy,Age: 48years, A13: Anumu Ravi,S/o.Ramulu,Age: 40years, A14: Shanigarapu Venkanna,S/o.Thirupathi,Age: 35years, A15: Jangeti Naresh,S/o.Ramesh,Age: 30years, A16: Shetty Shankar,S/o.Rajamallu,Age: 30years, all are Agriculturists and R/o. Ramannagudem.

This case is coming up for hearing on 22052019 before me in the presence of Sri K.Muralidhar Rao, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri. G. Naresh Reddy, Learned Advocate for the accused, and upon perusing the material papers available on record and upon hearing the Counsel on both sides, and the matter having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.1122 of 2014

2

01.The SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable U/Sec. 160 of the Indian Penal Code in Crime

No.106/2014.

02.The brief allegations in the charge sheet as follows :

On 24052014 at 0930 hours, the complainant /LW1Guddeli Jangaiah came to the PS and lodged a report in which he stated that since few days some disputes were taking place between the two group of accused and in that connection, on 26042014 at 1900 hours, keeping the previous grudges in mind all the accused picked up quarrel with each other and lead to breach of public peace and tranquality thereby creating disturbance to the public.

03. On the receipt of the above complaint, LW4/ S. VittalSIof Police registered a case in Crime No.106/2014 for the offence punishable U/Sec. 160 of the Indian

Penal Code, issued F.I.R. and took up the investigation.

During the course of investigation, LW4 has examined and recorded the statement of LW1/ Guddeli Jangaiah at the PS. Subsequently he visited the scene of offence, examined the scene minutely, secured the presence of LW2 and

LW3/ Shanigarapu Srinu and Guda Tirupathi, examined and recorded their statements.

04. The cognizance was taken for the offence punishable U/Sec. 160 of I.P.C. by this Court.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.1122 of 2014

3

05. On appearance of the accused, the copies of relevant documents were furnished to them as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

06. Accused were examined U/Sec. 255 of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable

U/Sec. 160 of I.P.C. Charge was orally explained to them in the vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

07. The prosecution did not examine anyone on its behalf.

08. Sec.313 Cr.P.C. examination was dispensed with as there were no incriminating substances available in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

09. Now the point for determination is : “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused

for the offence punishable under Sec. 160 of I.P.C. as alleged beyond

all reasonable doubt ?

10. Heard arguments from both sides.

11. POINT :

To bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences U/Sec. 160 of I.P.C., the prosecution shall establish that the accused have committed affray.

12. To establish the above offences against the accused, the prosecution has failed to examine any of the witnesses on its behalf. The evidence of LW1 to LW4 was

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.1122 of 2014

4

closed by this Court since the police has failed to produce them before this Court despite several adjournments and conditional orders.

13. In the absence of any evidence, this Court has not found a single attribution attributed against the accused, that the accused have committed the alleged acts in this case. In the absence of evidence, the accused cannot be convicted for the offences charged and this Court opines that the prosecution did not show any interest in prosecuting its matter and thereby it has ineptly failed to establish its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. As such the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused as contemplated under criminal jurisprudence, hence the accused are entitled for clean acquittal.

14. IN THE RESULT, the accused No.1 to 16 are found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Sec. 160 of I.P.C. and accordingly, they are acquitted for the same U/Sec.255(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused No.1 to 16 shall stand canceled after the appeal time is over. The unmarked case property, if any, shall be destroyed after the appeal time is over.

(Typed, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open Court on this the 22 nd day of May2019)

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.1122 of 2014

5 APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

– None –– None –

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

– Nil –

MATERIAL OBJECTS:

– Nil –

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

CC/100747/2014 Acquitted

P.S. Regonda vs MD.KHALEEM

19 Jun 2019

C.C.No.747 of 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, PARKAL

Tuesday, this the 19 th day of June, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

Addl.Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Parkal.

CALENDER CASE No. 747 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 252 of 2011

BETWEEN:

The State of Telangana through SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda … Complainant

AND

A4: Md.Khaleem,S/o.Raheem, Age: 45 years, Occu: Business, R/o. Bhupalpally.

… Accused

This case is coming up for hearing on 19062019 before me in the presence of Sri K.Muralidhar Rao, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.P.Bhadraiah, Learned Advocatde for the accused, and upon perusing the material papers available on record and upon hearing the Counsel on both sides, and the matter having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

01.The SubInspector of Police, P.S. Regonda filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable U/Sec. 411 of I.P.C. in Crime No.53/2011.

02.The brief allegations in the charge sheet as follows :

On 20042011 at 1200 noon, the complainant /LW1Sadu Sambaiah came to the PS and lodged a report in which he stated that, he has fitted a 5 HP electric motor for irrigating his fields and on 20042011 in the morning hours, when he went to the fileds, he found that some unknown persons have committed

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.747 of 2014

2

theft of copper wire wg.4 kgs 600 grams worth Rs.17,000/.

03. On the receipt of the above complaint, LW13/A.VasudevSIof Police registered a case in Crime No.53/2011 for the offence punishable U/Sec. 411 of I.P.C., issued

F.I.R. and took up the investigation.

During the course of investigation, LW13 has examined and recorded the statement of LW1/Sadu Sambaiah at the PS, later he visited the scene of offence, examined the scene minutely, incorporated the physical features of the scene in the CDF in the presence of LW8 and LW9/Vangari Sambaiah and More

Raji Reddy, examined and recorded the statments of LW2 toLW7/ Sripathi

Thirupathi, Pinnanti Venugopal Rao, Pinnanti Rajeshwar Rao, Pinnanti Prakash

Rao, Kotha Ravinder Reddy and Poshala Rajaiah.

04. The cognizance was taken for the offence punishable U/Sec.411 of I.P.C., by this Court.

05. On appearance of the accused, the copies of relevant documents were furnished to him as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

06. Accused was examined U/Sec. 239 of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable U/Sec.

411of I.P.C. Charge was framed, read over and explained to him in the vernacular language for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

07. The prosecution failed to examine any witnesses on its behalf.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.747 of 2014

3

08. Sec.313 Cr.P.C. examination was dispensed with as there were no incriminating substances available in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

09. Now the point for determination is : “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused

for the offence punishable under Sec. 411 of I.P.C. as alleged beyond

all reasonable doubt ?

10. Heard arguments from both sides.

11. POINT :

To bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.411 of I.P.C., the prosecution shall establish that the accused has received copper wire knowing that the same is stolen property.

12. To establish the above offence against the accused, the prosecution has failed to examine any witnesses on its behalf. The evidence of LW1 to LW14 was closed by this Court since the police has failed to produce them before this Court despite several adjournments and conditional order.

Considering the same this Court opines that the prosecution did not show any interest in prosecuting its matter and thereby it has ineptly failed to establish its

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.747 of 2014

4

case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. As such the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused as contemplated under criminal jurisprudence, hence the accused is entitled for clean acquittal.

14. IN THE RESULT, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable

U/Sec. 411 of I.P.C. and accordingly, he is acquitted for the same U/Sec.248(1) of

(Typed, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open Court on this the 19 th day of June2019)

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

– None – – None –

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

– Nil –

MATERIAL OBJECTS:

– Nil –

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

C.C.No.747 of 2014

AJFCM,PARKAL

Order Record 255 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/100264/2014	P.S REGONDA vs CHERALA MALLAIAH	19 Jun 2019	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/100747/2014	P.S. Regonda vs MD.KHALEEM	19 Jun 2019	Judgement	Acquitted
PRC/37/2018	P.S REGONDA vs MD.Sarwar	19 Jun 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100372/2014	P.S regonda vs REGULA MAHENDER BABU	12 Jun 2019	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/100410/2014	P.S Regonda vs SURAM SAMMAIAH	12 Jun 2019	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/100513/2014	P.S REGONDA vs AMMA RAMESH	12 Jun 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100836/2014	P.S REGONDA vs DORI KARNAKAR	12 Jun 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101231/2014	P.S REGONDA vs MOUTAM RAVI	12 Jun 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101260/2014	P.S Chityal vs KANCHERLA RAMULU	11 Jun 2019	Judgement	—
DVC/100002/2016	Thadam @ Bujugundla lakshmi vs Vsthadam Thirupathi	31 May 2019	Judgement	—
DVC/100020/2017	JUNNUGARI LATHA ALIAS POOLAMMA vs JANNUGARI DURGAIAH	31 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/253/2014	P.S REGONDA vs CHEPURI KUMARASWAMY	29 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/701/2014	P.S Regonda vs Kusumba Narahari	29 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100295/2014	P.S.REGONDA vs CHINTHALA KAMALA	29 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100434/2014	P.S. TEKUMATLA vs MD.KHALEEM	29 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100746/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs MD.KHALEEM	29 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101030/2014	P.S REGONDA vs GUDIMETLA VENKANNA	29 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101122/2014	P.S Regonda vs LENKALA SRINIVAS REDDY	22 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/1323/2014	P.S regonda vs BANDI SHIVA	08 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100749/2014	P.S. Regonda vs MD. KHALEEM	08 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100750/2014	P.s.Regonda vs MD. KHALEEM	08 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100865/2014	P.S.Regonda vs BOMMAKANTI RAJAIAH	08 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100779/2014	P.S. Chityal vs Nukala Odely	07 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100791/2014	P.S Chityal vs KORRI ILAIAH	07 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100323/2014	P.S Chityal vs MERUGU RAJU	06 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100830/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Pingani Rajaiaj	06 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101244/2014	P.S MOGULLAPALLY vs BALAVENI SRINIVAS	06 May 2019	Judgement	—
DVC/100010/2017	Jupelly 2 thakkallapally Radhika @ Deepika vs Thakkallapally Rajeshwar Rao	03 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100546/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Marepelli Sammaiah	02 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100132/2014	P.S Chityal vs GOLLAPALLY RAJU	01 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100730/2014	P.S MOGULLAPALLY vs BAIRY RAVI	01 May 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100077/2014	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs LAKKIREDDI THIRUPATHI REDDY	30 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100464/2014	P.S. Chityal vs Muppidoju Ram Murthy	30 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100770/2014	P.S REGONDA vs RODDA RAMA	30 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101082/2014	P.S Chityal vs MANGUNOORI SHANKAR	30 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101101/2014	P.S CHITYAL vs BANDI SRINIVAS	30 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101189/2014	P.S. Chityal vs Adepu Srinivas	30 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100328/2015	P.S.CHITYAL vs GADAM BHAGYAMMA	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100475/2014	P.S CHITYAL vs SHAMALA RAGHUPATHI	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100520/2014	P.s. Regonda vs Mudide Ogeshwar	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100586/2014	P.S Chityal vs JAMBULA CHANDRA MOULI	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100736/2014	P.S Mogullapally vs RENUKUNTLA SHYAM	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100813/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Pulluri Sampath @ Ramesh Reddy	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100834/2014	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs REDDY POSHALU	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101304/2014	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs AJMEERA JAYARAM	29 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100202/2015	P.S TEKUMATLA vs POTHARAVENI SWAMY	25 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100862/2014	P.S.MOGULAPALLY vs ANABOINA KUMAR	25 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100268/2014	P.S Regonda vs MORE BIXAPATHI	24 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100354/2015	EARLA SRINIVAS vs KODEPAKA PANI	24 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101107/2014	P.S.CHITYAL vs BOINI RAJU	24 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101324/2014	P.S.Regonda vs Mogulla Sathish	24 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101435/2014	P.S CHITYAL vs NARAGONI SAMPATH	24 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100470/2014	P.S. Regonda vs Gadde Vejeeru 2 Rajeeru	23 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101135/2014	P.S Chityal vs KATANGURI MADHUSUDAN REDDY	23 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101136/2014	DABBETA RAJU vs SHAIK BAHDOOR	23 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/262/2018	P.s Mogullapally vs Pasunuri Snigdha	22 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/497/2018	P.s Mogullapally vs Sudhala Satish Babu	22 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100251/2014	P.S Regonda vs BANDI SANJEEVA	22 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100574/2015	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs KASTURI VENKATA RAMANA CHARY	18 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100414/2015	P.S. Chityal vs SHADA AGAIAH	17 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100544/2014	LAKUM SANDHYA vs ADIGOPPULA SAMMAIAH	17 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100859/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Darangula Raju	16 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100908/2014	P.s. chityal vs Bochu bixapathi	16 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100957/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Jogula Sammaiah	16 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/137/2019	P.s.Bhupalpally vs Santhapuri Rajesh	15 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100433/2014	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs MUSINIPALLI RAMESH	15 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100469/2014	P.S.Regonda vs KUNURU SARASWATHI	15 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100351/2017	P.S. Mogullapally vs Malasai thirupathi Rao	09 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100605/2014	P.S Regonda vs YAPASHETTI RAMANNA @ RAMAIAH	08 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100798/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Poladi Jagga Rao	08 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100831/2014	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Pokkuri Mallaiah	08 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101362/2014	NALAGOPPULA MALLESHAM vs PALLEBOINA BHADRAIAH	08 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100561/2014	P.S MOGULLAPALLY vs MUPPU NARESH	04 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
PRC/6/2019	P.S TEKUMATLA vs Mittapally Ravi @ Ravinder	04 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101192/2014	P.S Regonda vs THELLA SATHISH	03 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
PRC/2/2019	P.S Regonda vs Vemula Ravi	03 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100674/2014	P.S. TEKUMATLA vs Rudravena Rajaiaj	02 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101094/2014	P.S CHITYAL vs NALLA SRINIVAS REDDY	02 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101108/2014	P.S CHITYAL vs DOUDU SATHYAM	02 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101235/2014	P.S CHITYAL vs BOTLA RAVI	02 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101253/2014	P.s.Chityal vs Alle Anandam	02 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101273/2014	P.S.CHITYAL vs EARLA SAMBAIAH	02 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100068/2014	P.S Tekumatla vs DASARAPU SARAIAH	01 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100123/2015	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs REKULA RAKESH	01 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101007/2014	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs GUDURU SARANGAPANI	01 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
PRC/8/2019	P.S Bhupalpally vs Nimmala Raj kumar	01 Apr 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100067/2014	P.S Mogullapally vs GADAM KUMARI	29 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100331/2014	P.s. chityal vs Mekala Sammaiah	28 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100380/2016	VANGA SWAPNA vs VANGA NAGESH	28 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100618/2014	ODELA RAJKUMAR vs ODELA PUSHPAMMA	28 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101306/2014	P.S. Chityal vs Odela Rajkumar	28 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100927/2014	P.S. REGONDA vs Ganta Raghu	27 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101132/2014	P.S Regonda vs GAJJI SAMBAIAH	27 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100206/2014	P.S BHUPALPALLY vs GADE SURENDER REDDY	25 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100427/2015	P.s. Bhupalapally vs Namusani Ashok	18 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/101257/2014	P.S TEKUMATLA vs BOMMA RANJITH KUMAR	18 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
PRC/3/2019	P.S.Bhupalpally vs Ponaganti Ravinder @ Ravi	18 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
PRC/9/2019	P.S.Bhupalpally vs Kasagani Vijaya	18 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
CC/100515/2014	P.S.REGONDA vs NIMMALA SHYAM	15 Mar 2019	Judgement	—
PRC/5/2019	P.S TEKUMATLA vs Thurpathi Shankar	14 Mar 2019	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 255 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Jun 2019		9
May 2019		24
Apr 2019		58
Mar 2019		40
Feb 2019		47
Jan 2019		14
Dec 2018		5
Nov 2018		16
Oct 2018		15
Sep 2018		9
Aug 2018		13
Jul 2018		11

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Khushboo Upadhyay handled?

Khushboo Upadhyay has handled 261 court orders since 2018 at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 24 orders per month.

What types of cases does Khushboo Upadhyay hear?

Based on available records, Khushboo Upadhyay primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases, Domestic Violence Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex.

Where is Khushboo Upadhyay currently posted?

Khushboo Upadhyay is posted as PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex, Hanumakonda, Telangana.

Are judgments by Khushboo Upadhyay available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by Khushboo Upadhyay are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Khushboo Upadhyay dispose cases?

Khushboo Upadhyay disposes approximately 24 cases per month, based on 261 orders handled over their tenure at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex.

Since when is Khushboo Upadhyay serving?

Khushboo Upadhyay has been serving at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex since 2018.

Case Types

CC 86%

OS 6%

EP 3%

PRC 3%

DVC 1%

MC 1%

ELECOP 0%

Posting History

Nov 2018 — Mar 2019

PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL · 27 orders
Nov 2018 — Nov 2018

ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL
Apr 2018 — Jun 2019

ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL · 234 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 4

Other Judges at this Court

Mr. G Sai Sharath

PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL

374 orders

Ms. B.Srivalli Sailaja

ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE PARKAL

64 orders

← View all judges at Parkal, JCJ Court Complex

Khushboo Upadhyay

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT PARKAL

Present : KHUSHBOO UPADHYAY,

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

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendants:-

EXHIBITS MARKED

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

Wednesday, this the 12 th day of June, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

CALENDER CASE No. 410 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 317 of 2013

­:: J U D G M E N T ::­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­2­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­3­

offences punishable under Sec. 324, 332, 353, 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C. as alleged

AJFCM,PARKAL

­4­

PARKAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS MARKED

AJFCM,PARKAL

AJFCM,PARKAL

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

Tuesday, this the 19 th day of June, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

CALENDER CASE No. 264 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 305 of 2013

­:: J U D G M E N T ::­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­2­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­3­

for the offences punishable under Sec. 304­A of I.P.C. as alleged

AJFCM,PARKAL

­4­

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

­5­

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

EXHIBITS MARKED

AJFCM,PARKAL

AJFCM,PARKAL

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

Wednesday, this the 22 nd day of May, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

CALENDER CASE No. 112 2 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 412 of 2014

­:: J U D G M E N T ::­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­2­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­3­

for the offence punishable under Sec. 160 of I.P.C. as alleged beyond

AJFCM,PARKAL

­4­

PARKAL.

AJFCM,PARKAL

­5­

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

EXHIBITS MARKED

AJFCM,PARKAL

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

Tuesday, this the 19 th day of June, 2019

PRESENT: Ms. Khushboo Upadhyay,

CALENDER CASE No. 747 of 2014

OLD CALENDER CASE No. 252 of 2011

­:: J U D G M E N T ::­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­2­

AJFCM,PARKAL

­3­

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

2

3

4

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

2

3

for the offences punishable under Sec. 304A of I.P.C. as alleged

4

5

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

2

3

4

5

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

2

3

4