M.a.soma Sekhar

APNE000006732024 1

COURT OF SESSION :: NELLORE DIVISION :: NELLORE

In the Court of the Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore

Present: Sri M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore. *** Tuesday, this the 28th day of April, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.42 of 2024

(P.R.C. No.63/2023 on the file of learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of

I Class, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District)

(Crime No.331/2018 of Nawabpeta Police Station, Nellore City) ***

1. Name of the Complainant:State – Sub-Inspector of Police, Nawabpeta Police Station, SPSR Nellore District

2. Description of the Accused:-

1. Shaik Mujeeb @ Mujju, S/o Jainulabdin @ Yusuf, aged 30 years, R/o D.No.32-1379, New Colony, Jakir Hussain Nagar, Nellore;

2. Shaik Nooruddin, S/o Moulali, aged 43 years, R/o D.No.32/1329, New Colony, Jakir Hussain Nagar, Nellore;

3. Shaik Meharunnisa, W/o Abdul Ahmed, aged 50 years, New Colony, Jakir Hussain Nagar, Now residing at Kodurupadu Village of Indukurpet Mandal;

4. Shaik Maimunnisa, W/o Abdul Rehaman, aged 48 years, New Colony, Mypadu Road, Jakir Hussain Nagar, Nellore;

5. Shaik Safiya, S/o Nuruddin, aged 33 years, New Colony, Jakir Hussain Nagar, Nellore; and

6. Shaik Munthaj (Case not established), W/o Musthak.

APNE000006732024 2

3. Offences: -

Charge No.1 under Section 498-A IPC against A.1 to A.5 being the husband and in-laws of the deceased/Shaik Reshma, for subjecting her to cruelty by harassing her both physically and mentally by addicting to liquor by A.1; Charge No.2 under Section 306 IPC against A.1 to A.5 for abetting the said Shaik Reshma to commit suicide by harassing her both physically and mentally; Charge No.3 under Section 323 IPC against A.1 to A.5 for causing injuries to Sk. Reshma by beating her with hands and legs; Charge No.4 under Section 376 r/w 511 IPC against A.2 for attempting to commit rape on the said Shaik Reshma.

4. Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

5. Finding of the Judge:Found not guilty

6. Sentence or Order: -

In the result, the Accused No.1 to 5 are found not guilty for the charge under Sections 498-A, 306 and 323 of IPC, and Accused No.2 is further found not guilty for the offence under Section 376 r/w 511 of IPC, and accordingly they are acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused and from their sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months. MO.1-Black colour with Red border Saree with flower design, M.Os.2 to 4-Clothes of the deceased/Shaik Reshma, and the unmarked non-valuable property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. Forward MOs.1 to 4 and the unmarked non-valuable property if any to the learned II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore, in CPR No.54/2026 of

Sessions Court for carrying out the Order of disposal of the case property after

expiry of appeal time.

7. Prosecution conducted by:Sri Sk. Rafimalik

Additional Public Prosecutor,

VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

8. Accused defended by:Sri K. Uma Sankar, Advocate for the accused No.1 to 5.

This case coming on 28.04.2026 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Sk.Rafi Malik, Additional Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and Sri K. Uma Sankar, Advocate for the Accused No.1 to 5 and upon perusing the records, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

APNE000006732024 3

J U D G M E N T

Filing of charge sheet:-

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nawabpeta Police Station, Nellore City,

SPSR Nellore District filed charge sheet in Crime No.331/2018 of Nawabpeta

Police Station against the Accused No.1 to 5, by showing one Shaik Munthaj,

Wife of Musthak, as Accused No.6 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306, 323 r/w 34 of IPC and under Section 376 r/w 511 of IPC.

JURISDICTION:

2.The offence took place at Jakir Hussain Nagar, Nellore, Nellore Town, which comes under the limits of Nawabpeta Police Station, SPSR Nellore

District, and within the territorial jurisdiction of learned II Additional Judicial

Magistrate of I Class, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District i.e. Committal Court.

3.The gist of the allegations made by the prosecution is that:-

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nawabpeta Police Station, filed charge sheet against the Accused No.1 to 6 alleging that on 10.09.2018 at 18.30 hours,

LW.1/Patan Shahina of Srinivasarao Peta, Guntur presented a report stating that she is a resident of Srinivasaraopeta, Guntur town and living by fruits business. They solemnized the marriage of their daughter Reshma with shaik

Mujeeb, Son of Yusuf about 3 years back in the presence of both elders as per the rites and customs of Muslim religion. Her daughter was blessed with a daughter. Her son-in-law was addicted to liquor and neglected the family. Now and then she along with her husband used to visit their daughter, convinced her to continue her family life. On 09.09.2018 morning her daughter informed her over phone that his uncle Nooruddin misbehaved on her, but she threatened

APNE000006732024 4 and escaped from him. When her daughter informed to her son-in-law, he asked Nooruddin about his act and chastised him, for which, Nuruddin informed the same to his sisters Munthaj, Maimun and Meharunnisa. Then her son-in-law along with Nuruddin, Maimun, Munthaj and Meharunnisa together beat her daughter. On the next day i.e., on 10.09.2018 at about 14.00 hours, her son-in- law informed her over phone that her daughter committed suicide and died by hanging. Then she along with her husband and relatives rushed to Jakir

Hussain Nagar, Nellore and witnessed that her daughter was dead and the dead body was kept in their hall and found black marks on the throat of her daughter.

Her daughter died due to the harassment of her husband and his relatives.

(i)Basing on the report of LW.1/Patan Shahina, LW.17/G. Solomonu,

Head Constable of Nawabpeta Police Station registered the same as a case in

Crime No.331/2018 under Sections 323 and 306 r/w 34 of IPC on 10.09.2018 at 18.30 hours and submitted FIRs to all officers concerned. Considering the gravity of the case, LW.18/N. Venkata Rao, the then Inspector of Police,

Nawabpeta Police Station took up investigation in this case.

(ii)During the course of investigation, LW.18 inspected the scene of offence, seized one silk saree from the scene of offence in the presence of mediators LW.8/Palicharla Madhusudhana and LW.9/Shaik Ghouse Basha under a cover of scene observation report, which was duly attested by the mediators, and LW.18 also examined LWs.1 to 5 namely, Patan Shahina, Patan

Rasool Khan, Patan Firoz Khan, Arava Varamma and Boddukuru Raja respectively at the scene of offence and recorded their detailed statements on 10.09.2018.

(iii)Since the deceased died below 7 years after her marriage, on the requisition of LW.18/Inspector of Police, the Tahsildar & Mandal Executive

Magistrate/LW.15 conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the

APNE000006732024 5 presence of LWs.8, 10 and 11 namely, Palicharla Madhu Sudhana, Iragaraju

Thirumala Raju and Shaik Ibrahim respectively on 11.09.2018 and prepared inquest report which was duly attested by the said mediators. During the course of inquest, LW.15/Tahsildar examined and recorded the statements of blood relatives and witnesses LWs.1 to 5, and submitted the inquest report and statements to the Court.

(iv)After inquest, LW.18/Inspector of Police visited the scene of offence, examined LW.6/Shaik Ghouse Basha and LW.7/Shaik Guljar and recorded their statements.

(v)Basing on the statements of the witnesses, the case has been disclosed that the deceased is a resident of Srinivasaraopeta, Guntur, about 3 years back her parents solemnized her marriage with A.1 as per the Muslim rites and customs in the presence of both side elders, A.1 and the deceased/Reshma lived for some period at KodurupaduVillage, where A.3 is residing, then A.1 shifted the family to Jakir Hussain Nagar, Nellore and was residing in a house belongs to A.3. A.1 is a Carpenter, but he addicted to liquor and used to harass his wife both mentally and physically without going to works and without providing proper food to the deceased/Reshma. A.1 and the deceased/Reshma were blessed with a girl child. A.3 used to help Reshma and her daughter. A.2 who is paternal uncle of A.1 also residing in the sdame locality, he and his wife/Shafiya/A.5 also used to visit the house of A.1 and helps to the deceased/Reshma. On 08.09.2018 afternoon the deceased informed to LWs.5 to 7 and other neighbours that at about 15.00 hours while she was alone in her house, A.2 came to her house and misbehaved with her by demanding to fulfill his lust, she refused, threatened and escaped from him, and Reshma also told the same to her husband. On the same night A.1 went to A.2 and asked about his attempt on Reshma. On the next day A.1 to A.5 in furtherance of their

APNE000006732024 6 common intention, quarreled with the deceased on the pretext that the deceased

Reshma blaming A.2 unnecessarily as he attempted rape on Reshma, A.3 beat

Reshma with hands and after some time, Munthaj (alleged A.6) came to house of Mujib, enquired about the quarrel and went away.

(vi)On the next day i.e., on 10.09.2018 also A.3 came to the house of deceased/Reshma, talked about the issue with her and went away. At about 14.00 hours, when A.1 came to his house, noticed that his wife/Reshma hanging to an iron pipe with the help of Silk Saree, which tied to the roof for the swing of their daughter in bedroom. Then A.1 informed the same to the neighbours and got down the dead body of Reshma with the help of Varamma/LW.4. Due to the above acts of the Accused No.1 to 5, the deceased vexed with her life and on 10.09.2018 around 13.30 hours, she committed suicide by hanging in their house with the help of a Silk Saree and died.

(vii)Basing on the investigation, LW.18/Inspector of Police added

Sections 498-A and 376 r/w 511 IPC and added Shaik Shafiya, wife of A.2, as

Accused No.5 in addition to the list of the accused of this case and filed a memo

before the Court to that effect.

(viii)During the course of invesigation, on 14.09.2018 LW.18 arrested

Accused No.1 to 4 at 10.00 hours, recorded their confessional statements in the presence of LWs.8 and 12 namely, Palicharla Madhusudhana and Palicharla

Munikumar Reddy under a cover of confessional mahazarnama which was duly attested by the said mediators and sent the accused to judicial remand.

(ix)Accused No.5 got anticipatory bail in IV Additional District &

Sessions Judge Court, Nellore and surrendered before the learned II Additional

Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore and was enlarged on bail by submitting

sureties.

APNE000006732024 7

(x)LWs.13 and 14 namely, Dr. Suresh Pamajula, and Dr. N. Renuka

Devi team of doctors, held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued postmortem certificate by opining that the deceased died due to “Asphyxia due to hanging”. LW.16/N. Seenaiah, Police Constable handed over the clothes of the deceased to LW.18/Inspector of Police after postmortem examination. LW.18 sent the material objects to RFSL, Guntur for analysis.

Subsequently, LW.19/K. Srinivasa Rao, Inspector of Police, assumed charge of

Nawabpeta Police Station, Nellore, took up further investigation, obtained RFSL report, completed investigation and filed charge sheet against the Accused No.1 to 5, by deleting the Accused No.6.

Taking of cognizance and committal proceedings:

4.The learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore had taken the cognizance of the case, for the offence under Sections 498-A, 306 and 323 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.376 r/w 511 of IPC against the Accused No.1 to 5 and registered it as P.R.C. No.63/2022 and copies of documents were furnished to them, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. on their appearance. Since the offence under Sections 498-A, 306 and 376 of IPC are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Nellore Division, Nellore, the learned Magistrate had committed this case under Section 209 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short

Cr.P.C) to the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court, Nellore. Later, the Hon'ble

Principal Sessions Judge, Nellore has numbered the same as Sessions Case

No.42/2024 and made over the same to this Court for disposal according to law.

Appearance of the accused and opening the case:

5.After receipt of the summons, the Accused No.1 to 5 appeared before this

Court and engaged Sri P. Uma Sankar, Advocate, to defend them. Thereafter,

APNE000006732024 8 the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as envisaged under Section 226 of

Cr.P.C., opened the case, by describing the charge brought against the Accused and also the evidence going to be adduced to prove their guilt.

Framing of charge:-

6.After hearing both sides and considering the entire material available on record, the Accused No.1 to 5 were examined under Section 228 (2) of Cr.P.C., charge for the offence under Sections 498-A, 306 and 323 of IPC against

Accused No.1 to 5, and further under Sec.376 r/w 511 of IPC against Accused

No.2 were framed, read over and explained to them in their vernacular language for which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, this case stands posted for prosecution evidence, after fixing the schedule for trial.

Prosecution evidence:-

7.To prove their respective contentions, the prosecution has got examined

P.Ws.1 to 6, got marked Exs.P.1 to P.18 and M.Os.1 to 4. Further, the evidences of LWs.5, 7 to 17 and 19, namely, Boddukuru Raja, Shaik Guljar,

Palicharla Madhu Sudhana, Shaik Ghouse Basha, Iragaraju Thirumala Raju,

Shaik Ibrahim, Palicharla Munikumar Reddy, Dr. Suresh Pamajula, Dr. N.

Renuka Devi, K. Chenchaiah, Tahsildar & Mandal Executive Magistrate, N.

Seenaiah, Police Constable, G. Solomonu, Head Constable and K. srinivasa

Rao, Inspector of Police, Nawabpeta Police Station respectively, were given up by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

8.The Accused No.1 to 5 have complied with section 437-A Cr.P.C for their appearance before the Appellate Court, if any.

APNE000006732024 9

9.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused No.1 to 5 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C for which, they denied the incriminating material appearing against them in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and reported no defence evidence on their behalf. Hence defence evidence is recorded as NIL.

10.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record.

11.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted arguments that on behalf of prosecution P.W.1 to P.W.6 are examined, Ex.P.1 to P.18 and Mos.1 to 4 are marked. Though, P.Ws.1 to 5 turned hostile, taking into consideration of the evidence of PW.6, Ex.P.1 to P.18 and M.Os.1 to 4, prayed for convicting the

Accused.

12.The learned counsel for the Accused argued that except the evidence of the Investigating Officer/PW.6, there is no any evidence on record against the

Accused. Moreover, PWs.1 and 2 being the parents, PW.3 being the brother of the deceased/Reshma, and PWs.4 and 5 being the neighbours of the deceased, turned hostile, and did not support the case of the prosecution. So, there is no any evidence on record that the accused committed the offence. Moreover,

LWs.5, 7 to 17 and 19 who are cited as witnesses in the charge sheet to prove the case of prosecution, are given up by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

Thereby the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused and prayed the

Court to acquit the accused.

13.Now, the point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the Accused No.1 to 5 beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence charged against him under Sections 498-A, 306, 323, and 376 r/w 511 of IPC?

APNE000006732024 10

POINT:

14.Perused the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 6, Ex.P1 to P.18 and M.Os.1 to 4.

i)P.W.1 – Patan Shahina, who is the mother of the deceased/Shaik

Reshma deposed that Accused No.1 is the husband of her deceased daughter/Shaik Reshma, and A.2 to A.5 are relatives of A.1, and she never lodged any complaint against the Accused No.1 to 5 and A.1 to A.5 never committed any offence against her deceased daughter and they looked after her deceased daughter in a good manner during her lifetime with A.1. She admitted her signature on the alleged complaint, as Ex.P.1. She further deposed that she does not know anything about the case facts, and she does not know the contents of said complaint, and that LW.18 who was the then Sub-Inspector of

Police, Nawabpeta Police Station never examined her in connection with this case. She completely turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.1 denied all the suggestions put to her by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as false, and that her 161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.2.

ii)P.W.2 – Patan Rasool, who is the father of the deceased/Reshma deposed that, PW.1 is his wife, and he also deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PW.1. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.2 denied the all the suggestions put to him by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.3.

APNE000006732024 11 iii)PW.3 – Patan Firoz Khan, who is the son of PWs.1 and 2 also deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.1 and 2. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.3 denied the all the suggestions put to him by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.4.

iv)PW.4 – Arava Varamma, who is the neighbour of the deceased deposed that she does not know the accused, PW.1 never lodged any complaint against the Accused No.1 to 5, and they never committed any offence against the deceased/Sk. Reshma and they looked after the deceased in a good manner during her lifetime with a.1, and that LW.18 who was the then Sub-

Inspector of Police, Nawabpeta Police Station never examined her in connection with this case. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of the prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.4 denied all the suggestions put to her as false, and her Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.5.

v)PW.5 – Shaik Ghouse Basha, who is a neighbour of the deceased deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PW.4. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.5 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.6.

APNE000006732024 12 vi)PW.6 – N. Venkata Rao, who worked as Inspector of Police,

Nawabpeta Police Station that, on 10.09.2018 at about 6.30 p.m., LW.17/G.

Solomonu, Head Constable of Nawabpeta Police Station registered a case in

Crime No.331/2018 under Sections 323 and 306 r/w 34 IPC basing on Ex.P.7-

Complaint of PW.1 and submitted Ex.P.8-Original FIR to Court and copies of the same to all concerned officials. He further deposed that, after receiving copy of

FIR, he secured the presence of mediators LWs.8 and 9 namely, Palicharla

Madhu Sudhana Reddy and Shaik Ghouse Basha respectively, rushed to the scene of offence situated at Jakhirhussain Nagar, which is the house of the deceased/Sk. Reshma, and then he observed the same and prepared Ex.P.9- scene observation report, duly attested by the mediators, and seized M.O.1-

Black colour with red border Saree with flower design, and he also prepared

Ex.P.10-rough sketch of the scene of offence. He further deposed that, then he secured the presence of PWs.1 to 4, LW.5/Boddukuru Raja, examined and recorded their Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statements, as the death of deceased is below 7 years from her marriage, he made requisition before LW.15/K. Chenchaiah, the then Tahsildar & Mandal Executive Magistrate, Nellore, requesting him to conduct inquest over the dead body of the deceased, who accordingly conducted inquest in the presence of LW.8/Palicharla Madhu Sudhana,

LW.10/Iragaraju Thirumala Raju and LW.11/Shaik Ibrahim, and other blood relatives of deceased, and that Ex.P.11 is the said inquest panchanama, and the inquest panchayatdars unanimously opined that A.1 to A.4 harassed the deceased mentally and physically for want of additional dowry apart from A.2 attempted to commit rape against the deceased, and due to which, the deceased committed suicide and further, PWs.1 to 4 and LW.5 came to know about the harassment through the deceased only. PW.6 further deposed that,

LW.15/Mandal Executive Magistrate recorded the statements of PWs.1 to 4 and

APNE000006732024 13

LW.5 at the time of conducting inquest over the dead body of the deceased, and he forwarded the dead body of the deceased before LW.13/Dr. Suresh

Pamujula, Asst. Professor, Forensic Medicine, ACSR Medical College, Nellore for conducting autopsy along with LW.14/Dr. N. Renuka Devi, CAS, Department of General Medicine, ACSR Medical College, Nellore over the dead body of the deceased, who accordingly conducted and issued postmortem certificate by opining that the deceased committed suicide and died due to ‘Asphyxia due to hanging’, and that Ex.P.12 is the opinion given by LWs.13 and 14, who are team of doctors, who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased basing upon their clinical examination and RFSL report/Ex.P.15. He further deposed that, LW.16/N. Seenaiah, Police Constable of Nawabpeta Police station handed over the clothes of deceased to him after conducting postmortem examination and he seized the said clothes under Ex.P.13-Police proceedings, and M.Os.2 to 4 are the said clothes of the deceased, and that he added Section 498-A, 376 r/w 511 IPC by filing Ex.P.14-Section adding memo before the Court apart from adding Accused No.5 in this case, by mentioning that the case against A.6 is not made out prima facily, and as such, A.6 was deleted from this case. He further deposed that, he forwarded the material objects preserved by LWs.13 and 14 to

RFSL, Guntur for analysis, who accordingly analyzed and gave Ex.P.15-RFSL report. He further deposed that, on 14.09.2018 he arrested Accused No.1 to 4 at 10.00 a.m., in the presence of LW.8/Palicharla Madhu Sudhana and

LW.12/Palicharla Munikumar Reddy, by recording Ex.P.16-confessional-cum- arrest panchanama, duly attested by the said mediators, and that A.5 got anticipatory bail from Hon’ble IV Addl. District Judge, Nellore and later, enlarged on bail, and that he brought Accused No.1 to 4 to Police Station and sent them to remand after due formalities, and that LW.19/K. Srinivasa Rao who is his successor, filed charge sheet by enclosing all the documents against Accused

APNE000006732024 14

No.1 to 5, and that PWs.1 to 5 stated before him as in Exs.P.2 to P.6 respectively, and that LWs.5 and 7 stated before him as in Ex.P.17 and P.18 respectively.

During the cross-examination by the learned defence counsel, PW.6 denied all the suggestions put to him as false.

15.Now the point for consideration before the court is that, “Whether the evidence of P.W.6 can be based for convicting Accused or not?”

16.Admittedly, as discussed supra, the evidence of PW.6 being the case investigating authority, quite naturally supports the case of prosecution. His evidence needs corroboration of other material prosecution witnesses and the same is lacking. Moreover, PW.1 being the defacto complainant as well as the mother of the deceased/Reshma, and PW.2 being the father and PW.3 being the brother of the the deceased/Reshma, and PWs.4 and 5 being the neighbours of the deceased, did not depose anything against the accused. The evidences of LWs.5 and 7 who are the neighbours of the deceased, LWs.8 to 12 who acted as mediators for scene observation, inquest and arrest panchanama of the accused No.1 to 4, LWs.13 and 14 who held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased, LW.15 who conducted inquest over the dead bodyof the deceased in the presence of mediators and blood relatives of the deceased, and

LW.16 who followed the dead body of the deceased for shifting to postmortem examination, and LW.17 who registered the case basing on the statement of

PW.1, and LW.19 who filed charge sheet after completion of the remaining investigation, are given up by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. As such, there is no any iota of evidence against the Accused No.1 to 5 to prove their guilt.

APNE000006732024 15

17.The evidence of PW.6 who investigated the case, cannot be based for convicting the accused. As such, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the Accused No.1 to 5 beyond all reasonable doubt and the Accused No.1 to 5 are entitled for benefit of doubt.

Accordingly, this point is answered.

18.In the result, the Accused No.1 to 5 are found not guilty for the charge under Sections 498-A, 306 and 323 of IPC, and Accused No.2 is further found not guilty for the offence under Section 376 r/w 511 of IPC, and accordingly they are acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused and from their sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of

Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months.

MO.1-Black colour with Red border Saree with flower design, M.Os.2 to 4-Clothes of the deceased/Shaik Reshma, and the unmarked non-valuable property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Forward MOs.1 to 4 and the unmarked non-valuable property if any to the learned II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore, in CPR No.54/2026 of

Sessions Court for carrying out the Order of disposal of the case property after

expiry of appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court this the 28th day of April, 2026.

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

APNE000006732024 16

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

For Prosecution:

Prosecution Name of WitnessDescription Witness No. Defacto complainant as well as PW.1:Patan Shahina mother of the deceased/Reshma.

PW.2:Patan RasoolFather of the deceased/Reshma.

PW.3:Patan Firoz KhanBrother of the deceased/Reshma.

PW.4:Arava VarammaNeighbour of the deceased.

PW.5:Shaik Ghouse BashaNeighbour of the deceased.

PW.6:N. Venkata Rao, the then Investigating Officer. Inspector of Police, Nawabpet Police Station.

For Defence:NONE

Exhibits marked for the prosecution

Proved/ Exhibit No.Description of the Exhibit Attested by Ex.P.1:Signature of PW.1 in the complaint given to Police.PW.1

Ex.P.2:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1.PW.6

Ex.P.3:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.2.PW.6

Ex.P.4:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3.PW.6

Ex.P.5:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.4.PW.6

Ex.P.6:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.5.PW.6

Ex.P.7:Complaint of PW.1 given to the Police.PW.6

Original FIR in Crime No.331/2018 of Nawabpeta Police Ex.P.8:PW.6 Station.

Ex.P.9:Scene observation-cum-seizure panchanama.PW.6

Ex.P.10:Rough sketch of the scene of offence.PW.6

APNE000006732024 17

Ex.P.11:Inquest panchanama.PW.6

Ex.P.12:Opinion given by the team of Doctors/LWs.13 and 14.PW.6

Ex.P.13:Police proceedings for seizure of Mos.2 to 4.PW.6

Ex.P.14:Section adding memo.PW.6

Ex.P.15:RFSL Report.PW.6

Ex.P.16:Confessional-cum-arrest panchanama of A.1 to A.4.PW.6

Ex.P.17:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.5/Boddukuru Raja.PW.6

Ex.P.18:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.7/Shaik Guljar.PW.6

For Defence:NIL

Material Objects Marked

Material Proved/ Description of the Exhibit Object No.Attested by Black colour with Red border Saree with flower M.O.1:PW.6 design.

M.Os.2 to 4: Clothes of the deceased/Shaik Reshma.PW.6

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies submitted to:-

1. The Hon’ble Registrar (Judicial), High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi.

2. The Hon’ble Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies to: -

3. The learned II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore.

4. The Addl. Public Prosecutor, VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

5. The Station House Officer, Nawabpeta Police Station. // True Copy //

APNE000050172023 1

COURT OF SESSION :: NELLORE DIVISION :: NELLORE

In the Court of the Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore

Present: Sri M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore. *** Tuesday, this the 28th day of April, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.327 of 2023

(P.R.C. No.06/2023 on the file of learned Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Railways, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District) (Crime No.21/2022 of Government Railway Police Station, Chirala, Bapatla District) ***

1. Name of the Complainant: State – Sub-Inspector of Police, Government Railway Police Station, Chirala, SPSR Nellore District.

2. Description of the Accused: -

Balla Srihari Varaprasad, S/o Guravayya, aged 30 years, R/o Door No.1/55, Railway Station Road, Kadavakuduru Village, Chinnaganjam Mandal, Prakasam District.

3. Offences :-

Charge under Section 305 IPC for abetting Nakkala Akhila/deceased to commit suicide by exchanging heated words.

4. Plea of the Accused: Pleaded not guilty

5. Finding of the Judge: Found not guilty

6. Sentence or Order: -

In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the charge U/Sec.305 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused and from his sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months. No material objects marked by this Court. Hence, there is no order

APNE000050172023 2 regarding disposal of property.

7. Prosecution conducted by: Sri Sk. Rafimalik

Additional Public Prosecutor,

VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

8. Accused defended by: Smt. V. Maheswari, Advocate for the accused.

This case coming on 28.04.2026 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Sk.Rafi Malik, Additional Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and Smt. V. Maheswari, Advocate for the Accused, and upon perusing the records, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

Filing of charge sheet:-

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Government Railway Police Station, Chirala,

Bapatla District filed charge sheet in Crime No.21/2022 of Government Railway

Police Station, Chirala against the Accused for the offence punishable under

Section 305 of IPC.

JURISDICTION:

2.The offence took place at KM. No.324/1-3, on upline Posts, between

Vetapalem – Chinaganjam Railway Stations, which comes under the limits of

Government Railway Police Station, Chirala, and within the territorial jurisdiction of learned Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Railways, Nellore, SPSR

Nellore District i.e. Committal Court.

3.The gist of the allegations made by the prosecution is that:-

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Government Railway Police Station, Chirala filed charge sheet against the Accused alleging that, the deceased Akhila was studying Intermediate First Year in Vignanabharathi College, Chirala and she

APNE000050172023 3 was going to College daily by College bus. About 1 ½ month ago the deceased/Akhila was chit chatting and moving closely with the accused near their house and the same was observed by her parents namely, Nakkala

Ramarao/LW.1 and Nakkala Latha/LW.2 and they admonished the accused.

Later, the deceased informed to LW.5/Nakkala Venkateswaramma, who was in love with the accused, and presently he was refusing to marry her, and the same was also known to LWs.1 and 2, since from deceased putting pressure on accused for their marriage, but the accused was refusing to marry her and scolded her as “I don’t marry you, you go and die, and do as you like. The matter stood so, on 22.02.2022 at midnight, at 01.00 a.m., the accused and deceased are discussing some matter with loud voice at their house staircase, after hearing the noise, LWs.1 and 2 woke up from sleep and rushed there, meanwhile, the accused observed LWs.1 and 2 and ran away from that place.

On that, the deceased informed to LWs.1 and 2 that she and the accused are loving each other, but at present he was refusing to marry her, and also abusing that he don’t marry her, and asked her to go and die. Then LWs.1 and 2 consoled the deceased/Akhila and they will put the matter before the village elders. Thereafter, in the early morning, the family members i.e., LWs.1, 2 and

LW.3/Nakkala Yamini woke up and found missing of the deceased/Akhila. On that, the deceased went to the scene of offence and committed suicide by falling under an unknown running train due to abetment of the accused.

(i)On 22.02.2022 at 8.00 hours, LW.20/Ch. Kondaiah, Head

Constable of GRP, Chirala registered the report of LW.9/Mukesh Kumar, who was the Station Master of Chirala Railway Station as a case in Crime

No.21/2022 under Sec.174 Cr.P.C. of Chirala GRPS, and submitted original FIR to Court and copies of the same to all concerned officials.

APNE000050172023 4

(ii)During the course of investigation, LW.20 examined LW.9 and visited the scene of offence in the presence of mediators LWs.13 and 14 namely, Kancharla Sowmya Deepthi and K. Ramadevi, RPF WASI, Chirala, drafted observation report at the crime scene, prepared a rough sketch, meantime,LWs.1 to 4 reached there and identified the deceased, then LW.20 shifted the dead body to Government Area Hospital, Chirala for safe custody to avoid train traffic at SOC, and intimated to family members of the deceased to present at GAH, Chirala for inquest and LW.20 reached Chinaganjam Railway

Station, examined LWs.10 and 11 namely, Malireddy Bhimudu Babu and M.

Ashok Reddy respectively, and recorded their statements. Later, LW.20 reached GAH, Chirala, but family members of the deceased were not available to conduct inquest.

(iii)On 23.02.2022 at 8.00 hours, while LW.20 was present at Chirala

GRP Station, LWs.1 to 4 who are the family members of the deceased came to

GRP Station and raised allegation against the accused, and on that, LW.20 recorded their statements under Sec.161 Cr.P.C. Meanwhile, LW.1 produced

Certificate of School of Secondary Education (S.S.C.) of the deceased/Nakkala

Akhila. On verification, date of birth of the deceased was found as 14.04.2005.

On the same day, at 10.00 hours, LW.20 held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of LWs.15 to 17 namely, Kattemboina Hemalatha,

Yalagala Rathna Kumari and Aula Ashok Kumar respectively and sent to

LW.19/Dr. Sk. Azad, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Govt. Area Hospital, Chirala for postmortem examination to find out the exact cause of death. On 24.02.2022

LW.20 secured neighbours of the deceased, examined LWs.5 to 8 and recorded their statements.

(iv)LW.20 sent a requisition to Assistant Public Prosecutor, Hon’ble

Special Judicial First Class Magistrate, Railways, Nellore, for obtaining legal

APNE000050172023 5 opinion and LW.20 obtained preliminary postmortem report of the deceased from LW.19, in which it is opined that ‘Reserved due to pending RFSL report’.

(v)On 25.02.2022 LW.20 obtained legal opinion from N. Kalpana,

Senior Assistant Public Prosecutor, II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Court,

Nellore opined that the facts of the case according to the statements of prime witnesses it is establishing the requirement of investigation under Sec.305 IPC as the deceased is a minor. On 25.02.2022, LW.20 altered the Section of law from Sec.174 Cr.P.C. to Sec.305 IPC and submitted original alteration memo to the Hon’ble Court and copies of the same to all officers concerned. On 26.02.2022 LW.20 sent a requisition letter to Mandal Executive Magistrate,

Chinnaganjam Mandal for transmission of original FIR and inquest of the deceased in this case on the file of learned Spl. JMFC for railways, Nellore, and on 27.02.2022 at 20.15 hours LW.20 arrested the accused at Chirala Bus Stand and sent him to remand.

(vi)During the course of investigation, on 03.03.2022 LW.20 secured R.

Srinivasa Rao, Headmaster, Satyam High School, Chinnaganjam, and examined him as LW.12, and recorded his Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement, and on verification, the date of birth of the deceased is found as the same in SSC and

Study Certificate i.e., 14.04.2005.

(vii)LW.18/S. Sree Kumar, Scientific Assistant, RFSL, Guntur who analyzed the material objects and issued opinion that ‘the items No.1, 2 and 3 are analyzed but no poison substances is found in them’. Basing on the report of LW.18, LW.19 who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased, issued postmortem certificate on 08.07.2022 opining that the deceased would have been died due to hemorrhage and shock due to head injury and multiple fractures. After completion of entire investigation, LW.20 filed charge sheet against the accused.

APNE000050172023 6

Taking of cognizance and committal proceedings:

4.The learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Railways,

Nellore taken the cognizance of the case, for the offence under Section 305 of

IPC against the Accused and registered it as P.R.C. No.6/2022 and copies of documents were furnished to him, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. on his appearance. Since the offence under Section 305 of IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Nellore Division, Nellore, the learned Magistrate had committed this case under Section 209 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short Cr.P.C) to the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court, Nellore. Later, the

Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Nellore has numbered the same as Sessions

Case No.389/2018 and made over the same to this Court for disposal according to law.

Appearance of the accused and opening the case:

5.After receipt of the summons, the Accused appeared before this Court and engaged advocate to defend him. Thereafter, the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor as envisaged under Section 226 of Cr.P.C., opened the case, by describing the charge brought against him and also the evidence going to be adduced to prove his guilt.

Framing of charge:-

6.After hearing both sides and considering the entire material available on record, as per Section 228 (2) of Cr.P.C. charge for the offence under Section 305 of IPC against the accused was framed, read over and explained to him in his vernacular language for which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

APNE000050172023 7

Hence, this case stands posted for prosecution evidence, after fixing the schedule for trial.

Prosecution evidence:-

7.To prove their respective contentions, the prosecution has got examined

P.Ws.1 to 7 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.21. Further, the evidences of LWs.4 and 7, 8 and 10 to 19 namely, Nakkala Srinivasa Rao, Avula Sambasivarao,

Nakkala Sathish, Malireddy Bhimudu Babu, M. Ashok Reddy, R. Srinivasa Rao,

Kancharla Sowmya Deepthi, K. Ramadevi, Kattemboina Hemalatha, Yalagala

Rathnakumari, Avula Ashok Kumar, S. Sree Kumar, Scientific Assistant, and Dr.

Sk. Azad, Civil Asst. Surgeon, Govt. Area Hospital, Chirala respectively, were given up by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

8.The Accused had complied with section 437-A Cr.P.C for his appearance

before the Appellate Court, if any.

9.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused was examined under

Section 313 Cr.P.C for which, he denied the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and reported no defence evidence on his behalf. Hence defence evidence is recorded as NIL.

10.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record.

11.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted arguments that on behalf of prosecution P.W.1 to P.W.7 are examined and Ex.P.1 to P.21 are marked. Though PWs.1 to 5 turned hostile to the case of prosecution, taking into consideration of the evidence of PWs.6 and 7 and Ex.P.1 to P.21, prayed for convicting the Accused.

APNE000050172023 8

12.The learned legal aid counsel for the Accused argued that except the evidences of the Investigating Officer/PW.7, there is no any independent evidence on record against the accused. Moreover, PWs.1 to 3 being the parents and sister of the deceased respectively and PWs.4 and 5 being the neighbours of PWs.1 to 3, did not support the case of prosecution. The evidence of PW.6 is not reflecting any offence against the accused. So, there is no any evidence on record that the Accused committed the offence. Thereby the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused and prayed the Court to acquit the accused.

13.Now, the point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt for the offences charged against him under Section 305 of IPC?

POINT:

14.Perused the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 7 and Ex.P1 to P.21.

i)P.W.1 – Nakkala Rama Rao, who is the father of the deceased/Nakkala Akhila deposed that he do not know the accused, the accused never committed any offence against the deceased/Nakka Akhila and he is not responsible for the death of the deceased, he does not know the contents of complaint lodged by LW.9, and LW.20 who was the then Railway RP

SI, Chirala never conducted inquest panchanama over the deceased/Nakkala

Akhila in his presence and in the presence of LWs.2 to 4 and they never opined that the deceased committed suicide by falling under a running train due to abetment of the accused. He completely turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

APNE000050172023 9

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.1 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.1.

ii)P.W.2 – Nakkala Latha, who is the mother of the deceased also deposed in the same lines, as deposed by her husband/PW.1. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.2 denied the all the suggestions put to her as false, and her 161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.2.

iii)PW.3 – Nakkala Yamini, who is the sister of the deceased also deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.1 and 2. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.3 denied the all the suggestions put to her as false, and her 161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.3.

iv)PW.4 – Nakkala Venkateswaramma, who is the relative of the deceased also deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.1 to 3. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.4 denied the all the suggestions put to her as false, and her 161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.4.

v)PW.5 – Thati Naresh, who is the neighbour of PWs.1 to 4 deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.1 to 4. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

APNE000050172023 10

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.5 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.5.

vi)PW.6 – Mukesh Kumar, who worked as Station Master, Chirala

Railway Station deposed that, on 22.02.2022 he was on duty in the morning shift from 7.00 a.m., to 11.00 a.m., and he received message from LW.11/Ashok

Reddy, Station Master of Chinna Ganjam Railway Station, that in between

Vetapalem to Chinna Ganjam Upline, one dead body of female was lying at KM

No.324/3, wearing Track-pant and T-shirt, and then he forwarded the above said message to LW.20/SI/GRP, Cheerala, and SI/RPF/Cheerala, and later he also lodged Ex.P.6-Complaint before LW.20, and that LW.20 examined him in connection with this case.

During the cross-examination by the learned defence counsel no incriminating material found against the the accused.

vii)PW.7 – Ch. Kondaiah, working as Sub-Inspector of Police, Chirala

GRP that, on 22.02.2022 at about 8.00 hours, he registered the report of PW.6 as a case in Crime No.21/2022 under Sec.174 Cr.P.C., and submitted Ex.P.7- original FIR to MEM, Chinnaganjam, and then he examined PW.6, visited the scene of offence in the presence of LWs.13 and 14 namely, Kancharla Sowmya

Deepthi and K. Ramadevi, drafted Ex.P.8-Scene observation report, prepared

Ex.P.9-rough sketch of the same, and meanwhile, PWs.1 to 3 and

LW.4/Nakkala Sreenivasa Rao reached there and identified the deceased, then he shifted the dead body to the Government Area Hospital, chirala for safe custody to avoid train traffic at SOC, and intimated to family members of deceased to present at GAH, Chirala for inquest and he reached Chinaganjam

APNE000050172023 11

Railway station, examined LW.10/Malireddy Bhimudu Babu, LW.11/M. Ashok

Reddy, and recorded their statements later he reached at GAH, Chirala, but family members of the deceased were not available to conduct inquest. He further deposed that, on 23.02.2022 at 8.00 hours, while he was present at

Chirala GRP Station, PWs.1 to 3 and LW.4 who are the family members of the deceased came to GRP Station, raised an allegation against the accused, then he recorded their detailed statements in Part-II case diary under Sec.161

Cr.P.C., meanwhile, PW.1 produced Ex.P.10-Certificate of School Secondary

Education (S.S.C.) of the deceased, and on verification, the date of birth of the deceased was on 14.04.2005, and on the same day at 10.00 hours, he held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of LWs.15 to 17 namely, Kattemboina Hemalatha, Yalagala Rathnakumari and Aula Ashok

Kumar respectively, and Ex.P.11 is the said inquest panchanama duly attested by LWs.15 to 17, and sent to LW.19/Dr. Sk. Azad, Civil Asst. Surgeon, Govt.

Area Hospital, Cheerala for postmortem examination to find out the exact cause of death, and that on 24.02.2022 he secured neighbours of the deceased and examined PWs.4, 5, 7 and LW.8, and recorded their statements. He further deposed that, under the above circumstances, he sent a requisition to Asst.

Public Prosecutor, Hon’ble Spl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Railways,

Nellore for obtaining legal opinion, and he obtained preliminary postmortem report of the deceased from LW.19 under Ex.P.12, and he opined that “Reserved due to pending RFSL report”. He further deposed that, on 25.02.2022 he obtained legal opinion from N. Kalpana, Sr. Assistant Public

Prosecutor, II JMFC, Nellore who opined that the facts of the case according to the statements of Prime Witnesses, it is establishing the requirement of investigation under Sec.305 IPC as the deceased is a minor. PW.7 further deposed that, on 25.02.2022 he altered the section of law from Sec.174 Cr.P.C.

APNE000050172023 12 to sec.305 IPC and submitted Ex.P.13-alteration memo to the Court, and copies of alteration memo to all officers concerned and continued further investigation, and on 26.02.2022 he sent requisition letter to MEM, Chinaganjam Mandal for transmission of original FIR and inquests of the deceased in this case on the file of the Court of Spl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Railways, Nellore, and on 27.02.2022 at 20.15 hours, he arrested the accused at Chirala Bus-stand and sent him for remand, and that the prima facie case was made out against the accused under Sec.305 of IPC. He further deposed that, during the course of investigation, on 03.03.2022 he secured R. Srinivasa Rao, Head Master,

Satyam High School, Chinnaganjam, and examined him as LW.12, recorded his

Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement, obtained Study Certificate of the deceased from

LW.12 and on verification it is found date of birth of the deceased is same in

SSC and Study Certificates i.e., 14.04.2005. He further deposed that, LW.18/S.

Sree Kumar, Scientific Assistant, RFSL, Guntur, who analyzed the material objects, issued opinion that the item No.1, 2 and 3 are analyzed, but no poisonous substance is found in them, and that Ex.P.14 is the said RFSL report.

He further deposed that, basing on the report of LWs.18 and 19 who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased, issued postmortem certificate on 08.07.2022 and opined that the deceased would have been died due to hemorrhage and shock due to head injury and multiple fractures, and the said final opinion is marked as Ex.P.15, and that after completion of entire investigation, he filed charge sheet against the accused under Section 305 IPC, and that PWs.1 to 5 stated before him as in Exs.P.1 to

P.5 respectively, LWs.4, 7 and 8 stated before him as in Exs.P.16 to P.18 respectively, LWs.10 to 12 stated before him as in Exs.P.19 to P.21 respectively.

APNE000050172023 13

During the cross-examination by the learned defence counsel, PW.7 denied all the suggestions put to him, as false.

15.Now the point for consideration before the court is that “Whether the evidences of P.Ws.6 and 7 can be based for convicting

Accused or not?

16.The father of the deceased is examined as PW.1, the mother and sister of the deceased are examined as PW.2 and PW.3 respectively, and the neighbours of the deceased are examined as PWs.3 and 4, and they turned hostile to the case of prosecution. Admittedly, the evidence of PW.6 being the

Station Master of Chirala Railway Station, and PW.7 being the Investigating

Officer, quite naturally supports the case of prosecution. Their evidence need corroboration of other material prosecution witnesses and the same is lacking.

The evidence of LW.4 who was one of the inquest panchayatdar, LWs.7 and 8 being the neighbours of the deceased, LWs.10 and 11 being the Railway staff,

LW.12 being the Head Master of Satyam High School, and LWs.13 to 17 being the mediators for scene observation and inquest panchanamas, LW.18 being

Scientific Assistant, who issued RFSL report, and LW.19 who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased, are given up by the prosecution. As such, there is no any iota of evidence against the accused to prove his guilt.

17.The evidence of PW.6 who gave report about the death of the deceased and PW.7 who registered the case and investigated the case, cannot be based for convicting the accused, since it lacks independent corroboration. As such, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the

APNE000050172023 14 guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and the Accused is entitled for benefit of doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered.

18.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the charge U/Sec.305 of

IPC and accordingly he is acquitted under Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused and from his sureties as per Provisions under

Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months.

No material objects marked by this Court. Hence, there is no order regarding disposal of property.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court this the 28th day of April, 2026.

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

For Prosecution:

Prosecution Name of WitnessDescription Witness No. PW.1:Nakkala Rama RaoFather of the deceased/Akhila.

PW.2:Nakkala LathaMother of the deceased.

PW.3:Nakkala YaminiSister of the deceased.

PW.4:Nakkala Venkateswaramma.Relative of the deceased.

PW.5:Thati NareshNeighbour of the deceased.

Mukesh Kumar, the then Station PW.6:Defacto complainant. Master, Chirala Railway Station.

APNE000050172023 15

Ch. Kondaiah, Sub-Inspector of PW.7:Police, Chirala Govt. Railway Investigating Officer. Police Station.

For Defence:NONE

Exhibits marked for the prosecution

Proved/ Exhibit Description of the ExhibitAttested No. by Ex.P.1:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.2:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.2 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.3:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.4:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.4 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.5:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.5 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.6:Complaint given by PW.6 to PW.7.PW.6

Original FIR in Cr. No.21/2022 u/Sec.174 Cr.P.C. of Ex.P.7:PW.7 GRP/Chirala.

Ex.P.8:Scene observation report.PW.7

Ex.P.9:Rough sketch of the scene of offence.PW.7

Ex.P.10:Attested copy of SSC Certificate of the deceased.PW.7

Ex.P.11:Inquest panchanama.PW.7

Ex.P.12:Preliminary postmortem report.PW.7

Ex.P.13:Section alteration Memo.PW.7

Ex.P.14:RFSL Report.PW.7

Ex.P.15:Final opinion.PW.7

Ex.P.16:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.4/Nakkala Srinivasa Rao.PW.7

Ex.P.17:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.7/A. Sambasiva Rao.PW.7

Ex.P.18:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.8/Nakkala Sathish.PW.7

Ex.P.19:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.10/M. Bhimudu Babu.PW.7

APNE000050172023 16

Ex.P.20:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.11/M. Ashok Reddy.PW.7

Ex.P.21:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.12/R. Srinivasa Rao.PW.7

For Defence:NIL

Material Object Marked

Material Proved/ Description of the Exhibit Object No.Attested by

NIL

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies submitted to:-

1. The Hon’ble Registrar (Judicial), High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi.

2. The Hon’ble Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies to: -

3. The learned Spl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class for Railways, Nellore.

4. The Addl. Public Prosecutor, VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

5. The Station House Officer, Government Railway Police Station, Chirala.

// True Copy //

APNE000000242024 1

COURT OF SESSION :: NELLORE DIVISION :: NELLORE

In the Court of the Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore

Present: Sri M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore. *** Wednesday, this the 29th day of April, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.2 of 2024

(P.R.C. No.09/2020 on the file of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kota, SPSR Nellore District) (Crime No.145/2020 of Chittamur Police Station, SPSR Nellore District) ***

1. Name of the Complainant:State – Inspector of Police, Vakadu, SPSR Nellore District.

2. Description of the Accused:-

Yellampati Veeraswamy, S/o Subrahmanyam, aged 37 years, Kotha Harijanawada, Aravapalem Village, Chittamur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

3. Offences: -

Charge No.1 under Section 448 of IPC for committing trespass into the house of LW.1/Nallamakula Suneetha @ Sujatha with an intention to commit offence; Charge No.2 under Section 376(2) of IPC for committing rape on N. Suneetha @ Sujatha/LW.1 without her consent, who is physically challenged person; Charge No.3 under Section 506 of IPC for committing criminal intimidation by threatening LW.1/Sujatha to kill her, if she reveals the acts of accused to anybody.

4. Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

5. Finding of the Judge:Found not guilty

6. Sentence or Order: -

In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the charge U/Secs.448, 376(2) and 506 of I.P.C., and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the Accused and from his sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they

APNE000000242024 2 shall stand in force for a period of six months. No property is marked before this Court, and as such, there is no order regarding disposal of case property.

7. Prosecution conducted by:Sri Sk. Rafimalik

Additional Public Prosecutor,

VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

8. Accused defended by:Sri T. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, Advocate.

This case coming on 29.04.2026 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Sk. Rafi Malik, Additional Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and of Sri T. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, Advocate for the Accused, and upon perusing the records, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

Filing of charge sheet:-

1.The Inspector of Police, Vakadu, SPSR Nellore District filed charge sheet in Crime No.145/2020 of Chittamur Police Station, against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 376(2)(l) and 506 of I.P.C.

JURISDICTION:

2.The offence took place at Kotha Harijanawada, Aravapalem Village,

Chittamur Mandal, which comes under the limits of Chittamur Police Station,

SPSR Nellore District, and within the territorial jurisdiction of learned Judicial

First Class Magistrate, Kota, SPSR Nellore District i.e. Committal Court.

3.The gist of the allegations made by the prosecution is that:-

The Inspector of Police, Vakadu, filed charge sheet against the Accused alleging that, LW.1/Nallamakula Suneetha @ Sujatha is a physically challenged woman and suffering from flaccid paralysis and unable to walk and as such, she remained in the house along with her brother Nallamakula Luther/LW.2 and his

APNE000000242024 3 wife Nallamakula Padmavathi/LW.3 at New Harijanawada, Aravapalem Village,

Chittamur Mandal. The accused is the southern side neighbour to the house of

LW.1/Sujatha. He cast his evil eye against her to satisfy his lust with her and waiting for an opportunity. LWs.2 and 3 used to went to Chillamuru Village by leaving LW.1/Sujatha alone in the house.

(i)On 15.09.2020 evening LW.2/Luther arranged meals to the victim and went to Chillamuru. Taking advantage of the loneliness of LW.1/Sujatha, the accused trespassed into her house on the night of 15/16.09.2020, caught hold her hands forcibly, gagged clothes in her mouth, removed her shirt and

Nicker, laid upon her and committed rape on her forcibly without her consent and also threatened her with dire consequences not to reveal to anybody. On the next day morning i.e., on 16.09.2020 LW.1/Sujatha went to the house of

LW.4/Nallamakula Chengamma and informed the same to her by weeping. She also informed the same to her brother LW.2/Luther, when he visited the house on that evening. On the advice of the village elders, LW.2/Luther filed report in

Chittamur Police Station.

(ii)Basing on the report of LW.2, the Sub-Inspector of Police,

Chittamur Police Station by name K. Kishore Babu/LW.16 registered the same as a case in Crime No.145/2020 under Sections 448, 376(2)(l) and 506 of IPC on 16.09.2020 at 17.30 hours and submitted express FIR to the concerned officials. LW.17/K. Narasimha Rao, Inspector of Police, Vakadu obtained copy of express FIR and took up investigation in this case.

(iii)During the course of investigation, LW.17 visited the scene of offence and directed LW.15/Johnsy, who was Woman Asst. Sub-Inspector of

Chittamur Police Station to record the statement of LW.1/Sujatha, and accordingly, LW.15 recorded the statement of LW.1 and handed over to LW.17, who observed the scene of offence in the presence of mediators LW.9/Kottu

APNE000000242024 4

Chiranjeevi and LW.10/Puchalapalli Yadaiah, and seized clothes available at the scene of offence under cover of scene observation report, duly attested by the mediators. LW.17 also examined LWs.2 to 8 namely, Nallamakula Luther,

Nallamakula Padmavathi, Nallamakula Chengamma, Chitteti Atchaiah,

Yellampati Polaiah, Chitteti Ramanaiah and Gnanam Polaiah respectively, and recorded their statements and sent LW.1/Sujatha before LW.12/Dr. G. Triveni,

Civil Asst. Surgeon, Community Health Center, Vakadu for medical examination and necessary certificate.

(iv)On 17.09.2020 at 17.30 hours, LW.17 arrested the accused at

Aravapalem Crossroad, Chittamur Mandal, recorded his confessional statement and seized clothes which were wore at the time of commission of offence under a cover of mahazarnama, duly attested by mediators LW.9/Kottu Chiranjeevi and LW.11/Budanam Raveendra Babu and sent the accused to judicial custody.

LW.17 forwarded the material object before the RFSL, Guntur for analysis and opinion through Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Gudur.

(v)The Assistant director got analyzed the material objects, issued report opining that blood is detected on items 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9 only, but not on other items, and Semen is detected on items 2, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 only, but not on other items. Spermatozoa could only be detected in items 2, 7, 10 and 11.

No foreign material detected in item No.3. No foreign hair is detected in item

No.4. Blood on items 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9, Semen on items 2, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 is of human origin, but their blood group could not be determined.

(vi)LW.12 who examined LW.1, issued medical certificate, opining that there is evidence of recent sexual intercourse. LW.13/Dr. S. Sonu, Civil

Assistant Surgeon, Government Area Hospital, Gudur who examined the accused, issued potency certificate opining that there is nothing to suggest that the person examined, is not capable of performing sexual act. LW.14/R. Ashok

APNE000000242024 5

Kumar, the then learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Gudur recorded the

Sec.164 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.1. After completion of entire investigation,

LW.17 filed charge sheet against the accused.

Taking of cognizance and committal proceedings:

4.The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kota had taken the cognizance of the case, for the offence under Sections 448, 376(2) and 506 of

IPC against the Accused and registered it as P.R.C. No.09/2020 and copies of documents were furnished to him, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. on his appearance. Since the offence under Section 376 of IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Nellore Division, Nellore, the learned Magistrate had committed this case under Section 209 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short Cr.P.C) to the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court, Nellore. Later, the

Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Nellore has numbered the same as Sessions

Case No.2/2024 and made over the same to this Court for disposal according to law.

Appearance of the accused and opening the case:

5.After receipt of the summons, the Accused appeared before this Court, and engaged Sri T. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, Advocate, to defend him.

Thereafter, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as envisaged under Section 226 of Cr.P.C., opened the case, by describing the charge brought against the

Accused and also the evidence going to be adduced to prove his guilt.

Framing of charge:-

6.After hearing both sides and considering the entire material available on record, the Accused was examined under Section 228 (1)(b) of Cr.P.C., charge for the offence under Sections 448, 376(2) and 506 of IPC against the accused

APNE000000242024 6 were framed, read over and explained to him in his vernacular language for which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, this case stands posted for prosecution evidence, after fixing the schedule for trial.

Prosecution evidence:-

7.To prove their respective contentions, the prosecution has got examined

P.Ws.1 to 7, and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.20. Further, the evidences of LWs.4, 5, and 9 to 16 namely, Nallamakula Chengamma, Chitteti Atchaiah, Kottu

Chiranjeevi, Putchalapalli Yadaiah, Budanam Raveendra Babu, Dr. G. Triveni,

Dr. S. Sonu, Sri R. Ashok Kumar, the then Addl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class, gudur, Johnsy, Woman Asst. Sub-Inspector and K. Kishore Babu, Sub-Inspector of Police, Chittamur Police Station respectively, were given up by the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor.

8.The Accused had complied with section 437-A Cr.P.C for his appearance

before the Appellate Court, if any.

9.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused was examined under

Section 313 Cr.P.C for which, he denied the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and reported no defence evidence on his behalf. Hence defence evidence is recorded as NIL.

10.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record.

11.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted arguments that on behalf of prosecution P.W.1 to P.W.7 are examined, and Ex.P.1 to P.20.

Though, P.Ws.1 to 6 turned hostile, taking into consideration of the evidence of

PW.7, and Ex.P.1 to P.20, prayed for convicting the Accused.

APNE000000242024 7

12.The learned counsel for the Accused argued that except the evidence of

PW.6 being the Investigating Officer, there is no any evidence on record against the Accused. Moreover, PW.1 who is the alleged victim, PW.2 being the brother of the victim, PW.3 being the wife of PW.1 and PWs.4 to 6 who are the neighbours of PW.1, turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. So, there is no any evidence on record that the accused committed the offence. Further, the evidences of LWs.4, 5 and 9 to 16, who are cited as witnesses in support of the prosecution case, are given up by learned Addl.

Public Prosecutor. Thereby the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused and prayed the Court to acquit the accused.

13.Now, the point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence charged against them under Sections 448, 376(2) and 506 of IPC?

POINT:

14.Perused the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 7, and Ex.P1 to P.20.

i)P.W.1 – Nallamakula Suneetha @ Sujatha, is the victim in this case. She appears to be physically disabled woman and unable to walk herself and since by birth she is suffering from Flaccid Paralysis and in order to ascertain about competency of witness regarding giving evidence, this Court posed some preliminary questions to test her competency in giving evidence, and she gave rationable answers. This Court satisfied that the witness is competent to give evidence. During her chief examination, PW.1 deposed that she does not know anything about the case facts, the accused never committed

APNE000000242024 8 any offence against her and he never committed rape against her, and that police never examined her in connection with this case. She further deposed that at no point of time LW.14 who was the then Hon’ble Judicial first Class

Magistrate, Gudur recorded her statement, and at no point of time she affixed

her Left Hand Thumb impression in any Court. She completely turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.1 denied all the suggestions put to him by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as false, and that his 161 Cr.P.C.

statement made before the the Police is marked as Ex.P.1, and her Sec.164

Cr.P.C. given before LW.14/learned Magistrate is marked as Ex.P.2.

ii)P.W.2 – Nallamakula Luther, who is the brother of PW.1 deposed that he knows the accused, and at no point of time he lodged complaint against the accused, and the accused never committed any offence against PW.1. He admitted his signature on the alleged complaint, as Ex.P.3. He further deposed that he does not know the contents of alleged complaint, and LW.17 who was the then Inspector of Police, Vakadu never examined him in connection with this case, and that PW.1 was also not examined by LW.17 and LW.14 at any point of time. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.2 denied the all the suggestions put to him by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.4.

iii)PW.3 – Nallamakula Padmavathi, who is the wife of PW.2 deposed that she knows the accused, and at no point of time PW.2 lodged complaint against the accused, the accused never committed any offence against PW.1, and LW.17 never examined her in connection with this case, and PW.1 was also

APNE000000242024 9 not examined by LW.17 and LW.14 at any point of time. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.3 denied all the suggestions put to her as false, and her Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement given before the Police is marked as Ex.P.5.

iv)PW.4 – Gnanam Polaiah, who is a neighbour of PWs.1 to 3 deposed that he knows PWs.1 to 3 and the accused, and he do not know anything about the case facts, and LW.17 never examined him in connection with this case. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.4 denied all the suggestions put to him, as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement made before the Police, is marked as Ex.P.6.

v)PW.5 – Yellampati Polaiah, who is also a neighbour of PWs.1 to 4 deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PW.4. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.5 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement made before the Police, is marked as Ex.P.7.

vi)PW.6 – Chitteti Ramanaiah, who is also a neighbour of PWs.1 to 5 deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.4 and 5. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

APNE000000242024 10

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.5 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement made before the Police, is marked as Ex.P.8.

vii)PW.7 – K. Narasimha Rao, who worked as Inspector of Police,

Vakadu deposed that, on 16.09.2020 at about 5.30 p.m., PW.2 came to Police

Station and lodged Ex.P.9-Complaint, which LW.16/K. Kishore Babu, Sub-

Inspector of Police, Chittamuru Police Station registered the same as a case in

Crime No.145/2020 under Sections 448, 376(2)(i) and 506 of IPC, and submitted Ex.P.10-original FIR to Court and copies of the same to all concerned.

He further deposed that, he took up further investigation in this case and rushed to scene of offence and directed LW.15/Johnsy, Woman Asst. Sub-Inspector of

Police, Chittamuru Police Station to record the statement of PW.1, who accordingly recorded, and Ex.P.11 is the statement recorded by LW.15, and then he secured the presence of mediators LW.9/Kottu Chiranjeevi and

LW.10/Putchalapalli Yadaiah, observed the scene of offence situated at the house of PW.1 and prepared Ex.P.12-Scene observation report duly attested by the said mediators, and he also prepared Ex.P.13-rough sketch of the scene, he also taken Ex.P.14-Seventeen Nos. of photos along with C.D., and then he secured the presence of PWs.2 to 6, LW.4/Nallamakula Chengamma and

LW.5/Chitteti Atchaiah, examined and recorded their Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statements, then he forwarded PW.1 before LW.12/Dr. G. Triveni, Civil Asst.

Surgeon, Community Health Center, Vakadu for examination and for issuance of necessary certificate, and accordingly LW.12 examined PW.1 and preserved material objects which are forwarded to RFSL, Guntur for analysis through

SDPO, Gudur, and Ex.P.15 is the said RFSL report, and basing upon the RFSL report and Clinical examination of LW.12, she issued Ex.P.16-Final opinion by

APNE000000242024 11 opining that there is evidence of recent sexual intercourse. PW.7 further deposed that, he arrested the accused on 17.09.2020 at about 5.30 p.m., at

Aravapalem Crossroad, Chittamuru in the presence of mediators LW.9/Kottu

Chiranjeevi and LW.11/Budanam Raveendra Babu, and the accused confessed about commission of offence, and then he seized the clothes of the accused, which were wore by him at the time of commission of offence under the cover of

Ex.P.17-confessional, seizure, arrest panchanama, duly attested by the said mediators. (Said clothes are not produced at the time of recording evidence), and that he brought the accused to Police Station and sent him to remand after due formalities. He further deposed that, he made requisition before the Court to conduct Potency test of the accused, and accordingly permitted, and he produced the accused before LW.13/Dr. S. Sonu, Civil Asst. Surgeon,

Government Area Hospital, Gudur, who examined and issued Ex.P.18-Potency certificate stating that ‘there is nothing to suggest that the accused is not capable of performing sexual act’. He further deposed that, prior to that, he sent requisition before LW.14 to record the Ex.P.2-Statement of PW.1 under Sec.164

Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1, who accordingly recorded, and after completion of entire investigation, he laid charge sheet against the accused by enclosing all the documents, and that PWs.1 to 6 stated before him as in Exs.P.2 to P.7 respectively, and LWs.4 and 5 stated before him as in Exs.P.19 and P.20 respectively.

During the cross-examination by the learned defence counsel, PW.7 denied all the suggestions put to him, as false.

15.Now the point for consideration before the court is that, “Whether the evidence of P.W.7 can be based for convicting Accused or not?”

APNE000000242024 12

16.Admittedly, as discussed supra, the evidence of PW.6 being the

Investigating Officer, quite naturally supports the case of prosecution. His evidence needs corroboration of other material prosecution witnesses and the same is lacking. Moreover, PW.1 being the victim, PW.2 being the brother of the victim, PW.3 being the wife of PW.2, and PWs.4 to 6 being the neighbours of

PWs.1 to 3, turned hostile. The evidences of LWs.4 and 5 who are the neighbours of the victim, LWs.9 to 11 who acted as mediators for scene observation, arrest of the accused and seizure panchanama, LW.12 who examined the victim and gave medical certificate, LW.13 who examined the accused and gave Potency certificate, LW.14 who recorded the Sec.164 Cr.P.C.

statement of PW.1, LW.15 who recorded the statement of PW.1, and LW.16 who registered the case, are given up by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. As such, there is no any iota of evidence against the Accused to prove his guilt.

17.The evidence of PW.7 who investigated the case and filed charge sheet against the Accused, cannot be based for convicting the accused. As such, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt and the Accused is entitled for benefit of doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered.

18.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the charge U/Secs.448, 376(2) and 506 of I.P.C., and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of

Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the Accused and from his sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months.

APNE000000242024 13

No property is marked before this Court, and as such, there is no order regarding disposal of case property.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court this the 29th day of April, 2026.

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

For Prosecution:

Prosecution Name of WitnessDescription Witness No. PW.1:Nallamakula Suneetha @ SujathaVictim.

Defacto complainant as PW.2:Nallamakula Lutherwell as the brother of Victim.

PW.3:Nallamakula PadmavathiWife of PW.2.

PW.4:Gnanam PolaiahNeighbour of PW.1.

PW.5:Yellampati PolaiahNeighbour of PW.1.

PW.6:Chitteti RamanaiahNeighbour of PW.1.

K. Narasimha Rao, the then PW.7:Investigating Officer. Inspector of Police, Vakadu.

For Defence:NONE

Exhibits marked for the prosecution

Proved/ Exhibit No.Description of the Exhibit Attested by Ex.P.1:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. of PW.1 made before Police.PW.7

APNE000000242024 14

Ex.P.2:Sec.164 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1 given before PW.7 LW.14/learned Judicial Magistrate.

Ex.P.3:Signature of PW.2 on the report given by him to Police.PW.3

Ex.P.4:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.2 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.5:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.6:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.4 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.7:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.5 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.8:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.6 made before Police.PW.7

Ex.P.9:Complaint of PW.1 given before Police.PW.7

Original FIR in Crime No.145/2020 of Chittamur Police Ex.P.10:PW.7 Station.

Statement of PW.1 recorded by LW.15/Woman Asst. Ex.P.11:PW.7 Sub-Inspector, Chittamur Police Station.

Ex.P.12:Scene observation report.PW.7

Ex.P.13:Rough sketch of the scene of offence.PW.7

Ex.P.14:Positive Photos 17 in number along with Compact Disc.PW.7

Ex.P.15:RFSL report.PW.7

Ex.P.16:Final opinion.PW.7

Ex.P.17:Confessional, seizure-cum-arrest panchanama.PW.7

Ex.P.18:Potency Certificate of the Accused.PW.7

Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.4/N. Chengamma Ex.P.19:PW.7 made before Police.

Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.5/Ch. Atchaiah made Ex.P.20:PW.7

before Police.

For Defence:NIL

APNE000000242024 15

Material Objects Marked

Material Proved/ Description of the Exhibit Object No.Attested by NIL

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies submitted to:-

1. The Hon’ble Registrar (Judicial), High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi.

2. The Hon’ble Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies to: -

3. The learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kota.

4. The Addl. Public Prosecutor, VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

5. The Station House Officer, Chittamur Police Station.

// True Copy //

APNE000018472024 1

COURT OF SESSION :: NELLORE DIVISION :: NELLORE

In the Court of the Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore

Present: Sri M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore. *** Tuesday, this the 28th day of April, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.173 of 2024

(P.R.C. No.125/2019 on the file of learned V Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District) (Crime No.188/2018 of Vedayapalem Police Station, Nellore City) ***

1. Name of the Complainant:State – Sub-Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station, Nellore City.

2. Description of the Accused:-

1. Kolakaluri Ravi Kumar, S/o Ramu, aged 52 years, B.V. Nagar, Nellore City;

2. Kolakaluri Suresh, S/o Ramu, aged 40 years, YSR Nagar, Nellore City;

3. KolakaluriMahesh, S/o Ramu (Case against A.3 was split up and numbered as PRC No.2/2023 on the file of V Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore)

3. Offences: -

Charge No.1 under Section 448 IPC against A.1 and A.2 for committing house- trespass into the house of LW.1/Kunchala Rajesh with intent to commit an offence; Charge No.2 under Section 352 IPC against A.1 and A.2 for assaulting LW.1/Kunchala Rajesh otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by the said LW.1/K. Rajesh; Charge No.3 under Section 352 IPC against A.1 and A.2 for assaulting LW.2/Kunchala Rekha Rani otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by the said LW.1/K. Rajesh; Charge No.3 under Section 307 IPC against A.1 for attempting to commit murder of LW.1/K. Rajesh;

APNE000018472024 2

Charge No.4 under Section 307 r/w 34 IPC against A.2 for having common intention along with A.1 in attempting to commit murder of LW.1/Kunchala Rajesh.

4. Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

5. Finding of the Judge:Found not guilty

6. Sentence or Order: -

In the result, the Accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the charge U/Secs.448, 352 and 307 r/w 34 of IPC and accordingly they are acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused No.1 and 2 and from their sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months. (The case against Accused No.3 is split up and numbered as PRC No.2/2023 on the file of V Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore.) MO.1-Casuarina Stickand the unmarked non-valuable property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. Forward MO.1 and the unmarked non-valuable property if any to the learned V Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore (Vide CPR No.210/2019 i.e., committal Court and CPR No.56/2026 of Sessions Court) for carrying out the Order of disposal of the case property after expiry of appeal time.

7. Prosecution conducted by:Sri Sk. Rafimalik

Additional Public Prosecutor,

VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

8. Accused defended by:Sri P. Shafi Ahamed Advocate for A.1 and A.2.

This case coming on 28.04.2026 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Sk.Rafi Malik, Additional Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and Sri P. Shafi Ahamed Advocate for the Accused No.1 and 2 and upon perusing the records, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

Filing of charge sheet:-

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station, SPSR Nellore

District filed charge sheet in Crime No.188/2018 of Vedayapalem Police Station

APNE000018472024 3 against the Accused No.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 352, 307 and 448 read with Sec.34 of IPC.

JURISDICTION:

2.The offence took place at YSR Nagar, Nellore City which comes under the limits of Vedayapalem Police Station, Nellore City, and within the territorial jurisdiction of learned V Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore,

SPSR Nellore District i.e. Committal Court.

3.The gist of the allegations made by the prosecution is that:-

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station, filed charge sheet against the Accused No.1 to 3 alleging that there are ill-feelings between

Accused No.1 to 3 and LW.1/Kunchala Rajesh, since LW.1 gave complaint against them to Police for their misbehaviour in a drunken state, for which,

Police called them and warned them.

(i)On 23.06.2018 at 7.30 p.m., Accused No.1 to 3 who are close associates of each other, criminally trespassed into the house of LW.1/Rajesh with the common intention of killing him, and in furtherance of their common intention, A.1 beat LW.1 with an iron rod on the back of his head and caused bleeding injury. A.2 beat LW.1 on his left hand near the thumb with a stick and caused bleeding injury. A.3 beat him with an iron rod on the left side of his neck and caused injury. Accused No.1 again beat LW.1 on his right back shoulder region. The accused No.1 to 3 also assaulted LW.2/Kunchala Rekha Rani, who is the wife of LW.1. On the intervention of LWs.3 and 4 namely, Gunji Sarath

Babu and LW.4/Johnson Kewin, the accused went away. LW.1/Rajesh was admitted in Government Hospital. On medical intimation, the Outpost in-Charge of Government Hospital, Nellore by name Sk. Masthan Saheb, Head Constable

APNE000018472024 4 recorded the statement of LW.1 on 23.06.2018 at 22.45 hours and forwarded the same along with hospital intimation, to the Station House Officer,

Vedayapalem Police Station, Nellore City on point of jurisdiction.

(ii)On 24.06.2018 at 17.00 hours, LW.9/Ch. Kondaiah, the then Sub-

Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station registered the statement and hospital intimation of LW.1/Rajesh as a case in Crime No.188/2018 under

Sections 307 and 290 r/w 34 of IPC of Vedayapalem Police Station and submitted FIRs to all concerned officials and took up investigation.

(iii)During the course of investigation, LW.9/Sub-Inspector of Police examined LWs.1 to 4 namely, Kunchala Rajesh, Kumchala Rekha Rani, Gunji

Sarath Babu and Johnson Kewin respectively on 24.06.2018 and recorded their

Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statements. On 25.06.2018 at 09.00 hours, LW.9 visited the scene of offence in the presence of mediators LW.5/Devella Madhan Mohan and

LW.6/Buddharaju Naga Venkata Anil Kumar and inspected the same, prepared rough sketch, seized a casurinas stick used for the commission of offence under a cover of observation report duly attested by the mediators/LWs.5 and 6.

(iv)During the course of further investigation, LW.9 filed a memo before the Court by adding Section 448 of I.P.C. During the course of further investigation, on 20.07.2018 at 14.30 hours, LW.9 arrested the Accused No.1 to 3 at Ramakotaiah Nagar, Nellore City and got remanded to judicial custody.

Thereafter, on the written instructions of SDPO, Nellore Town in C.

No.533/GL/2018, dated 03.09.2018, LW.10/K. Narasimha Rao, being the

Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station took up investigation. LW.10 examined some more witnesses and they came forward to speak tot he participation of some others, their statements were recorded by LW.10, but

LW.10, being the Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Staion, did not place reliance of their statements, and as such, prima facie case is made out agaisnt

APNE000018472024 5

Accused No.1 to 3 only. LW.7/Dr. Sk. Ismail, Civil Asst. Surgeon, ACSR Govt.

General Hospital, Nellore, who gave treatment to LW.1, issued wound certificate stating that the injuries on the person of LW.1 are simple in nature. After completion of entire investigation, LW.10 filed charge sheet against the Accused

No.1 to 3.

Taking of cognizance and committal proceedings:

4.The learned V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore had taken the cognizance of the case, for the offence under Sections 307, 352 and 448 r/w 34 of IPC against Accused No.1 to 3, and registered it as P.R.C.

No.125/2019. Since Accused No.3 not appeared before the trial Court, the case against A.3 was split up and numbered as PRC No.2/2023 on the file of learned

V Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore and thereafter, copies of documents were furnished to Accused No.1 and 2 as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. on appearance of the Accused No.1 and 2. Since the offence under Section 307 of IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Nellore

Division, Nellore, the learned Magistrate had committed this case under Section 209 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short Cr.P.C) to the Hon’ble Principal

Sessions Court, Nellore. Later, the Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Nellore

has numbered the same as Sessions Case No.173/2024 and made over the same to this Court for disposal according to law.

Appearance of the accused and opening the case:

5.After receipt of the summons, the Accused No.1 and 2 appeared before this Court and engaged Sri P. Shafi Ahamed Advocate, to defend them.

Thereafter, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as envisaged under Section 226 of Cr.P.C., opened the case, by describing the charge brought against the

APNE000018472024 6

Accused No.1 and 2 and also the evidence going to be adduced to prove their guilt.

Framing of charge:-

6.After hearing both sides and considering the entire material available on record, the Accused No.1 and 2 were examined under Section 228 (2) of

Cr.P.C., charge for the offences under Sections 448, 352, and 307 r/w 34 were framed, read over and explained to them in their vernacular language for which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, this case stands posted for prosecution evidence, after fixing the schedule for trial.

Prosecution evidence:-

7.To prove their respective contentions, the prosecution has got examined

P.Ws.1 to 4, got marked Exs.P.1 to P.12 and M.O.1. Further, the evidences of

LWs.2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 10 namely, Kunchala Rekha Rani, Johnson Kewin, Devella

Madhan Mohan, Dr. Sk. Ismail, Civil asst. Surgeon, ACSR Govt. General

Hospital, Nellore, Sk. Masthan Saheb, Head Constable and K. Narasimha Rao,

Inspector of Police respectively, were given up by the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor.

8.The Accused No.1 and 2 have complied with section 437-A Cr.P.C for their appearance before the Appellate Court, if any.

9.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused No.1 and 2 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C for which, they denied the incriminating material appearing against them in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and reported no defence evidence on their behalf. Hence defence evidence is recorded as NIL.

APNE000018472024 7

10.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record.

11.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted arguments that on behalf of prosecution P.W.1 to P.W.4 are examined, Ex.P.1 to P.12 and MO.1 are marked. Though, P.Ws.1 to 3 turned hostile, taking into consideration of the evidence of PW.4, Ex.P.1 to P.12 and M.O.1, prayed for convicting the Accused.

12.The learned counsel for the Accused argued that except the evidence of the Investigating Officer/PW.4, there is no any evidence on record against the

Accused No.1 and 2. Moreover, PW.1 being the injured and defacto complainant, and PW.2 being the mediator for scene observation panchanama, and PW.3 being a neighbour of PW.1, turned hostile, and did not support the case of the prosecution. So, there is no any evidence on record that the accused committed the offence. Moreover, LW. 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 10 who are cited as a witness in the charge sheet to speak about the commission of the alleged offence by the accused, are given up by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

Thereby the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused and prayed the

Court to acquit the accused.

13.Now, the point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the Accused No.1 and 2 beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence charged against them under Sections 448, 352 and 307 r/w 34 of IPC?

POINT:

14.Perused the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4, Ex.P1 to P.12 and M.O.1.

i)P.W.1 – Kunchala Rajesh, who is the injured in this case deposed that he does not know the accused, they never came to his house and not made

APNE000018472024 8 any attempt of killing him, and they never assaulted his wife/LW.2, and he never lodged any complaint against the Accused No.1 to 3, and his signature was taken by the elders on white empty papers regarding the development of their area. He admitted his signature on the alleged complaint, as Ex.P.1. he further deposed that he does not know the contents of the said complaint, and that

LW.9 who was the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station never examined him in connection with this case. He completely turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.1 denied all the suggestions put to him by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as false, and that his 161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.2.

ii)P.W.2 – Buddharaju Naga Venkata Anil Kukmar, who acted as a mediator for scene observation panchanama deposed that, at no point of time

LW.9 who was the then Sub-Inspector of Police of Vedayapalem Police Station conducted scene observation panchanama in his presence and in the presence of LW.5/Devella Madhan Mohan, and LW.9 obtained his signatures on a written paper at Police Station, and he admitted his signature on the alleged observation panchanama, as Ex.P.3. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.2 denied the all the suggestions put to him by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as false.

iii)PW.3 – Gunji Sarath Babu, deposed that he do not know Accused

No.1 to 3, he does not know PW.1, PW.2, LW.2, LWs.4 and 5, and he does not know anything about the case facts, and that LW.9 who was the then Sub-

Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station never examined him in

APNE000018472024 9 connection with this case. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.3 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.4.

iv)PW.4 – Ch. Kondaiah, the then Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem

Police Station deposed that, on 23.06.2018 at about 22.45 hours, LW.8/Sk.

Masthan Saheb, Head Constable, who was in-Charge of Out-Post Police

Station, Govt. General Hospital, Nellore recorded the Ex.P.5-statement of PW.1 and forwarded the same to him on the point of jurisdiction, and then on 24.06.2018 at about 5.00 p.m., he registered the same as a case in Crime

No.188/2018 under Sections 307 and 209 r/w 34 IPC and submitted Ex.P.6-

Original FIR to Court, and copies to all concerned. He further deposed that, then he secured the presence of PW.1, PW.3, LW.2/Kunchala Rekha Rani and

LW.4/Devella Madhan Mohan, examined them on 24.06.2018 and recorded their

Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statements, and on 25.06.2018 at 9.00 a.m., he rushed to the scene of offence along with PW.2 and LW.5 which is situated at YSR Nagar,

Nellore City, which is in front of the house of PW.1, observed the same and seized M.O.1-Casurina Stick from the scene of offence in the presence of PW.2 and LW.5 by preparing Ex.P.7-scene observation-cum-seizure panchanama duly attested by PW.2 and LW.5, and he also prepared Ex.P.8-rough sketch of the scene of offence, and he filed Ex.P.9-Memo before the court by adding

Section 448 IPC. He further deposed that, on 20.07.2018 at 2.30 p.m., he arrested Accused No.1 to 3 at Ramakotaiah Nagar, Nellore, brought them to

Police Station and sent them to remand after due formalities, and on the instructions of the then SDPO, Nellore, LW.10/K. Narasimha Rao, the then

APNE000018472024 10

Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station took up further investigation, and he examined some more witnesses, who did not support the prosecution case and as such, they were not cited as witnesses, and confirmed his investigation as on correct lines, and that LW.7/Dr. Sk. Ismail, CAS, ACSR Govt.

General Hospital, Nellore who treated PW.1, issued Ex.P.10-Wound certificate of PW.1, and after completion of entire investigation, LW.10 filed charge sheet against Accused No.1 to 3 by enclosing all the documents, and that PWs.1 and 3 stated before him as in Exs.P.2 and P.3 respectively, and LWs.2 and 4 stated

before him as in Exs.P.11 and P.12 respectively.

15.Now the point for consideration before the court is that, “Whether the evidence of P.W.4 can be based for convicting Accused

No.1 and 2 or not?”

16.Admittedly, as discussed supra, the evidence of PW.4 being the case investigating authority, quite naturally supports the case of prosecution. His evidence needs corroboration of other material prosecution witnesses and the same is lacking. Moreover, PW.1 being the injured, and PW.2 being one of the mediators for scene observation panchanama and PW.3 who rushed to the place of offence on hearing the cries of PW.1, turned hostile. The evidences of

LW. 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 10 who are cited as a witness in the charge sheet to speak about the commission of the alleged offence by the accused, are given up by the prosecution. As such, there is no any iota of evidence against the Accused No.1 and 3 to prove their guilt.

17.The evidence of PW.4 who investigated the case, cannot be based for convicting the accused. As such, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the Accused No.1 and 2 beyond all

APNE000018472024 11 reasonable doubt and the Accused No.1 and 2 are entitled for benefit of doubt.

Accordingly, this point is answered.

18.In the result, the Accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the charge

U/Secs.448, 352 and 307 r/w 34 of IPC and accordingly they are acquitted

U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused No.1 and 2 and from their sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months. (The case against Accused

No.3 is split up and numbered as PRC No.2/2023 on the file of V Addl. Judicial

First Class Magistrate, Nellore.)

MO.1-Casuarina Stick and the unmarked non-valuable property, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Forward MO.1 and the unmarked non-valuable property if any to the learned V Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore (Vide CPR

No.210/2019 i.e., committal Court and CPR No.56/2026 of Sessions Court) for carrying out the Order of disposal of the case property after expiry of appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court this the 28th day of April, 2026.

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

APNE000018472024 12

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

For Prosecution:

Prosecution Name of WitnessDescription Witness No. Injured-cum-defacto PW.1:Kunchala Rajesh complainant

Buddharaju Naga Venkata Anil Mediator for scene PW.2: Kumarobservation mahazar.

PW.3:Gunji Sarath BabuNeighbour of PW.1.

PW.4:Ch. Kondaiah, the then Sub-Investigating Officer. Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station.

For Defence:NONE

Exhibits marked for the prosecution

Proved/ Exhibit No.Description of the Exhibit Attested by Ex.P.1:Signature of PW.1 in the complaint given to Police.PW.1

Ex.P.2:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1.PW.4

Signature of PW.2 on the scene observation Ex.P.3:PW.2 panchanama.

Ex.P.4:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3.PW.4

Statement of PW.1 recorded by LW.8/Head Constable, Ex.P.5:PW.4 in-Charge of Outpost Police Station, GGH, Nellore.

Original FiR in Crime No.188/2018 of Vedayapalem Ex.P.6:PW.4 Police Station.

Ex.P.7:Scene observation-cum-seizure panchanama.PW.4

Ex.P.8:Rough sketch of the scene of offence.PW.4

Ex.P.9:Section adding memo.PW.4

Ex.P.10:Wound Certificate of PW.1.PW.4

APNE000018472024 13

Ex.P.11:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.2/K.Rekha Rani.PW.4

Ex.P.12:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.4/Johnson Kewin.PW.4

For Defence:NIL

Material Objects Marked

Material Proved/ Description of the Exhibit Object No.Attested by M.O.1:Casurina Stick.PW.4

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies submitted to:-

1. The Hon’ble Registrar (Judicial), High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi.

2. The Hon’ble Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies to: -

3. The learned V Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore.

4. The Addl. Public Prosecutor, VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

5. The Station House Officer, Vedayapalem Police Station, Nellore City.

// True Copy //

APNE000002782025 1

COURT OF SESSION :: NELLORE DIVISION :: NELLORE

In the Court of the Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore

Present: Sri M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore. *** Monday, this the 27th day of April, 2026

SESSIONS CASE No.15 of 2025

(P.R.C. No.53/2024 on the file of learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kovur, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District) (Crime No.202/2023 of Kovur Police Station, SPSR Nellore District) ***

1. Name of the Complainant:State – Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovur Police Station, SPSR Nellore District.

2. Description of the Accused:-

Naramala Mallikarjuna, S/o Yamaiah, aged 44 years, Mixed Colony, Leguntapadu Village, Kovur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

3. Offences: -

Charge under Section 307 IPC for attempting to commit murder of LW.1/Naramala Vijaya Lakshmamma; Charge under Section 376 r/w 511 IPC for attempting to commit rape on Naramala Vijaya Lakshmamma/LW.1.

4. Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

5. Finding of the Judge:Found not guilty

6. Sentence or Order: -

In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the charge U/Secs.307 and 376 r/w 511 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C. This Court obtained bonds from the accused and from his sureties as per Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months.

APNE000002782025 2

There is no property produced or marked before this Court. Hence, there is no order regarding disposal of the case property.

7. Prosecution conducted by:Sri Sk. Rafimalik

Additional Public Prosecutor,

VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

8. Accused defended by:Sri A. Subrahmanyam, Advocate for the accused.

This case coming on 27.04.2026 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Sk.Rafi Malik, Additional Public Prosecutor for the prosecution and Sri A. Subrahmanyam, Advocate for the Accused and upon perusing the records, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

Filing of charge sheet:-

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovuru Police Station, SPSR Nellore District filed charge sheet in Crime No.202/2023 of Kovur Police Station against the

Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 376 r/w 511 of

IPC.

JURISDICTION:

2.The offence took place situated at Mixed Colony, Leguntapadu Village,

Kovur Mandal, which comes under the limits of Kovuru Police Station, and within the territorial jurisdiction of learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I

Class, Kovur, SPSR Nellore District i.e. Committal Court.

3.The gist of the allegations made by the prosecution is that:-

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovuru Police Station filed charge sheet against the Accused alleging that, the marriage of the accused was performed with one Audi Lakshmi of Penuballi Village. He was residing with his wife and

APNE000002782025 3 daughter and his mother/Naramala Vijayalakshmamma/LW.1, who is the victim in this case. The accused addicted to alcohol and harassed his wife and daughter daily by quarreling with them and beating them. Due to the harassment, the wife and daughter of the accused went to Hyderabad to her elder daughter’s house. Then the accused thought that LW.1 told wrong words to his wife and sent his wife and daughter to Hyderabad. While so, on 04.08.2023 night at about 8.00 pm., while LW.1/Vijayalakshmamma was at her house, the accused who is her son, consumed alcohol and came to the house and when LW.1 asked the accused to have the meals, then A.1 asked her that why she told wrong words to his wife and sent her and his daughter to

Hyderabad and picked up quarrel with LW.1 and took one towel and tightened it around the neck of LW.1 and pulled it tightly and tried to kill her. Then LW.1 pushed the accused and while coming out, the accused caught hold her tuft, forcibly pulled her into the house and pushed her down pulled her saree and caught hold of her neck and pressed it tightly and went on LW.1 and tried to commit rape. Then LW.1/Vijayalakshmamma escaped from his hands and cried loudly. Due to that, the neighbours came there and when saw them, the accused fled away. Due to the acts of the accused, LW.1 sustained scratch and swelling and burking injuries at her throat. On the next day LW.2/Pandipati

Rama Subbamma called LW.3/Veneti Suresh and shifted the injured/LW.1 to

CHC, Kovur for treatment.

(i)The Head Constable of Kovur Police Station/LW.13 recorded the statement of LW.1/Vijayalakshmamma and handed over to LW.14/D.

Venkateswara Rao, Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovur Police Station, who in turn registered the same as a case in Crime No.202/2023 under Sections 307 and 376 r/w 511 IPC of Kovur Police Station on 06.08.2023 and submitted the original FIR to Court, and copies of the same to all concerned officials.

APNE000002782025 4

(ii)During the course of investigation, LW.14 visited the scene of offence, prepared observation report, drafted rough sketch of the scene in the presence of mediators LW.10/Modigala Ashok Kumar and LW.11/Mogalluru

Nageswara Rao, duly attested by them. He also examined LWs.1 to 9 namely,

Naramala Vijaya Lakshmamma, Pandipati Rama Subbamma, Veneti Suresh,

Nandala Rajeswaramma,Yenati Koteswaramma, Thana Subhashini, Sanapudi

Rajeswari, Moddu Subramanyam and Guduru Meera Saheb respectively, and recorded their Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statements.

(iii)During the course of further investigation LW.14 arrested the accused on 07.08.2023 at 15.00 hours at Leguntapadu Mixed Colony in the presence of the above said mediators LWs.10 and 11 under a cover of mediatornama, duly attested by the said mediators, and sent the accused for judicial remand.

(iv)LW.12/Dr. P. Malavika, Civil Asst. Surgeon, Govt. CHC Hospital,

Kovur Town, who rendered treatment to LW.1, issued wound certificate. Basing on the RFSL opinion, issued her opinion that the injuries of LW.1 are simple in nature and also issued her final opinion that there is no evidence to opine that recent sexual intercourse has occurred. After completion of entire investigation,

LW.14 filed charge sheet against the accused.

Taking of cognizance and committal proceedings:

4.The learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kovur taken the cognizance of the case, for the offence under Sections 307 and 376 r/w 511 of

IPC against the Accused and registered it as P.R.C. No.53/2023 and copies of documents were furnished to him, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. on his appearance. Since the offence under Sections 307 and 376 of IPC are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Nellore Division, Nellore, the

APNE000002782025 5 learned Magistrate had committed this case under Section 209 of Criminal

Procedure Code (in short Cr.P.C) to the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court,

Nellore. Later, the Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Nellore has numbered the same as Sessions Case No.15/2025 and made over the same to this Court for disposal according to law.

Appearance of the accused and opening the case:

5.After receipt of the summons, the Accused appeared before this Court and he was provided with Sri A. Subrahmanyam, to defend him. Thereafter, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as envisaged under Section 226 of Cr.P.C., opened the case, by describing the charge brought against him and also the evidence going to be adduced to prove his guilt.

Framing of charge:-

6.After hearing both sides and considering the entire material available on record, the Accused was examined under Section 228 (2) of Cr.P.C., charge for the offences under Sections 307 and 376 r/w 511 IPC against him were framed, read over and explained to him in his vernacular language for which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, this case stands posted for prosecution evidence, after fixing the schedule for trial.

Prosecution evidence:-

7.To prove their respective contentions, the prosecution has got examined

P.Ws.1 to 6, and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.19. Further, the evidences of LWs.4 and 7 to 13 and 15 namely, Nandala Rajeswaramma, Sanapudi Rajeswari,

Moddu Subramanyam, Guduru Meera Saheb, Modigala Ashok Kumar,

Mogalluru Nageswara Rao, Dr. P. Malavika, CAS, Govt. CHC Hospital, Kovur town, Shaik Abdul Rasheed, the then Head Constable of Kovur Police Station,

APNE000002782025 6 and Y. Ranganath Gowd, Sub-Inspector of Police respectively, were given up by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

8.The Accused had complied with section 437-A Cr.P.C for his appearance

before the Appellate Court, if any.

9.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused was examined under

Section 313 Cr.P.C for which, he denied the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and reported no defence evidence on his behalf. Hence defence evidence is recorded as NIL.

10.Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record.

11.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted arguments that on behalf of prosecution P.W.1 to P.W.6 are examined, and Ex.P.1 to P.19 are marked. Though, P.W.1 to PW.5 turned hostile, taking into consideration of the evidence of PW.6, and Ex.P.1 to P.19, prayed for convicting the Accused.

12.The learned counsel for the Accused argued that except the evidence of the Investigating Officer/PW.6, there is no any evidence on record against the accused. Moreover, PW.1 being the defacto complainant as well as the victim, and PWs.2 to 5 being the neighbours of PW.1, did not support the case of the prosecution. So, there is no any evidence on record that the accused committed the offence. Moreover, the evidences of LW. 4 and 7 to 13 and 15 who are cited in the charge sheet to prove the case of prosecution, are given up by learned

Addl. Public Prosecutor. Thereby the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused and prayed the Court to acquit the accused.

APNE000002782025 7

13.Now, the point for determination is:

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence charged against him under Sections 307 and 376 r/w 511 of IPC?

POINT:

14.Perused the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 6, and Ex.P1 to P.19.

i)P.W.1 – Naramala Vijaya Lakshmamma, who is the victim as well as the defacto complainant in this case deposed that, the accused is her son, he never committed any offence, much less attempt to commit rape and attempt to commit murder against her, she do not know anything about the case facts, and she never lodged any statement against the accused before LW.13/Head

Constable, and she admitted her LTI on the alleged complaint, as Ex.P.1. She further deposed that she does not know the contents of the alleged complaint, and that LW.14 who was the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovur Police Station never examined her in connection with this case. She completely turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination, PW.1 denied all the suggestions put to her by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as false, and that her 161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.2.

ii)P.W.2 – Pandipati Rama Subbamma, who is a neighbour of PW.1 deposed that the accused is the son of PW.1, she does not know anything about this case facts, and LW.14 who was the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovur

Police Station never examined her in connection with this case. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

APNE000002782025 8

During the cross-examination, PW.2 denied the all the suggestions put to her by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as false, and her Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.3.

iii)PW.3 – Veneti Suresh, who is also a neighbour of PW.1 deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PW.2. He also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor,

PW.3 denied all the suggestions put to him as false, and his Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.4.

iv)PW.4 – Yenati Koteswaramma, who is also a neighbour of PW.1 deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.2 and 3. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.4 denied all the suggestions put to her as false, and her Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.5.

v)PW.5 – Thana Subhashini, who is also a neighbour of PW.1 deposed in the same lines, as deposed by PWs.2 to 4. She also turned hostile without supporting the case of prosecution.

During the cross-examination by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor,

PW.5 denied all the suggestions put to her as false, and her Sec.161 Cr.P.C.

statement is marked as Ex.P.6.

vi)PW.6 – D. venkateswara Rao, the then Sub-Inspector of Police,

Kovur Police station that, on 06.08.2023 at about 12.00 noon, he received

Ex.P.7-Hospital intimation from Community Health Center, Kovur to record the

APNE000002782025 9 statement of PW.1 and accordingly, he deputed LW.13/Shaik Abdul Rasheed, who was the then Head Constable of Kovur Police Station for the said purpose and he accordingly rushed there and recorded Ex.P.8-Statement of PW.1 and returned back to Police Station and handed over the same to him along with hospital intimation, and then he registered the same as a case in Crime

No.202/2023 under Sections 307 and 376 r/w 511 of IPC and submitted Ex.P.9-

Original FIR to Court and copies of the same to all concerned officials. He further deposed that, then he rushed to Community Health Center, Kovur and secured the presence of PWs.1 to 3, examined and recorded their Sec.161

Cr.P.C. statements, he gave requisition to LW.12/Dr. P. Malavika, Civil Assistant

Surgeon, Government CHC Hospital, Kovur Town to seize the clothes of PW.1, who accordingly seized the same, then he rushed to scene of offence, which is the house of PW.1 at Mixed Colony, Leguntapadu along with mediators

LW.10/Modigala Ashok Kumar and LW.11/Mogalluru Nageswara Rao, who were secured with the help of his staff, observed the same and prepared Ex.P.10-

Scene observation report, duly attested by the said mediators, and he also prepared Ex.P.11-Rough sketch of the scene of offence, then he secured the presence of PWs.4 and 5, and LWs.4, 7 to 9 namely, Nandala Rajeswaramma,

Sanapudi Rajeswary, Moddu Subramanyam and Guduru Meera Saheb respectively, examined and recorded their Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statements. He further deposed that, on 07.08.2023 at 12.00 Noon, he received credible information about the accused and then he summoned the mediators LWs.10 and 11 to Police Station, and rushed to the house of the accused and found him, and seized towel/Kanduva from his possession by recording Ex.P.12-

Confessional, seizure-cum-arrest panchanama, duly attested by the said mediators, then the accused was brought to Police Station and sent him to remand after due formalities. He further deposed that, then on 08.08.2023 he

APNE000002782025 10 took opinion of LW.12/Dr. P. Malavika along with Ex.P.13-Preliminary wound certificate issued by her in respect of her examination of PW.1, and that the further investigation was taken up by LW.15/Y. Ranganath Gowd, who is his successor in office, LW.13/Shaik Abdul Rasheed, Head Constable forwarded material objects to RFSL, for chemical analysis, LW.15/Sub-Inspector of Police received Ex.P.14-RFSL report and Ex.P.15-Final opinion given by

LW.12/Doctor, which speaks that there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse, and after completion of entire investigation, LW.15/Sub-Inspector of

Police filed charge sheet against the accused by enclosing all the documents needed, and that PWs.1 to 5 stated before him as in Exs.P.2 to P.6 respectively,

LWs.4 and 7 to 9 stated before him as in Exs.P.16 to P.19 respectively.

15.Now the point for consideration before the court is that, “Whether the evidences of P.W.6 can be based for convicting Accused or not?”

16.Admittedly, as discussed supra, the evidence of PW.6 being case investigating authority, quite naturally supports the case of prosecution. His evidence needs corroboration of other material prosecution witnesses and the same is lacking. Moreover, PW.1 being the defacto complainant as well as the victim, and PWs.2 to 5 being the neighbours of PW.1, turned hostile. The evidences of LW. 4 and 7 to 13 and 15 who are cited in the charge sheet to prove the case of prosecution, are given up by the prosecution. As such, there is no any iota of evidence against the accused to prove his guilt.

17.The evidence of PW.6 who investigated the case cannot be based for convicting the accused. As such, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt

APNE000002782025 11 and the Accused is entitled for benefit of doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered.

18.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the charge U/Secs.307 and 376 r/w 511 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.235 (1) of Cr.P.C.

This Court obtained bonds from the accused and from his sureties as per

Provisions under Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. and they shall stand in force for a period of six months.

There is no property produced or marked before this Court. Hence, there is no order regarding disposal of the case property.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court this the 27th day of April, 2026.

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

For Prosecution:

Prosecution Name of WitnessDescription Witness No. Victim as well as defacto PW.1:Naramala Vijaya Lakshmamma complainant.

PW.2:Pandipati Rama SubbammaNeighbour of PW.1

PW.3:Veneti SureshNeighbour of PW.1

PW.4:Yenati KoteswarammaNeighbour of PW.1

PW.5:Thana SubhashiniNeighbour of PW.1

D. Venkateswara Rao, the then PW.6:Sub-Inspector of Police, Kovur Investigating Officer. Police Station.

APNE000002782025 12

For Defence:NONE

Exhibits marked for the prosecution

Proved/ Exhibit No.Description of the Exhibit Attested by Ex.P.1:LTI of PW.1 in the complaint given to Police.PW.1

Ex.P.2:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1 given before PW.6.PW.6

Ex.P.3:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.2 given before PW.6.PW.6

Ex.P.4:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3 given before PW.6.PW.6

Ex.P.5:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.4 given before PW.6.PW.6

Ex.P.6:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.5 given before PW.6.PW.6

Ex.P.7:Hospital intimationPW.6

Statement of PW.1 given before LW.10/Head Ex.P.8:PW.6 Constable of Kovur Police Station.

Ex.P.9:Original FIR in Cr. No.202/2023 of Kovur Police StationPW.6

Ex.P.10:Scene observation report.PW.6

Ex.P.11:Rough sketch of the scene of offence.PW.6

Ex.P.12:Confessional, Seizure-cum-arrest panchanama.PW.6

Ex.P.13:Preliminary wound certificate.PW.6

Ex.P.14:RFSL report.PW.6

Ex.P.15:Final opinionPW.6

Ex.P.16:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.4/N. Rajeswaramma.PW.6

Ex.P.17:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.7/S. Rajeswari.PW.6

Ex.P.18:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.8/M. Subramanyam.PW.6

Ex.P.19:Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of LW.9/G. Meera Saheb.PW.6

For Defence:NIL

APNE000002782025 13

Material Object Marked

Material Proved/ Description of the Exhibit Object No.Attested by

NIL

Sd/ M.A. Somasekhar,

Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-

VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies submitted to:-

1. The Hon’ble Registrar (Judicial), High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi.

2. The Hon’ble Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Copies to: -

3. The learned I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore.

4. The Addl. Public Prosecutor, VIII Addl. Sessions Court, Nellore.

5. The Station House Officer, Kovuru Police Station.

// True Copy //