Sri.M.Hari Narayana

VII Metropolitan Magistrate-cum- Excise VII Additional junior civil judge Cyberabad L.B .Nagar

Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex · Rangareddy · Telangana

Sri.M.Hari Narayana, VII Metropolitan Magistrate-cum- Excise VII Additional junior civil judge Cyberabad L.B .Nagar, is posted at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana, India. 788 court orders on record since 2010. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC cases.

788

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

CC/401013/2009 Acquitted

Excise Balanagar vs K.Sanjeeva Rao

24 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

PRESENT : SRI M. HARINARAYANA, B.Com., LLM.,

SPL. JFCM, EXCISE CUM XII MM

CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR.

Wednesday, this the 24th day of April, 2013.

CC.NO. 1013 OF 2009

Between:

The State of A.P., through Excise Station, Balanagar. Complainant AND

K. Sanjeeva Rao, S/o. Venkata Ramana, age: 24 yrs., R/o. H.No.117 FF, NTR Nagar, Yellamma Banda, Kukatpally.Accused

This case is coming before me on this day for final hearing in the presence of APP., for complainant and of Sri T. Pulla Reddy, counsel for the accused, upon perusal of the material available on record, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

1. The Prohibition and Excise SubInspector Balanagar filed charge sheet in COR

No.40/0910 for the offence under section 7A r/w 8(e) of APP Act against the accused alleging as follows.

2.On 8.5.2009, PW1 (Sri L. Srinivas Reddy, P&ESI) proceeded to the open place in front of H.No.117 FF, NTR Nagar, Yellamma Banda, Kukatpally, by securing the

LW1 (Sri E. Lingaiah) and LW2 (Sri D. Srinivas) as the panchas on receiving information that the accused indulged in selling of illicit liquor where they found the accused with one plastic bag. On verification of the same they noticed (316) sachets of ID liquor. Later PW1 seized the same under cover of panchanama (Ex.P1) in the presence of mediators (Lws 1&2) and drawn the samples. Basing on which, PW1 registered a case in COR No.40/0910 for the offence under section 7A r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act (for short “APP ACT”) against the accused and issued COR (Ex.P2). Later the accused was sent for judicial custody and sample was deposited with the Court, and remaining contraband was deposited with Deputy Commissioner of Excise for confiscation under acknowledgment (Ex.P3). On receipt of analyst report (Ex.P4) charge sheet was filed.

3. This case was taken on file for the offence under section 7A r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act against the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused copies of the documents were furnished to the accused under section 207 Cr.P.C and examined under section 239 Cr.P.C. in which the accused denied guilty and pleaded for trial and a charge under section 8(b) of AP

Prohibition Act was framed.

5.The prosecution examined PW1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P4 and MO1 sample. None were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the accused.

6.After closing the prosecution side evidence the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C for which the accused denied the incriminating material against accused and defence evidence was closed on report.

7.Heard both sides.

8.Now the point for consideration is

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act.

9.The allegations made against the accused is that the accused was found in possession of ID liquor (For Short “contraband”) deposed and as such the accused is liable to be punishable under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act. To prove the same the prosecution examined PW1 who apprehended and filed charge sheet after receipt of analyst report as PW1.

10.The evidence of prosecution witnesses would go to show that they apprehended the accused while the accused was in possession of the contraband. The analyst report which was marked as Ex.P4 would disclose that the seized contraband from the alleged possession of the accused is of ID liquor. The other documents which were marked as Ex.P1 Panchanama, Ex.P2 COR, Ex.P3 DC Ack., Ex.P4 CE Report and MO1 sample.

11.Now this court wants to analyze the evidence of the prosecution witness with reference to the provisions of section 17 & 18 of APP Act. Let us proceed with an assumption and presumption that the evidence of excise officials true and correct. Even if we proceeded with such assumption, whether the accused would be held to be found guilty even if the prosecution agency failed to follow the sections 17 & 18 of APP Act. Section 17 of AP Act mandates that before effecting search a search warrant has to be obtained from

Collector or Magistrate. Section 18 of APP Act as an exception to section 17 of the Act. The

Section 18 empowers the Excise/Police officials not below the rank of subinspector to make search without warrant but before effecting such search they have to record the reasons for such, thus the mandates the excise officials either to obtain search warrant as required under section 17 & 18 of APP Act or to record reasons for not obtaining search warrant and also the ground of their belief as required under section 18 of APP Act.

12.Now, it has to be seen, whether failure to follow the procedure as laid down under section 17 & 18 of APP Act would have any affect on the case of the prosecution or not has to be seen with reference to the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh as report in 2002 (1) ALD (Crl ) 347 (AP). The Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the above said judgment by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1979 Supreme Court 711 has categorically held that if the excise / Police officials failed to follow the procedure as laid down under section 55 of APE Act (Corresponding section is section 18 of the APP Act) would entail the accused to have the benefit of doubt.

The observation of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Para No. 14 in the

Judgment reported in 2002 (1) ALD Crl. 347 AP are extracted below under ready reference.

“Section 55 of the Act contains Valuable safeguard for the liberty of citizen in order to protect them from ill – founded or frivolous prosecution or harassment Of course, the petitioner did not raise such pleas before the court below, but it is for the prosecution to bring on record while charging the accused, that they have followed the procedure contemplated under section 55 of the Act and 100 (4) of the code. For these reasons, I am satisfied that prosecution has failed to prove that Pws1 to 3 have followed such a procedure. Consequently, for these lacunae, the search and seizure is vitiated and the conviction is wholly unsustainable. Accordingly the criminal revision petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence are set aside.”

13.In view of the above ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra

Pradesh and as the excise officials who participated in the raid to testify and produce any document before the court to show that they followed the procedure as required under section 17 & 18 of APP Act, this court has no other opinion except to hold that the accused is entitled to have benefit of doubt as the procedure as laid down under section 17 & 18 of

APP Act had not been followed by the investigating agency and accordingly accused is entitled to be acquittal.

14. For the foregoing discussion it is held that the, prosecution failed to prove the offence under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act and accordingly the accused is acquitted under section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day of 24th April, 2013.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

PW1: Sri L. Srinivas Reddy, Excise Officer.None

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P1 COR., NIL Ex.P2 DC ACK., Ex.P3 CE Report, Ex.P4 Panchanama.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

MO.1 Sample.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District..

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

Calender Case No.1013/2009

COR No.40/0910

Excise Balanagar

1. Offence: 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act

2. Date of offence: 8.5.2009

3. Date of Complaint: 8.5.2009

4. Date of apprehension: 8.5.2009

5. Date of commencement of trial: 31.1.2013

6. Date of Closure of trial: 17.4.2013

7. Date of Judgment: 24.4.2013

8. Name of the complainant: Excise Balanagar

9. Name of the accused:

K. Sanjeeva Rao, S/o. Venkata Ramana, age: 24 yrs., R/o. H.No.117 FF, NTR Nagar, Yellamma Banda, Kukatpally.

10.Finding of sentence if any: Acquittal

The accused is found not guilty for the offence under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act and accused is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. and bail bonds shall stand cancelled.

MO1 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

The Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad At LB Nagar.

CC/400774/2011 Acquitted

Shivarampally vs K Sridhar Reddy

25 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

PRESENT : SRI M. HARINARAYANA, B.Com., LLM.,

SPL. JFCM, EXCISE CUM XII MM

CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR.

Thursday, this the 25th day of April, 2013.

CC.NO. 774 OF 2011

Between:

The State of A.P., through Police Station, Shivrampally. Complainant AND

Kotra Sridhar Reddy, S/o Venkat Reddy, age: 36 yrs., R/o. APCO Colony, Katedan, Rajendranagar (M).Accused

This case is coming before me on this day for final hearing in the presence of A.P.P., for complainant and of Sri B. Narender Goud, counsel for the accused, upon perusal of the material available on record, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S., Shivrampally filed charge sheet in FIR

No.297/2011 for the offence under section 34(a) of AP Excise Act against the accused alleging as follows:

2.On 19.5.2011, LW7 (Sri K. Chandrasekhar Reddy, SubInspector of Police) conducted raid at the shop of the accused at APCO Colony, Katedan, Rajendranagar (M) along with LW1 (Sri Syed Gayas, ASI) and PW1 (Sri A. Venkatesh, Police Constable) by securing PW2 (Sri P. Veeraiah) and PW3 (Sri V. Rajasekhar Reddy) as panchas, on receipt of information that the accused indulged in illegal sales of wine bottles, where they found (12) DSP Quarter bottles, (4) Officers Choice bottles and (10) Bag Piper quarter bottles.

On seeing them the accused fled away. On local enquiry LW7 came to know the name of the accused was selling the liquor illegally without licence or permit. Basing on that LW6 seized the contraband under a cover of panchanama in the presence of PWs 2 and 3 (mediators) after drawing samples. Later LW7 brought the contraband and case papers to the Station and handed over the same to LW6 who registered a case in Cr.

No.297/2011 under Sec.34(a) of AP Excise Act, sent the sample to FSL for analysis and entrusted the investigation to PW4 (Sri N. Ranjit Kumar, SI of Police). During the course of investigation PW4 examined and recorded the statements of LW1 and PW1, Later

PW4 arrested the accused and produced him before the Court seeking judicial custody and on receipt of FSL report filed charge sheet.

3)The case was taken on file for the offense under 34(a) of AP Excise Act.

4)On appearance of the accused copies of the documents were furnished to the accused under section 207 Cr.P.C., and examined under section 239 Cr.P.C., in which the accused denied guilty and pleaded for trial and a charge under section 34(a) of AP

Excise Act was framed.

5)The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 5 and Exs.P1 to P5 and MO1 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. None were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the accused.

6)After closing the prosecution side evidence the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C., for which the accused denied the incriminating material against accused and defence evidence was closed on report.

7)Heard both sides.

8)Now the point for consideration is ..

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence 34(a) of AP Excise Act beyond all reasonable doubt and in accordance with law?

9)The allegations made against the accused is that upon receiving the information by Shivrampally PS., they went to the shop of the accused at APCO Colony

Katedn and on seeing them the accused fled away and upon search of the shop they found about (12) DSP Quarter bottles, (4) Officers Choice bottles and (10) Bag Piper quarter bottles and thereafter they seized the same under cover of panchanama and as the accused was selling the contraband without any licence or permit, the accused is liable to be punished under Sec.34(a) of A.P. Excise Act.

10)To prove the same the prosecution examined the panch witnesses in whose presence the contraband was seized as PWs 2 and 3. PWs 2 and 3 dis not support the case of the prosecution though they admitted their signatures on the panchanama as that of them. The signatures are marked as Exs.P1 and P2. Thus the evidence of PWs 2 and 3 is not helpful to the case of the prosecution.

11)The prosecution also examined PWs 1 and 5 who are the Police officials who raided the shop of the accused. PWs 1 and 5 in their evidence deposed that on 19.5.2011 at about 6 PM., they went to the shop of the accused at APCO Colony, Katedan and upon seeing them the accused fled away and on search of the shop they found (12) DSP

Quarter bottles, (4) Officers Choice bottles and (10) Bag Piper quarter bottles. PW1 further deposed in his chief evidence that on enquiry with the neighbours, the neighbours informed about the identity of the person who fled away as that of the accused. PW5 in his cross examination stated that no neighbours and no persons were examined at the the scene of offence. However, PW5 in his chief evidence stated that on enquiry with the neighbours they came to know about the name of the person as that of the accused. It is to be noticed that the statements of the persons who disclosed the identity of the accused were not recorded. As the statements of the persons were not recorded who disclosed the identity of the accused, this Court is of the opinion that there is no positive evidence available on record to show that the accused was running the shop where the contraband was seized. It is also to be noticed that no document from the shop was seized to show that the accused is concerned with the said scene of offence shop. Therefore, it is held that no positive evidence is produced by the prosecution to show that it is the accused who fled away on seeing PWs 1 and 5 and other Police officials.

12)The prosecution also examined PW4 who filed charge sheet against the accused. PW4 in his evidence deposed that he received case papers from LW6 who handed over the case papers to him after registering the case in Cr.No.297/11 and thereafter he effected the arrest of the accused and sent sample for analysis. In the cross examination PW stated that he did not visit the scene of offence during the course of investigation. Thus, it shows that the evidence of PW4 is formal in nature as he did not visit the scene of offence and did not examine the neighbours at the scene of offence and merely registering the case and filed charge sheet basing on the material available on record. Therefore, the evidence of PW4 is also not helpful to connect the seized contraband belongs to the accused.

13)In the result it is held that the prosecution failed to prove the offence under section 34(a) of AP Excise Act and accordingly the accused is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day of 25th April, 2013.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

PW1: Sri A. Venkatesh, Police Constable, None PW2: Sri P. Veeraiah, Panch witness, PW3: Sri V. Rajasekhar Reddy, Panch witness, PW4: Sri N. Ranjit Kumar, SI of Police, PW5: Sri K. Chandrasekhar Reddy, SI of Police.

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P1: Signature of PW1 on Panchanama, Ex.P2: Signature of PW1 on Panchanama, NIL Ex.P3: FIR., Ex.P4: FSL report, Ex.P5: Panchanama.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

MO.1 Sample.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

Calender Case No.774/2011

Cr. No.297/2011

Shivrampally Police Station

1. Offence: 34(a) of AP Excise Act

2. Date of offence: 19.5.2011

3. Date of Complaint : 19.5.2011

4. Date of apprehension: 19.5.2011

5. Date of commencement of trial: 18.7.2012

6. Date of Closure of trial: 28.2.2013

7. Date of Judgment: 25.3.2013

8. Name of the complainant: Shivrampally Police Station

9. Name of the accused:

Kotra Sridhar Reddy, S/o Venkat Reddy, age: 36 yrs., R/o. APCO Colony, Katedan, Rajendranagar (M).

10.Finding of sentence if any: Acquittal

The accused is found not guilty for the offence under section 34(a) of AP Excise Act and the accused is acquitted under section 248(1) Cr.P.C., and accused bail bonds shall stand cancelled.

Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

The Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at LB Nagar.

CC/400926/2012 Acquitted

Excise Balanagar vs Manju

24 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

PRESENT : SRI M. HARINARAYANA, B.Com., LLM.,

SPL. JFCM, EXCISE CUM XII MM

CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR.

Wednesday, this the 24th day of April, 2013.

CC.NO. 926 OF 2012

Between:

The State of A.P., through Excise Station, Balanagar. Complainant AND

Manju, W/o. Jithender, age: 26 yrs., R/o. Parthiwada, Near Railway Station, Fathenagar, Balanagar.Accused

JUDGMENT

1. The Prohibition and Excise SubInspector Balanagar filed charge sheet in COR

No.296/1011 for the offence under section 7A r/w 8(e) of APP Act against the accused alleging as follows.

2.On 6.11.2010, PW2 (Sri E. Kistaiah, P&ESI) conducted raid at open place at

Parthiwada, Near Railway Station, Fathenagar, Balanagar, by securing the LW1 (Sri R.

Raju) and LW2 (Sri V. Karunakar) as the panchas on receiving information that the accused indulged in selling of illicit liquor where they found the accused with one bag. On verification of the same they found (56) sachets of ID liquor. Later PW2 seized the same under cover of panchanama (Ex.P4) in the presence of mediators (Lws1&2) and drawn the samples. Thereafter PW2 handed over the accused, samples, panchanama and contraband to PW1. Basing on which, PW1 registered a case in COR No.296/1011 for the offence under section 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act (for short “APP ACT”) against the accused and issued COR (Ex.P1). Later the accused was sent for judicial custody and sample was deposited with the court, and remaining contraband was deposited with

Deputy Commissioner of Excise for confiscation under (Ex.P2) acknowledgment. On receipt of analyst report (Ex.P3) charge sheet was filed by LW5 (Sri G. Venkatesham,

P&ESI).

3. This case was taken on file for the offence under section 7A r/w 8(e) of AP

Prohibition Act against the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused copies of the documents were furnished to the accused under section 207 Cr.P.C and examined under section 239 Cr.P.C in which the accused denied guilty and pleaded for trial and a charge under section 8(b) of AP

Prohibition Act was framed.

5.The prosecution examined PWs 1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P4 and

MO1 sample. None were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the accused.

6. After closing the prosecution side evidence the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.PC for which the accused denied the incriminating material against accused and defence evidence was closed on report.

7.Heard both sides.

8.Now the point for consideration is

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act?

9.The prosecution examined PWs 1 and 2. PW2 is Excise officer who apprehended the accused while the accused was in possession of the contraband, upon receiving reliable information by the excise officer. The evidence of PW1 also to the effect of registering the COR and arresting the accused, sending the sample for analysis and on receipt of the analyst report filing of charge sheet. Thus, the evidence of excise officer who apprehended the accused is crucial to decide whether the guilt of the accused was proved against the accused in accordance with law or not particularly with reference to sections 17 & 18 of AP Prohibition Act. Further in his evidence did not depose that he followed the procedure as laid down under section 17 & 18 of AP Prohibition Act. Apart from that no document is filed before the court to show that the said excise officer complied the mandatory provisions under sections 17 & 18 of AP Prohibition Act. Thus even if it is proved the recovery of the contraband from the possession of the accused, does it amount to proving the offence against the accused if the procedure as laid down under Sections 17 & 18 of AP Prohibition Act, are not followed. In this regard the observations of the Hon'ble

High Court of AP reported in 2002(1) ALD (Crl.) 347 A.P and 2003 (2) ALT (Crl.) 190

A.P are necessarily to be taken in to consideration. The Hon'ble High Court of AP in the above referred Judgments observed that if any seizure is made in violation of the procedure as laid down under sections 17 & 18 of AP Prohibition Act would make entire seizure is illegal and holding so, the accused in those cases were acquitted. As observed above, the excise officer failed to follow the procedure as laid down under sections 17 & 18 of AP Prohibition Act. As the seizure has become illegal, this court is of the opinion that consequently the accused is liable to be acquitted, even though it proved seizure of contraband from the possession of the accused.

10.For the foregoing discussion it is held that the, prosecution failed to prove the offence under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act and accordingly the accused is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day of 24th April, 2013.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

PW1: Sri L. Srinivas Reddy, Excise Officer, PW2: Sri E. Kistaiah, Excise Officer.None

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P1 COR., NIL Ex.P2 DC ACK., Ex.P3 CE Report, Ex.P4 Panchanama.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

MO.1 Sample.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District..

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

Calender Case No.926/2012

COR No.296/1011

Excise Balanagar

1. Offence: 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act

2. Date of offence: 6.11.2010

3. Date of Complaint: 6.11 2010

4. Date of apprehension: 6.11.2010

5. Date of commencement of trial: 5.12.2012

6. Date of Closure of trial: 17.4.2013

7. Date of Judgment: 24.4.2013

8. Name of the complainant: Excise Balanagar

9. Name of the accused:

Manju, W/o. Jithender, age: 26 yrs., R/o. Parthiwada, Near Railway Station, Fathenagar, Balanagar.

10.Finding of sentence if any: Acquittal

The accused is found not guilty for the offence under section 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act and accused is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. and bail bonds shall stand cancelled.

MO1 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

The Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad At LB Nagar.

CC/400244/2007 Acquitted

Excise Serilingampally vs M.Bhooma Goud

24 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

PRESENT : SRI M. HARINARAYANA, B.Com., LLM.,

SPL. JFCM, EXCISE CUM XII MM,

CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR.

Wednesday, this the 24th day of April, 2013.

CC.NO. 244 OF 2007

Between:

The State of A.P., through Excise Station, Serilingampally. Complainant

AND

1)M. Bhooma Goud, S/o. Narsa Goud, age: 32 yrs., R/o. Islampur (v), Toopran (M), Medak District,

2)Md. Faheem Pasha, S/o.Ghouse Pasha,, age: 20 yrs., R/o Chandampet (v), Chinna Shankarampet, Adl., Medak District,

3)Razzaq, R/o Mumbai,

4)Qudeer, R/o. Mumbai.Accused

This case is coming before me on this day for final hearing in the presence of APP., for complainant and and of Sri J.V. Ramana Murthy, counsel for the accused, upon perusal of the material available on record, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

1. The Prohibition and Excise Officials of Serilingampally SHO filed charge sheet in COR No.1184/200102 for the offence U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act against the accused alleging that on 9.2.2001 on receipt of information about illegal transportation of

Chloral Hydrate through a car from Nanded to Toopran (v) of Medak Dist., via Darga the proceeded to the road leading from Tolichowki to BHEL., in front of Venkateshwara Temple

Gate where they found a white Ambassador car bearing No.AP 10A4610 was coming. On search of the car A1 and A2 were found in possession of 450 kgs. Chloral Hydrate. On enquiry A2 was the Driver and A1 confessed that he purchased the same from A3 and A4 and selling the same to various villagers without licence or permit. On that they arrested the accused, seized the contraband in the presence of mediators after drawing samples and deposited the remaining contraband to DC., Excise. Basing on which a case in Cr.

No.1184/200102 was registered for the offence punishable U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act and sent samples for analysis and after receipt of analyst report, filed charge sheet.

2.This case was taken on file for the offences U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act against the accused.

3.On appearance of the accused copies of the documents were furnished to the accused under section 207 Cr.PC and examined under section 239 Cr.P.C. in which the accused denied guilty and pleaded for trial and a charge U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act was framed.

5.The prosecution did not examine any witnesses and no documents were marked. None were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the accused.

6)Since none were examined and as there is no incriminating material against the accused, the examination under section 313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with.

7.Heard both sides.

8.Now the point for consideration is ..

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under section U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act .

9.This Court framed the charge U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act. Thereafter the matter was undergone for more than 10 adjournments for service of summons on the prosecution witnesses. In spite of granting several opportunities, the summons were not served on the list of witnesses. Since the matter is of the year 2007 and as the accused are attending the Court regularly, this Court having no option except to close the evidence of prosecution and accordingly closed the evidence of prosecution. Thus no evidence is available on record to bring home the guilt of the accused to which the accused are charged.

10.In the result it is held that the prosecution failed to prove the offence

U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act and accordingly the accused are acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day of 24th April, 2013.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED

NIL

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

Calender Case No.244/2007

COR No.1184/200102

Excise Serilingampally

1. Offence: U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act

2. Date of offence: 20.2.2002

3. Date of Complaint: 20.2.2002

4. Date of apprehension: 20.2.2002

5. Date of commencement of trial: NIL

6. Date of Closure of trial: NIL

7. Date of Judgment: 24.4.2013

8. Name of the complainant: Excise Serilingampally

9. Name of the accused:

1)M. Bhooma Goud, S/o. Narsa Goud, age: 32 yrs., R/o. Islampur (v), Toopran (M), Medak District,

2)Md. Faheem Pasha, S/o.Ghouse Pasha,, age: 20 yrs., R/o Chandampet (v), Chinna Shankarampet, Adl., Medak District,

3)Razzaq, R/o Mumbai,

4)Qudeer, R/o. Mumbai.

10.Finding of sentence if any: Acquittal

The accused are found not guilty for the offence U/s.34(a) of AP Excise Act and accused are acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C and accused bail bonds shall stand cancelled.

Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

The Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at LB Nagar.

CC/400431/2010 Acquitted

Excise Malkajgiri vs Akbar

24 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

PRESENT : SRI M. HARINARAYANA, B.Com., LLM.,

SPL. JFCM, EXCISE CUM XII MM

CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR.

Wednesday, this the 24th day of April, 2013.

CC.NO. 431 OF 2010

Split up from the main

CC No.73 of 2007

Between:

The State of A.P., through Excise Station, Malakajgiri.Complainant

AND

A5)Akbar, Tata Sumo Taxi Stand, Santhosh Nagar Traffic Signals, Hyderabad.Accused

This case is coming before me on this day for final hearing in the presence of APP., for complainant and of Sri K. Vijaya Bhaskar, counsel for the accused, upon perusal of the material available on record, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

1. The Prohibition and Excise Officials of Malakajgiri SHO filed charge sheet in

COR No.208/200506 for the offence U/s. 7(a) r/w.8(e)AP Prohibition Act against A5 along with A1 to A4 in the main case in CC No. 73/07 alleging that on 31.10.2005 on receipt of illegal sales of ID liquor bottles in the house of A1 to A4 at H.No.7125, S.P.Nagar,

Moulali, they proceeded and entered into the house after serving search memo on A1 and on search of the house they found seven gunny bags, each bag containing one rubber tube, each tube filled with (80) liters total (560) liters of ID liquor. On enquiry they confessed that A5 supplied (9) rubber tubes of ID liquor to A1 to A4 for sale purpose. Basing on that a case in Cr.No.208/200506 was registered for the offence punishable U/s. 7(a) r/w. 8(e)

AP Prohibition Act against A5 along with A1 to A4 in the main case CC No.73/07 and sent samples for analysis and after receipt of analyst report, filed charge sheet.

2.This case was taken on file for the offence punishable U/s. 7(a) r/w.8(e)AP

Prohibition Act against the accused.

3.This case is split up from CC No. 73/07 against A5 only. On appearance of the A5 copies of the documents were furnished to him under section 207 Cr.PC and examined under section 239 Cr.P.C. in which the accused denied guilty and pleaded for trial and a charge U/s. 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act was framed.

5.The prosecution did not examine any witnesses and no documents were marked. None were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the accused.

6.Since none were examined and as there is no incriminating material against the accused, the examination under section 313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with.

7.Heard both sides.

8.Now the point for consideration is

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under section U/s.8(b) of AP Prohibition Act .

9.This Court framed the charge U/s. 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act. Thereafter the matter was undergone for more than 10 adjournments for service of summons on the prosecution witnesses. In spite of granting several opportunities, the summons were not served on the list of witnesses. Since the matter is of the year 2007 and as the accused is attending the Court regularly, this Court having no option except to close the evidence of prosecution and accordingly closed the evidence of prosecution. Thus no evidence is available on record to bring home the guilt of the accused to which the accused is charged.

10.In the result it is held that the prosecution failed to prove the offence U/s.

8(b) of AP Prohibition Act and accordingly the accused is acquitted under section 248 (1)

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled. Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day of 24th April, 2013.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED

NIL

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

IN THE COURT OF THE SPL JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR EXCISE CASES

CUM XII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD AT LB NAGAR

Calender Case No. 431 OF 2010 Split up from the main

CC No.73 of 2007

COR No.129/98

Excise Malakajgiri

1. Offence: U/s. 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act

2. Date of offence: 31.10.2005

3. Date of Complaint: 31.10.2005

4. Date of apprehension: 31.10.2005

5. Date of commencement of trial: NIL

6. Date of Closure of trial: NIL

7. Date of Judgment: 24.4.2013

8. Name of the complainant: Excise Malakajgiri

9. Name of the accused:

A5)Akbar, Tata Sumo Taxi Stand, Santhosh Nagar Traffic Signals, Hyderabad.

10.Finding of sentence if any: Acquittal

The accused is found not guilty for the offence U/s. 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act and accused is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C and accused bail bonds shall stand cancelled.

Case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Spl. JFCM Excise Court cum XII MM., Cyberabad, LB Nagar, R.R.District.

The Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at LB Nagar.

Order Record 724 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/400774/2011	Shivarampally vs K Sridhar Reddy	25 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	Acquitted
CC/400244/2007	Excise Serilingampally vs M.Bhooma Goud	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	Acquitted
CC/400431/2010	Excise Malkajgiri vs Akbar	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	Acquitted
CC/400926/2012	Excise Balanagar vs Manju	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	Acquitted
CC/401013/2009	Excise Balanagar vs K.Sanjeeva Rao	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	Acquitted
CC/401019/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Raju	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400048/2002	Excise Malkajgiri vs R. Rakesh	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400081/2013	Excise Serilingampally vs P.Padma	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400107/2007	Excise Uppal vs S.NARSIMHA	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400112/2006	Excise Malkajgiri vs B Bikshapathi	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400242/2007	Excise Serilingampally vs Sudahakar Gatuday	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400286/2007	Balanagar P.S. vs Pushparaj Srinivas	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400357/2010	Excise Malkajgiri vs Omvathi	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400566/2008	Excise Saroornagar vs Mohd.Qasim Ali	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401016/2006	Excise Balanagar vs Surender	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401245/2005	Excise Balanagar vs Sreemanth	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401444/1999	Balanagar P.S. vs Sanjay alias Sanjay singh	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401567/2003	Excise Ghatkesar vs A.Venkatesh	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401758/2002	Excise Malkajgiri vs K.Sanjeev Reddy	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400651/2010	L.B.Nagar P.S. vs Narayana Reddy	18 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400072/2008	Excise Balanagar vs Rama Rao	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400342/2011	Excise Balanagar vs R.Rama Rao	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400350/2011	Excise Balanagar vs R.Saroja	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400370/2011	Excise Balanagar vs S.Bondu	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400552/2012	Excise Balanagar vs S.Bondu	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400553/2012	Excise Balanagar vs A.Srinu	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400702/2010	Excise Balanagar vs S.Bondu	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400707/2010	Excise Balanagar vs Bondu	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400730/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Laxmi	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400748/2011	Excise Balanagar vs K.Nirmal Kumar	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400754/2011	Excise Balanagar vs K.Nirmal	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400919/2012	Excise Balanagar vs D.Balu	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400925/2012	Excise Balanagar vs V.Kamalamma	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401007/2012	Excise Balanagar vs S.Chilakamma	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401011/2009	Excise Balanagar vs N.Ansari	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401016/2012	Excise Balanagar vs Chilakamma	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401025/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Sunil	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401028/2012	Excise Balanagar vs E.Ravi	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401031/2012	Excise Balanagar vs Chilakamma	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401043/2012	Excise Balanagar vs Chilakamma	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401044/2012	Excise Balanagar vs E.Ravi	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400088/2013	Excise Serilingampally vs P.Santhamma	16 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400884/2012	Excise Serilingampally vs S.Akash	16 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400117/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs Syed Saidulu	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400154/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs G.Satyam	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400156/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs A.Shanker Naik	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400262/2011	Excise Rajendra Nagar vs M.Parvathi Bhai	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400482/2012	Excise Rajendra Nagar vs M.Raju	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400892/2012	Excise Rajendranagar vs V.Ramulu Naik	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401048/2012	Excise Rajendranagar vs N.Anil Singh	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401076/2012	Excise Rajendranagar vs Syed Saiddu	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400008/2013	Excise Hayath Nagar vs M.Raji	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400178/2012	Ex Saroornagar vs Varthiya Badhiya	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400193/2012	Ex Saroornagar vs L. Dhana laxmi	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400229/2012	Excise Saroornagar vs M.Naresh	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400232/2012	EX Saroornagar vs Rathavath Shiva	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400407/2011	Excise Saroonagar vs N.Achi@Bharathi	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400408/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs Nenavath Shanthi	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400437/2012	Excise Saroornagar vs J.Kalpana	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400496/2012	Excise Hayath Nagar vs S.Kamili	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400530/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs N. Gouri	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400590/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs Mora Venkaiah	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400591/2009	Excise Saroornagar vs Vsmudavath Laxmi	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400691/2012	Excise Saroor Nagar vs A.Ramdas	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400876/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs N.Lachman	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400896/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs V.Mohan	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400958/2012	Excise Hayath Nagar vs K.Suraj	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400960/2012	Excise Hayath Nagar vs P.Mallesh	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400970/2012	Excise Hayath Nagar vs K.Babu	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400971/2012	Excise Hayath Nagar vs M.Srinivas Rao	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401038/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs I.Mohan	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401128/2011	Excise Saroornagar vs M.Chandu	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401496/2009	Excise Saroornagar vs Nanavath Bichi	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400068/2013	Excise Balanagar vs K.Narsamma	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400352/2011	Excise Balanagar vs R.Raju	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400557/2011	Excise Balanagar vs V.Suder	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400606/2012	Excise Balanagar vs P.Yadamma	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400745/2012	Excise Balanagar vs G.Malleshwari	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400793/2012	Excise Balanagar vs V.Anjaiah	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400914/2012	Excise Balanagar vs S.Suresh	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400929/2012	Excise Balanagar vs Raj Kumar @ Pappu	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400930/2012	Excise Balanagar vs Sujatha	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401013/2009	Excise Balanagar vs K.Sanjeeva Rao	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401024/2012	Excise Balanagar vs S.Anil	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401045/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Sunil	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401086/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Raja	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401091/2007	Excise Balanagar vs Md Shafayath	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401111/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Narsamma	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/401119/2012	Excise Balanagar vs K.Bakkaiah	10 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400083/2013	Excise Serilingampally vs K.Padma	09 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400085/2013	Excise Serilingampally vs K.Padma	09 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400164/2013	Excise Serilingampally vs T.Ravi Singh	09 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400005/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs N.Shiva	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400054/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs G.Srisailam	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400104/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs K.Durgesh	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400106/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs C.Narsamma	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400108/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs Balamani	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400110/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs Ch.Narsamma	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400111/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs Ch.Narsamma @ Ch.Narsamma	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/400116/2013	Excise Rajendranagar vs G.Raju	08 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—

Showing 100 of 724 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2013		148
Feb 2013		17
Jan 2013		103
Apr 2012		55
Mar 2012		137
Feb 2012		133
Jan 2012		195

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri.M.Hari Narayana handled?

Sri.M.Hari Narayana has handled 788 court orders since 2010 at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 21 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri.M.Hari Narayana hear?

Based on available records, Sri.M.Hari Narayana primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Sri.M.Hari Narayana currently posted?

Sri.M.Hari Narayana is posted as VII Metropolitan Magistrate-cum- Excise VII Additional junior civil judge Cyberabad L.B .Nagar at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Sri.M.Hari Narayana available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri.M.Hari Narayana are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri.M.Hari Narayana dispose cases?

Sri.M.Hari Narayana disposes approximately 21 cases per month, based on 788 orders handled over their tenure at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Sri.M.Hari Narayana serving?

Sri.M.Hari Narayana has been serving at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex since 2010.

Case Types

CC 100%

Posting History

Feb 2010 — May 2013

VII Metropolitan Magistrate-cum- Excise VII Additional junior civil judge Cyberabad L.B .Nagar · 788 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 5

Other Judges at this Court

Sri A.karna Kumar

Principal District and Sessions Judge

264 orders

Sri. Vinod Kumar

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, RangaRed...

1 orders

Smt. Ch.ashalatha

Chairman, Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal for Rang...

143 orders

Sri.Y.Sathyendra

III Additional District and Sessions Judge, RangaR...

173 orders

Sri. K. Jayaram Reddy

IV ADJ-IV Addl.MSJ-cum-I Addl.Family Court

3 orders

Smt.M.Bhavani

V Additional District and Sessions Judge, RangaRed...

0 orders

Dundhigalla Sadhana

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga...

19 orders

Smt.T.JayaLakshmi

X Additional District and Sessions Judge, RangaRed...

891 orders

Smt.M.K.Padmavathi

XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, RangaRe...

0 orders

Smt T Anitha

XII Additional District and Sessions Judge, RangaR...

0 orders

Smt.M.Vani

Special Sessions Judge for Fast tracking the Cases...

1,621 orders

Ms. K. C. Reddy Devarapalli

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl.Judic...

0 orders

Smt.Shraddha Sehgal

Judicial Magistrate of First Class-Special(Mobile)...

87 orders

Ms.Penumala Gopika Naga Sravya

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise...

69 orders

Ms. S.Swarna Mallika

III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-III Addl.Jud...

21 orders

Sri B.Kiran Teja

VI Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-VI Addl.Judic...

45 orders

Ms. Shereena Mohd

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistra...

0 orders

Mrs. Sravana Swathi Chintada

I Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Metropolitan Magi...

2 orders

Sri J.Hanumantha Rao

Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Ma...

12 orders

Arpitha Maram Reddy

II Addl. Senior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl.Chief Judi...

24 orders

Sri. Gannarapu Sudarshan

Family Court Judge

0 orders

Smt. P. Srivani

Additional Family Court, L.B.Nagar

0 orders

G. Srinivas

Special Sessions Judge for trial and Disposal of P...

55 orders

Sri G.Sampurna Anand

Commercial Disputes Courts RangaReddy

0 orders

← View all judges at Rangareddy, PDJ Court Complex