Kum. M. Prameela Rani

II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XVI ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS BHEEMUNIPATNAM

JCJ Bheemunipatnam · Visakapatnam · Andhra Pradesh

Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI, II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XVI ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS BHEEMUNIPATNAM, is posted at JCJ Bheemunipatnam, Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. 484 court orders on record since 2018. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, PRC, OS cases.

484

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/12/2021 Acquitted

ANDHRA PRADESH, Bheemili PS vs Raapaka Kasiviswanadham

26 Mar 2021

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

BHEEMUNIPATNAM:VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

C.C.No.12/2021

Date of offenceOn 18.08.2020 at about 1800 hrs., at NRI hospital road, Sangivalasa village, Tagarapuvalasa.Bheemunipatnam mandal

Date of report or complaint18.08.2020

Date of apprehension of the18.08.2020 accused or appearance of the accused in the Court Date of commencement of trial01.03.2021

Date of close of trial17.03.2021

Date of sentence on order26.03.2021

Explanation of delay or remarksThe delay is due to non production of witnesses by the prosecution. No witness is retained beyond three days.

Name of the ComplainantState represented by the Sub Inspector of Police, Bheemunipatnam P.S., VisakhapatnamCity inCrime No.365/2020 of Bheemunipatnam P.S.

Name of the accusedRapakaKasiViswanadham,s/o Sankararao, Aged 35 yrs, Caste by T. Kapu, N/o 4-14, Devupalli village, Bondapalli mandal, Vizianagaram, r/o Thotapalem, Vizianagaram

OffenceU/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act Finding Not guilty SentenceIn the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and he is acquitted U/s. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force till six months as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 sample bottle shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Bheemunipatnam

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

IN THE COURT OF THE XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT

BHEEMUNIPATNAM

Present : Kum. M. Prameela Rani, XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

Friday, the 26th day of March, 2021.

Calendar Case No.12/2021

Between: The State represented by the Inspector of Police, Bheemunipatnam P.S., Visakhapatnam City

....Complainant.

And: Rapaka Kasi Viswanadham, s/o Sankararao, Aged 35 yrs, Caste by T. Kapu, N/o 4-14, Devupalli village, Bondapalli mandal, Vizianagaram, r/o Thotapalem,

Vizianagaram .... Accused.

This case is coming on 26.3.2021 for final hearing before me in the presence of Asst. Public Prosecutor for the complainant/State and of Sri. Y.R.S.Prakasarao, Advocate for the accused and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S., filed charge sheet against the above named accused in Crime No.365/2020 of Bheemili P.S., for the offence

U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

On 18.8.2020 on receiving credible information about illegal possession and transportation of liquor for selling P.W.2 S. Santosh Kumar, Sub Inspector of

Police, Bheemunipatnam Police Station along with his his staff i.e., constables

P.W.1 and L.W.2 Rama Krishna rushed to NRI hospital road, Sangivalasa village,

Tagarapuvalasa at about 6.00 p.m., and on seeing them the accused tried to escape from that place with one bag and on suspicion P.W.2 caught hold of him and checked the bag and found (1) ADAN’s Supreme Blend Superior Grain

Whisky 180 ml., (18 bottles); (2) Loinsgate Virgin Scotch blended whisky 180 ml., (6 bottles) (3)Manjeera Classic Reserve Whisky 180 ml., (4 bottles) (4)

Florence XO rare brandy 180 ml., (3 bottles); (5) 8PM Premium Black Excusive whisky 180 ml., (4 bottles). On interrogation, the accused revealed his identity particulars and further confessed the offence that he purchased the said liquor bottles from different Govt. wine shops at Tagarapuvalasa for selling them at

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili higher price for profit without having any valid licence. Then, he arrested the accused and seized the liquor bottles and lifted samples and forwarded the same to the Chemical Examiner for analysis under the cover of an occurrence report and basing on the said occurrence report, L.W.4 Inspector of Police,

Bheemunpatnam Police Station regsitered a case in Cr.No.365/2020 for the offence punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act and endorsed the same to

P.W.2 for investigation. Durign the course of investigation, P.W.2 visited the scene of offence, prepared rough sketch, examined the witnesses and recorded their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C., and sent the accused for judicial remand on 19.8.2020 and that after receipt of analyst report and after completion of investigation, P.W.2 filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act.

3.This case was taken on file for the offence punishable U/sec.34 (a) of

A.P. Excise Act against the accused. On the appearance of the accused, copies of the case documents are furnished to the accused as required U/sec.207

Cr.P.C. The accused was examined U/sec.239 of Cr.P.C. The accused denied the accusations in the charge sheet for the offence punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P.

Excise Act. A charge U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act is framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4.During the trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 and 2 and got marked

EXs.P1 to P5 and M.O.1. P.W.1 K. Yellarao is the Constable, Bheemili P.S., who accompanied P.W.2 at the time of raid. P.W.2-S. Santosh Kumar is the Sub-

Inspector, Anandapuram P.S., who conducted raid, drew samples and seized the property and conducted further investigation in this case. In order to avoid repetition of evidence, the learned Asst., Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.W2 Ramakrishna, P.C., As the analysis report is marked through the evidence of P.W.2, the evidence of L.W.3 Government Chemical Examiner of

P & E, Regional Prohibition and Excise Laboratory, Visakhapatnam is given up by the learned Asst., Public Prosecutor.

5. EX.P1 is occurrence report, EX.P2 is original FIR in Crime No.365/2021 of

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili Bheemili P.S., EX.P3 is the rough skech, Ex.P.4 is the letter of advice and Ex.P.5 is the Chemical Analysis report. M.O.1 is the sample bottles.

6. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined U/sec. 313 Cr.P.C. The incriminating material found in the prosecution evidence is read over and explained to the accused in Telugu. The accused denied the same and did not choose to adduce any evidence in his defence.

7.Heard the arguments on both sides. Perused the material on record.

8.Now, the point for consideration is:

1. Whether the accused is found in possession of a bag containing liquor bottles?

2. Whether the said bag containing liquor bottles is seized from

the possession of the accused at the scene of offence as per the

procedure laid down under law?

3. Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused

for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act

beyond all reasonable doubt?

4. Whether the accused is liable for conviction and sentence for the said offence.

9. P O I N T S -1 TO 3:- Point Nos.1 to 3 are interlinked with each other.

Hence, they are dealt together.

To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 and 2. P.W.2 who is the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S., who conducted raid in his evidence he says that on 18.08.2021 at about 5.30 p.m., while he along with his constables i.e., P.W.1 and S. Ramakrishna (L.W.2) were in petrolling duty and reached N.R.I. Hospital road, Sangivalasa and conducting vehicle checking and person checking, they noticed one person coming from NRI college road towards Tagarapuavalasa carrying one cloth bag and on suspicion they stopped the accused and when he checked the said bag he found liquor bottles. On questioning the accused revealed his identity particulars and further confessed that he purchased the same from various wine shops and further confessed the offence. P.W.2 further says that he found 18 Nip bottles of Adan’s Supreme whisky of 180 ml., each; 6 Nip bottles of Lionsgate whisky of 180 ml., each; 4

Nip bottles of Manjeera whisky of 180 ml., each; 3 Nip bottles of Florence whisky of 180 ml., each ; 4 Nip bottles of 8 PM whisky of 180 ml., each and that he seized the said bottles under the cover of an occurrence report duly scribed

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili by him and they all attested it and returned to police station at about 8.00 p.m,. along with accused and seized property and occurrence report and basing on Ex.P.1 occurrence report, their Inspector G. Srinivasu (L.W.4) registerd a case in Cr.No.365/2020 under Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act and endorsed the same to him for investigation. P.W.2 further says that he sent the accused for judicial custody and examinedthe witnesses and recorded their statements, visisted the scene of offence, observed the same, prepared rough sketch of scene and forwarded the sample to the Chemical examiner for analysis through a letter of advice. In support of his contention, the prosecution got marked the said occurrence report as EX.P1, FIR as Ex.P.2, rough sketch as Ex.P.3, Letter of advice as Ex.P.4. He further says that after receipt of chemical analysis report from Chemical Examiner who opined that the sample is Indian Liquor and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet against the accused. In support of his contention, the prosecution also got marked the Chemical

Analysis report as Ex.P5.

11.P.W.1 is the Constable who accompanied P.W.2 at the time of raid and participated in the said raid corroborated to the evidence of P.W.2 in all material particulars. In his cross examination P.W.1 admitted that there is a pan shop, rice mill and one hospital at the scene of offence. Further, P.W.2 in his cross examination also admitted that there are many apartments and NRI hospital cum college near the scene of offence and that he has not examined any person at the scene of offence and they have not issued any summons to any person in the said village to act as mediators.

12.From the cross-examination of P.Ws.1 and 2, it is elicited that the scene of offence area is a busy locality where number of apartments, pan shops, rice mills and NRI college cum hospital are situated and It is also elicited from the cross-examination of P.W.2 that he has not issued any summons or notices to any person in the said village to act as mediator. When the scene of offence is a busy locality and when the time of raid is 1800 hrs., then P.W.2 can easily secure any two independent witnesses from the locality to act as mediators.

But, it seems that P.W.2 did not make any efforts to secure any independent

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili mediators. Even P.W.2 did not make any efforts to secure the presence of

Village Revenue Officer or Village Revenue Assistant of the said village to act as mediators. It seems that this case is falsely filed against the accused for statistical purpose. Accordingly points 1 to 3 are answered.

14.Point No.4: Therefore, this Court is of the view that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the charge punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and the accused is entitled for acquittal.

15.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable

U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and he is acquitted U/s. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force till six months as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 sample bottles shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Directly typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, this the 26th day of March, 2021.

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE.

WITNESSES EXAMINED.

FOR PROSECUTION: P.W.1 K. Yellarao, P.C., Bheemili P.S., P.W.2S. Santosh Kumar(Sub-Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S.)

FOR DEFENCE: NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED.

Prosecution : EX.P1/18.08.2020 Occurrence report. EX.P2/18.08.2020 Original FIR in Crime No.365/2020 of Bheemili P.S. EX.P3/18.08.2020 Rough sketch Ex.P4/Letter of advice, Ex.P5/14.10.2020Analysis report

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

M.O.1...Sample bottles

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

C.C.No.12/2021 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

CC/310/2020 Acquitted

Anandapuram P.S. vs Koneti Kondamma

30 Mar 2021

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

BHEEMUNIPATNAM:VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

C.C.No.310/2019

Date of offenceOn 20.12.2019 at about 1200 p.m., at Lodagalavanipalem, Anandapuram

Date of report or complaint20.12.2019

Date of apprehension of the accused20.12.2019 or appearance of the accused in the Court Date of commencement of trial02.03.2021

Date of close of trial03.03.2021

Date of sentence on order30.03.2021

Explanation of delay or remarksThe delay is due to non production of witnesses by the prosecution. No witness is retained beyond three days.

Name of the ComplainantState represented by the Sub Inspector ofPolice,AnandapuramP.S., VisakhapatnamCity inCrime No.260/2019 of Anandapuram P.S.

Name of the accused Koneti Kondamma, w/o late Gangaraju, Age 57 years, Jangalu by caste, R/o Lodagalavanipalem,Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District OffenceU/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act

Finding Not guilty

SentenceIn the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/sec.34

(a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and she is acquitted U/s. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force till six months as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 sample bottles shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Bheemunipatnam

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

IN THE COURT OF THE XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT

BHEEMUNIPATNAM

Present : Kum. M. Prameela Rani, XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

Tuesday, this the 30th day of March, 2021.

Calendar Case No.310/2020

Between: State represented by the Sub Inspector of Police, Anandapuram P.S., Visakhapatnam City

....Complainant.

And: Koneti Kondamma, w/o late Gangaraju, Age 57 years, Jangalu by caste, R/o Lodagalavanipalem,

Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.... Accused.

This case coming on 24.3.2021 for final hearing before me in the presence of Asst. Public Prosecutor for the complainant/State and of Sri N. Santosh Kumar, Advocate for the accused and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub Inspector of Police, Anandapuram P.S., filed charge sheet against the above named accused in Crime No.260/2019 of Anandapuram P.S., for the offence U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

On 20.12.2019 at about 1200 hrs., on reliable information P.W.2-D.

Srinivasarao, Sub-Inspector of Police, Anandapuram P.S., along with his staff

P.W.1 K. Srinivasarao, PC 3205 and L.W.1 S. Dhana Laxmi, WPC 985 reached the panshop of accused and on seeing them the accused who is selling liquor tried to abscond from the said place and they caught hold of her and on questioning her, she disclosed her identity particulars and further disclosed that she used to purchase liquor bottles at Visakhaptnam for selling them in her panshop for higher price without having any valid licence. Then P.W.2 asked her to show the liquor bottles, on that she showed liquor bottles which were kept in panshop and on that P.W.2 searched and found Hyderabad Blue Whisky 180 ml., 3 bottles and Director’s SpecialWhisky 180 ml., 6 bottles. Then P.W.2 arresed the accused under the cover of an occurrence report and returned to police station along with accused and seized property and got registered a cse in case in Cr.No.260/2019 for the offence punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise

Act and examined the witnesses, recorded their statement, served Section 41-A

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili notice on the accused and forwarded the sample to the Chemical Examiner (L.W.3) for analysis and after receipt of Chemical Examiner (L.W.3) report that the samples have Eithyl Alochol and and after completion of investigation,

P.W.2 filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act.

3.This case was taken on file for the offence punishable U/sec.34 (a) of

A.P. Excise Act against the accused. On appearance of the accused, copies of the case documents are furnished to the accused as required U/sec.207 Cr.P.C.

The accused was examined U/sec.239 of Cr.P.C. The accused denied the accusations in the charge sheet for the offence punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P.

Excise Act. A charge U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act is framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu and she not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4.During the trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 and 2 and got marked

EXs.P1 to P5 and M.O.1. P.W.1 K. Srinivasarao is the Constable, Anandapuram

P.S., who accompanied P.W.2 at the time of raid. P.W.2-D. Srinivasarao, is the

Sub-Inspector, Anandapuram P.S., who conducted raid, drew samples and seized the property and conducted further investigation in this case. In order to avoid repetition of evidence, the learned Asst., Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.W2-S. Dhanalakshmi, WPC. As analysis report is marked through the evidence of P.W.2, the evidence of L.W.3 Government Chemical

Examiner of P & E, Regional Prohibition and Excise Laboratory, Visakhapatnam is given up by the learned Asst., Public Prosecutor.

5. EX.P1 is occurrence report dated 20.12.2019, EX.P2 is original FIR in

Crime No.260/2019 of Anandapuram P.S., EX.P3 is the letter of advice, Ex.P.4 is the Chemical Analysis report and Ex.P.5 is the letter addressd to the Deputy

Commissioner of Police, P & E, Visakhapatnam for destruction of case property.

M.O.1 is 2 (Two) sample bottles.

7.Heard both sides. Perused the material on record.

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

8.Now, the point for consideration is:

1. Whether the accused is found in possession of a bag containing liquor bottles?

2. Whether the said bag containing liquor bottles is seized from

the possession of the accused at the scene of offence as per the

procedure laid down under law?

3. Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused

for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act

beyond all reasonable doubt?

4. Whether the accused is liable for conviction and sentence for the said offence.

9. P O I N T S -1 TO 3:- Point Nos.1 to 3 are interlinked with each other.

Hence, they are dealt together.

To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 and 2. P.W.2 who is the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Anandapuram P.S., who conducted raid in his evidence he says that on 20.12.2019 at about 12.00 p.m, he received information about selling of liquor in a pan shop, Lodagalavaniplaem,

Anandapuram mandal and then he along with one Head Constable Dhana

Lakshmi (L.W.1) and P.W.1 went to the said place and noticed accused who is in the said shop on seeing them thrown one bottle behind the buddy and then he questioned her as to where she kept the other bottles, then she informed that she kept bottles under the buddy (shop) and she took 8 bottles. Then he directed P.W.1 to secure mediators, but no one came forward to act as mediators. Then he found 3 Nip bottles of Hyderabad blue Whisky of 180 ml., each and 6 Nip bottles of director’s Special Whisky of 180 ml., each and the accused further revealed her identity particulars and further confessed the offence that she purchased the said bottles from a wine shop at Anandapuram and she does not possess a valid licence. Then P.W.2 lifted one bottle as sample from each brand, sealed and labelled them and also seized the remaining bottles under the cover of Ex.P.1 occurrence report duly signed by

P.W.1 and he along with his constables duly attested the same and served

Section 41-A Cr.P.C., notice on the accused. In support of his contention, the prosecution got marked the sample bottles as M.O.1.

10.He also deposed about the registration of EX.P2 FIR basing on EX.P1 occurrence report, sending of sample to Chemical Examiner, receipt of chemical analysis report from Chemical Examiner who opined that the sample

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili is Indian Liquor. In support of his contention, the prosecution got marked the

FIR as EX.P2 and the letter of advice as Ex.P.3 and the Chemical Analysis report as EX.P4.

11.P.W.1 is the Constable who accompanied P.W.2 at the time of raid and participated in the said raid corroborated to the evidence of P.W.2 in all material particulars.

12.In the cross-examination of P.W.1 admitted that he has not stated to police that he went to secure the mediators, but non came forward to act as mediators. Further P.W.2 in his cross examination admitted that the distance between the scene of offence and their police station is below 100 meters and that adjacent to their police station there is a M-seva office and M.R.O., office.

13.From the evidence of P.W.1 and 2, it is revealed that the scene of offence is a busy locality and that there is M-seva office and M.R.O., office near to the scene of offence. When it is a busy locality and when the time of raid is 1200 hrs., then P.W.2 can easily secure any two independent witnesses from the locality to act as mediators. But, it seems that P.W.2 did not make any efforts to secure any independent mediators. Even P.W.2 did not make any efforts to secure the presence of Village Revenue Officer or Village Revenue

Assistant of the said village to act as mediators. It seems that this case is falsely filed against the accused for statistical purpose. Accordingly points 1 to 3 are answered.

15.Point No.4: Therefore, this Court is of the view that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the charge punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and the accused is entitled for acquittal.

16.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable

U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and she is acquitted U/s. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force till six months as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 sample bottles shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Directly typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, this the 30th day of March, 2021.

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE.

WITNESSES EXAMINED.

FOR PROSECUTION: P.W.1 K. Srinivasarao, Constable, Anandapuram. P.W.2D. Srinivasarao, (Sub-Inspector of Police, Anandapuram P.S.)

FOR DEFENCE: NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED.

Prosecution : EX.P1/20.12.2019 Occurrence report. EX.P2/20.12.2019 Original FIR in Crime No.260/2019 of Anandapuram P.S. EX.P3/Letter of advice Ex.P4/15.02.2020 Chemical Analysis report. Ex.P5/11.06.2020Letter addresed by P.W.2 to the Deputy Commissioner, P & E, Visakhapatnam.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

M.O.1...Sample bottles (2)

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

C.C.No.310/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

CC/810/2020 Acquitted

Bheemili P.S. vs Palla Ashok

25 Mar 2021

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

BHEEMUNIPATNAM:VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

C.C.No.810/2020

Date of offenceOn 30.5.2020 at about 1700 hrs., at G. Thimmapuram,Bheemunipatnam mandal

Date of report or complaint30.05.2020

Date of apprehension of the30.05.2020 accused or appearance of the accused in the Court Date of commencement of trial23.02.2021

Date of close of trial16.03.2021

Date of sentence on order25.03.2021

Explanation of delay or remarksThe delay is due to non production of witnesses by the prosecution. No witness is retained beyond three days.

Name of the ComplainantState represented by the Sub Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S., Visakhapatnam City in Crime No.269/2020 of Bheemili P.S.

Name of the accusedPalla Ashok, s/o Narsinga Rao, Aged 41 Years, Caste by Yadava, R/o D.No.14-17- 8,Ramajogipeta,Maharanpeta, Visakhapatnam city

OffenceU/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act

Finding Not guilty

SentenceIn the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and he is acquitted U/s. 248 (1) Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force till six months as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 sample bottle shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Bheemunipatnam

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

IN THE COURT OF THE XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT

BHEEMUNIPATNAM

Present : Kum. M. Prameela Rani, XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

Thursday, the 25th day of March, 2021.

Calendar Case No.810/2020

Between: The State represented by the Sub Inspector of Police, Bheemunipatnam P.S., Visakhapatnam City

....Complainant.

And: Palla Ashok, s/o Narsinga Rao, Aged 41 Years, Caste by Yadava, R/o D.No.14-17-8, Ramajogipeta,

Maharanpeta, Visakhapatnam city... Accused.

This case is coming on 23.3.2021 for final hearing before me in the presence of Asst. Public Prosecutor for the complainant/State and of Sri N. Santosh Kumar, Advocate for the accused and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Sub Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S., filed charge sheet against the above named accused in Crime No.269/2020 of Bheemunipatnam P.S., for the offence U/sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

On 30.5.2020 at about 1700 hrs., P.W.2 P. Rambabu, Sub Inspector of

Police, Bheemunipatnam conducted raid at GB. Thimmapuram,

Bheemunipatnam mandal, Visakhapatnam and found the accused is having 15 bottles of Sentini Special Deluxe Grain Whisky of 180 ml., each in his possession without having any licence and P.W.2 seized the said liquor bottles under the cover of occurrence report and lifted samples for chemical analysis and returned to polic station and L.W.3 G. Srinivas, Inspector of Police,

Bheemunipatam registered a case in Cr.No.269/2020 under Section 34 (A) of

A.P. Excise Act and endrosed the same to P.W.2 for investigation. During the course of investigation, P.W.2 visisted the scene of offence, prepared rough sketch, served notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., on the accused and sent samples to L.W.2 for chemical analysis and after receipt of analyst report that the samples are Ethyl alcohol and after completion of investigation, P.W.2 filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 34(A) of A.P.

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili Excise Act.

3.This case was taken on file for the offence punishable U/sec.34 (a) of

A.P. Excise Act against the accused. On the appearance of the accused, copies of the case documents are furnished to the accused as required U/sec.207

Cr.P.C. The accused was examined U/sec.239 of Cr.P.C. The accused denied the accusations in the charge sheet for the offence punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P.

Excise Act. A charge U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act is framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4.During the trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 and 2 and got marked

EXs.P1 to P4 and M.O.1. P.W.1 Duvvada Yogeswararao, is the Constable

Bheemili Police Station who accompanied P.W.2 at the time of raid. P.W.2-P.

Rambabu, is the Sub-Inspector, Bheemili P.S., who conducted raid, drew samples and seized the property and conducted further investigation in this case. In order to avoid repetition of evidence, the learned Asst., Public

Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.W3-G. Srinivas, Inspector of Police,

Bheemili P.S. As analysis report is marked through the evidence of P.W.2, the evidence of L.W.2 Government Chemical Examiner of P & E, Prohibition and

Excise Laboratory, Visakhapatnam is given up by the learned Asst., Public

Prosecutor.

5. EX.P1 is occurrence report dated 30.5.2020, EX.P2 is original FIR in

Crime No.269/2020 of Bheemili P.S., EX.P3 is the Rough sketch and Ex.P.4 is

Chemical Analysis report. M.O.1 is sample bottle.

7.Heard the arguments on both sides through blue-jeans App. Perused the material on record.

8.Now, the point for consideration is:

1. Whether the accused is found in possession liquor bottles?

2. Whether the liquor bottles are seized from the possession of

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

the accused at the scene of offence as per the procedure laid down

under law?

3. Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused

for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act

beyond all reasonable doubt?

4. Whether the accused is liable for conviction and sentence for the said offence?

9. P O I N T S -1 TO 3:- Point Nos.1 to 3 are interlinked with each other.

Hence, they are dealt together.

To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 and 2. P.W.2 who is the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S., who conducted raid in his evidence he says that on 30.05.2020 at about 4.00 p.m., he received information about selling liquor illegally and thenhe along with one constable i.e., P.W.1 went near Hawili Daba, Gollala Thimmapuram and noticed the accused carrying one plastic cover and on seeing them the accused tried to run away. Then they caught hold of him and when he questioned as to why he is trying to run away and what is there in the said bag, the accused confessed that he is in possession of liquor bottles and he also revealed his identity particulars and further confessed the offence that he is not having any licence to sell the liquor. He further says that he opened the said cover and found 15 bottles of Sentini Special Deluxe Grain whisky of 180 ml., each and then he lifted one bottle as sample, sealed and labelled it and seized the remaining bottles under the cover of an occurrence report duly scribed by him and he along with accued attested it and arrested the accused and returned to police station along with seized property. He further says that basing on Ex.P.1 occurrence report, their Inspector G. Srinivas registered a case in

Cr.No.269/2020 for the offence under Section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act and served Section 41-A notice on the accused and sent him away and again visited the scene of offence, prepared rough sketch of the scene and fowarded the sample to the chemical examiner for analysis and after receipt of analyst report that the sample is Indian Liquor and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet against the accused. In support of his contention, the prosecution got marked the said occurrence report as EX.P1, the FIR as Ex.P.2, the roughs sketch as Ex.P.3 and the analyst report as Ex.P.4 and the sample bottle as

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili M.O.1.

11.P.W.1 D. Yogeswararao, is the Constable, Bheemili Police who accompanied P.W.2 at the time of raid and participated in the said raid corroborated to the evidence of P.W.2 in all material particulars. In his cross examination P.W.1 admitted that two village elders came when they caught hold of the accused but he do not whether they have attested the occurrence report. Even P.W.2 the S.I. of Police, who conducted raid and further investigation also in his cross examination admitted that he cannot say the names of the persons who refused to act as mediators.

12.From the cross-examination of P.W.1 and 2 and Ex.P.3 rough sketch, it is elicited that the scene of offnce area is a busy locality having wine shops and dhabas and that they have not issued any summons or notices to any person to act as mediator. When it is a busy locality and when the time of raid is 1700 hrs., then P.W.2 can easily secure any two independent witnesses from the locality to act as mediators. But, it seems that P.W.2 did not make any efforts to secure any independent mediators. Even P.W.2 did not make any efforts to secure the presence of Village Revenue Officer or Village Revenue Assistant of the said village to act as mediators. It seems that this case is falsely filed against the accused for statistical purpose. Accordingly points 1 to 3 are answered.

13.Point No.4: Therefore, this Court is of the view that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the charge punishable U/Sec.34 (a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and the accused is entitled for acquittal.

14.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable

Directly typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, this the 25th day of March, 2021.

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE.

WITNESSES EXAMINED.

FOR PROSECUTION: P.W.1 D. Yogeswararao, P.C., Bheemili P.S., P.W.2 P. Rambabu(Sub-Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S.)

FOR DEFENCE: NIL

EXHIBITS MARKED.

Prosecution : EX.P1/30.05.2020 Occurrence report. EX.P2/30.05.2020 Original FIR in Crime No.269/2020 of Bheemili P.S. EX.P3/30.05.2020 Rough sketch Ex.P4/30.06.2020Analysis report

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

M.O.1...Sample bottle

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

C.C.No.810/2020 XV A.M.M., Bheemili

CC/89/2021 Convicted

ANDHRA PRADESH vs Yerninti Krishna Babu @ Ganga

11 May 2021

1

IN THE COURT OF THE XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BHEEMUNIPATNAM

Present : Kum. M. Prameela Rani, XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam. Tuesday, the 11th day of May, 2021 Calendar Case No.89/2021 Between: The State of AP through Sub Inspector of Police, Bheemili P.S., Visakhapatnam … Complainant. A n d:

Accused Yerininti Krishna Babu @ Ganga, S/o Late Chinna Pydinaidu, Age 18 yrs 10 months, Caste by Nagavamsam, R/o Near Kondamma Kirana Shop, Gondayyapalem Village, Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District … Accused

This case is coming on this day for hearing before me in the presence of the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and the matter having been stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a case fled by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam against the accused for the ofences punishable U/Section 380 or 411 IPC.

2.The brief avernments of the charge sheet are:

On 23.01.2021 the defacto complainant came to the Police station and lodged a report saying that, his a resident of Flat No.154 of Khsatriya Residency, Bhoomatha Layout, Dakamarri village of Bheemunipatnam Mandal, he futher submitted that on the intervening on night of 22/23.01.2021 some unknown culprits gained entered into his house and committed theft of

Thosibha Blue Colour Mini laptop and took his Honda Active vehicle keys and also took the keys of Flat No.156 (his friend house) and the unknown culprit entered into Flat No. 156 and committed theft of TITAN watch and decamped with his Honda Activa vehicle bearing Reg.No.

AP 28 BE 6377, Thosibha Blue Colour Mini laptop and TITAN watch all worth of Rs.10,000/-, hence requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said report the S.H.O.,

Bheemunipatnam registered this case as a case in Cr.No. 36/2021 for the ofence U/Sec. 380 IPC.

During the course of investigation he visited the scene of ofence and examined the defacto complainant and other witnesses and recorded the other statements and prepared the Rough sketch of secene. It is further submitted that, on 02.02.2021 at about 5.00 P.M. the S.H.O.,

Bheemunipatnam arrested the accused under the cover of an mediator report and record his confession and recovered the stolen property and he produced the accused before this court for

Judicial custody and this court remanded the accused to Judicial custody on 03.02.2021. After

2

completion of the investigation the S.H.O., Bheemunipatnam fled a charge sheet against the accused for the U/Sec. 380 or 411 IPC.

3.After perusing the contents of the charge sheet and other document fled in this case, this court to took cognizance of this case against the accused for the ofence U/Sec. 380 or 411

IPC.

4. Case is called through bluejeans app. Accused is produced from central prison,

Visakhapatnam virtually through warder T.Nageswara Rao. Copies furnished to Accused through

E-mail. Accused is examined U/Sec. 239 Cr.P.C for the ofence U/sec. 380 or 411 IPC. Charges framed for the ofences U/Sec. 380 or 411 IPC. The accused pleaded guilty and did not claim to be tried for the ofence U/Sec. 380 IPC. This Court found that the said admission is voluntary and accordingly he was convicted for the said ofence under Section 241 Cr.P.C., The accused is questioned with regard to quantum of sentence that shall be awarded to him for the ofence under Section 380 IPC for which the accused pleaded mercy stating that he is a poor person.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the ofence committed by the accused, this Court is of the view that this is not a ft case to invoke the provisions of Section 360 Cr.P.C. or the provisions of Probation of Ofenders Act. However in view of the nature of the ofence committed by the accused and keeping in view of the plea of mercy pleaded by the accused and his family condition this Court is of the view that if the accused is sentenced to undergo certain period of imprisonment the ends of Justice would met.

Accordingly the accused is sentenced to undergo simple Imprisonment for a period of four months and to pay a fne of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) indefault to underto simple imprisonment for one month for the ofene under Section 380 IPC. The remand period undergone by the accused i.e., from 03.02.2021 to till date shall be set of under Section 428

Cr.P.C., The accused is informed his right to prefer appeal as against this Judgment and he is also informed that he is entitled to free legal aid if he is so interested.

The case property i.e. Thosibha Blue colour Mini laptop which is not produced before shall be returned to the defacto complainant by this court.

Typed to my dictation to the Typist, transcribed her, corrected and pronounced by me in home office through Blue Jeans this the 11th day of May, 2021.

XV Addl., Metropolitan Magistrate, Copy to: Bheemunipatnam The Sub-Inspector of Police, Bheemunipatnam P.S., Visakhapatnam.

3

//True copy//

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Bheemunipatnam

CC/678/2020 Convicted

Anandapuram P.S. vs Golagani Sanyasirao

16 Apr 2021

IN THE COURT OF XV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, AT

BHEEMUNIPATNAM

PRESENT: KUM. M. PRAMEEELA RANI

XV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate,

BHEEMUNIPATNAM.

Friday, this the 16th day of April, Two thousand and Twenty One

C.C.No. 678/2020

BETWEEN:

The State of AP through Sub Inspector of Police, Anandapuram P.S., Visakhapatnam …Complainant

AND

Golagani Sanyasirao, Late Karramma, R/o D.No. 1-108, Ramunaidupeta village, Bodamettapalem village, Bheemili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

…Accused

This case having come before me for fnal hearing on 16.04.2021 in the presence of Sri. APP upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing

Learned APP, this Court delivers the following:

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

The Charge sheet is fled against the Accused in C.C. 678/2020 for the offence U/Sec. 27e of IPC & Sec. M... Act alleged that the accused noted on on 30.06.2020 LW.1 along with L.Ws. 2 and 3 are went to Gajuwaka, .isakhapatnam on New Maruthi Dezire Car bearing No. AP30.PTR8477 for laying foor matties and seat covers and after completion of their work on same day they returned to his home on the car on the way they reached

Opposite Paradise hotel, on NH-16 road, Anandapuram at about 20.00 hrs, at the time L.W.1 applied the brakes for slow down the car due to road works (speed breaker), at the time the accused Golagani Sanyasi Rao, s/o late

Karramma rider of Motor Cycle Bearing No. AP 3e H 7726, rode the same in

- 2 -

rash and negligence manner and dashed LW.1 car from behind in drunken state. As a result the car back side was badly damaged and etc. facts. Hence

L.W.1 requested for take necessary action.

The case was taken on fle by against the accused for the offence

U/Sec. 27e of IPC & Sec. 185 M... Act. After appearance of the accused copies of documents were furnished U/Sec. 207 Cr.P.C the accused was examined U/

Sec. 251 Cr.P.C for which he admitted the offence voluntarily.

This case is called through bluejeans app. Accused appeared before this court physically.

Copies furnished to the accused. He is examined U/Sec. 251 Cr.P.C for the offence under Section 27e IPC and Sec. 185 M... Act . He pleaded guilty for the said offence. I found that the admission of the accused for the said offences is voluntary. Therefore, accused is convicted U/Sec. 252 Cr.P.C., After considering the admission of the accused and the facts of this case, the accused is sentenced to pay a fne of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 27e IPC in default of payment of fne he shall be sentenced to simple imprisonment for a period of one month and he further sentenced topay a fne of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 185

M... Act and in default of pyament of fne he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

(Pronounced by me in the open court, this the 16th day of April , 2021).

X. ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

BHEEMUNIPATNAM

APPENDIX OF E.IDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION:FOR DEFENCE:

No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on either sides.

X. AMM/BML

Order Record 476 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/89/2021	ANDHRA PRADESH vs Yerninti Krishna Babu @ Ganga	11 May 2021	other	Convicted
CC/678/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Golagani Sanyasirao	16 Apr 2021	other	Convicted
CC/310/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Koneti Kondamma	30 Mar 2021	judgement	Acquitted
CC/12/2021	ANDHRA PRADESH, Bheemili PS vs Raapaka Kasiviswanadham	26 Mar 2021	judgement	Acquitted
CC/810/2020	Bheemili P.S. vs Palla Ashok	25 Mar 2021	judgement	Acquitted
CC/768/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Viyyapu Yerraji Rao	24 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/394/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Saragada Narasayyamma	22 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/613/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Lenka Polinaidu	22 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/197/2020	Bheemili P.S. vs Annavarapu Uma Maheswara Rao	19 Mar 2021	other	—
CC/602/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Sadi Appalakonda	19 Mar 2021	other	—
CC/856/2019	Anandapuram P.S. vs Althi Apparao	19 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/200392/2018	VsThonangi Yerammma	19 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/867/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Duvvi Narasinga Rao	18 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/807/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Bantupalli Sanyasirao	17 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/609/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Buthala Bangarayya	16 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/694/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Vasupali Devudamma	15 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/865/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Buttala Yerakayya	15 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/866/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Mylapalli Laxmi	15 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/680/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Bora Chitti Duragyya	08 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/855/2019	Anandapuram P.S. vs Vsjilitimadi Venktappalaraju	08 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/858/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Robbi Satyanarayana	08 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/864/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Chilla Annapurna	05 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/679/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Chukka Appayamma	04 Mar 2021	judgement	—
CC/873/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Palla Yerrinaidu	27 Feb 2021	judgement	—
CC/231/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Koyya Venkata Laxmi	26 Feb 2021	judgement	—
CC/968/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Puthi Kondamma	25 Feb 2021	other	—
CC/392/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Undabatla Venkatapparao	10 Feb 2021	judgement	—
CC/412/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Chilla Siva Reddy	10 Feb 2021	judgement	—
CC/393/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Chilla Ramana	04 Feb 2021	judgement	—
CC/200415/2018	VsShaik Sanna Khan	30 Jan 2021	judgement	—
CC/55/2019	SI of Police, Bheemunipatnam Crime P.S vs Paramour Rma Badhiya	25 Jan 2021	judgement	—
CC/952/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Madugula Rama Rao	23 Jan 2021	other	—
CC/735/2020	SHO Anandapuram vs Bothula Prabakhar	08 Jan 2021	judgement	—
CC/200306/2017	Bheemili P.S. vs Yendeti Ganga alias Kumari	21 Dec 2020	other	—
CC/200083/2018	Bheemili P.S. vs Surada Narasinga Rao	26 Nov 2020	judgement	—
CC/238/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Kondapu Seethamma	09 Nov 2020	judgement	—
CC/692/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Kuppa Kanakam	09 Nov 2020	judgement	—
CC/567/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Chokkakula Venkata Rao	06 Nov 2020	judgement	—
EP/200001/2018	Kurakula Chinnarao vs Gundu China Narayana	05 Nov 2020	other	—
CC/607/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Kanakala Sai	04 Nov 2020	other	—
CC/736/2020	SHO Anandapuram vs Kadiyala Naveen	02 Nov 2020	other	—
CC/586/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Nagothi Appalaraju	27 Oct 2020	judgement	—
CC/590/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Konada Durga	20 Oct 2020	judgement	—
CC/582/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Koyya Pappayya	19 Oct 2020	judgement	—
CC/180/2019	Proh and Excise S.I., Bheemunipatnam vs Uppada Suramma	16 Oct 2020	judgement	—
CC/857/2019	Anandapuram P.S. vs Bhattula Bangarayya	15 Oct 2020	judgement	—
CC/565/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Madhija Kamji	12 Oct 2020	judgement	—
CC/574/2020	Anandapuram P.S. vs Siriki Vijaya Kumar	07 Oct 2020	other	—
CC/336/2020	Bheemili P.S. vs Neduri Veeraju @ Basha	04 Sep 2020	other	—
CC/302/2019	S.I of Police, Anandapuram P.S vs Majji Ramanamma	31 Aug 2020	judgement	—
CC/227/2020	Bheemili P.S. vs Raihan Sekh	27 Aug 2020	other	—
CC/600/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Kolli Ganga Raju	06 Aug 2020	judgement	—
CC/862/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Arigi Naidu	06 Aug 2020	judgement	—
CC/863/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Maddi Gunavathi	06 Aug 2020	judgement	—
CC/47/2019	Proh.and Excise Station BML vs Kandi Jatlayya	26 Jun 2020	judgement	—
CC/691/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Kuppa Gopi	26 Jun 2020	judgement	—
CC/868/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Surala Devi	26 Jun 2020	judgement	—
CC/869/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Balli Reddy Satyanarayana	25 Jun 2020	judgement	—
CC/871/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Reesu Ramanamma	25 Jun 2020	judgement	—
CC/870/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Garikina Ramulamma	24 Jun 2020	judgement	—
CC/200433/2018	B.V.S.S.Prakash vs Talluri Rekha Rani	19 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/200260/2018	Vs	16 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/200492/2018	VsA.1 Karri Srinu	11 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/115/2019	Golagani Appla Raju vs Ellipilli Mahesh	10 Mar 2020	other	—
CC/381/2019	S.H.O Bheemunipatnam vs Chukka Appanna	06 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/395/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Gorle Rambabu	06 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/308/2019	S.I of Police , Anandapuram vs Regani Srinu	05 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/310/2019	Police, Anandapuram Police Station vs Korada Satyanarayana	05 Mar 2020	judgement	—
MC/200007/2018	Chilla Appayyamma vs Chilla Polireddy	05 Mar 2020	order	—
CC/339/2019	S.I of Police, Proh and Excise, Bheemunipatnam,. vs Viyyapu Govinda	04 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/415/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Chittibonu Raju	04 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/162/2019	Devarakpalli Padma vs Viyyapu Suresh	03 Mar 2020	other	—
CC/385/2019	SHO Bheemunipatnam vs Reesu Ramulapadu	03 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/695/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Yeddi Ramanamma	03 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/291/2019	Proh and Excise S.I., Bheemunipatnam. vs Adapa Venkata Ratnam	02 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/200234/2018	Bheemili P.S. vs Dommeti Nookaratnam	02 Mar 2020	judgement	—
CC/318/2019	S.I of Police, Anandapuram Crime P.S vs Nodagala Shiva Shankar @ Shiva	29 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/186/2019	Parimi Venkata Chiranjeevirao vs Patchiripilli Lakshmi	27 Feb 2020	other	—
CC/200117/2018	Bheemili P.S. vs Mugada Siva	27 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/200228/2018	Pathiwada Padmini Rani vs Patibandla Suresh Kumar	26 Feb 2020	other	—
CC/200233/2018	Bheemili P.S. vs Thappetla Bhagavan	20 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/200278/2018	Pakki Lemuel Raju Patnaik vs Potnuru Balakameswararao	14 Feb 2020	other	—
CC/200297/2018	VsGolagani Srinivasarao	14 Feb 2020	judgement	—
MC/18/2019	Thatipudi Venkata Ramanamma vs Thatipudi Babu Rao	14 Feb 2020	order	—
CC/200609/2017	Anandapuram P.S. vs Alti Ramu	12 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/200272/2018	Vs	11 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/343/2019	S.I of Police, Proh and Excise, Bheemunipatnam,. vs Ch.Yerrayyareddy	10 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/344/2019	S.I of Police, Proh and Excise, Bheemunipatnam,. vs Nagiredla Narasayyamma	10 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/200304/2018	VsAvva Venkata Suri Appanna	10 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/285/2019	Proh and Excise S.I., Bheemunipatnam. vs Sammidi Lakshmi	06 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/387/2019	SHO Bheemunipatnam vs Manyala Narasimhamurthy	06 Feb 2020	judgement	—
DVC/8/2019	Tenkala Arpitha vs Tenkala Praveen Kumar	06 Feb 2020	other	—
CC/384/2019	SHO Bheemunipatnam vs Jeeru Ramanabai	05 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/596/2019	SHO Excise Station, Bheemili vs Saragada Kanaka Rao	05 Feb 2020	judgement	—
MC/14/2019	Tammina Helamatha vs Tammina Venkata Durga Prasad	05 Feb 2020	order	—
CC/380/2019	S.H.O. Bheemunipatnam vs Nakkalla NarayanaRao	04 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/511/2019	Bheemili P.S. vs Gujji Narasayyamma	04 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/383/2019	SHO Bheemunipatnam vs Kalli Muthyalamma	03 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/200353/2018	VsKondapu Kothayya Tata alias Kothayyareddy	03 Feb 2020	judgement	—
CC/181/2019	Proh and Excise S.I., Bheemunipatnam vs Chilla Lakshmi	23 Jan 2020	judgement	—

Showing 100 of 476 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2021		1
Apr 2021		1
Mar 2021		21
Feb 2021		6
Jan 2021		4
Dec 2020		1
Nov 2020		7
Oct 2020		7
Sep 2020		1
Aug 2020		5
Jun 2020		6
Mar 2020		16

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI handled?

Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI has handled 484 court orders since 2018 at JCJ Bheemunipatnam. The average disposal rate is 18 orders per month.

What types of cases does Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI hear?

Based on available records, Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at JCJ Bheemunipatnam.

Where is Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI currently posted?

Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI is posted as II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XVI ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS BHEEMUNIPATNAM at JCJ Bheemunipatnam, Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI dispose cases?

Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI disposes approximately 18 cases per month, based on 484 orders handled over their tenure at JCJ Bheemunipatnam.

Since when is Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI serving?

Kum. M. PRAMEELA RANI has been serving at JCJ Bheemunipatnam since 2018.

Case Types

CC 92%

PRC 2%

OS 2%

MC 2%

DVC 2%

EP 0%

Posting History

Jul 2020 — Jul 2020

II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XVI ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS BHEEMUNIPATNAM
May 2018 — Jul 2021

I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XV ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS BHEEMUNIPATNAM · 484 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 3

Convicted 2

Other Judges at this Court

Ms. Nirupa Bhanj Deo

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XIV ADDI...

0 orders

Smt. D. Soujanya

II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XVI...

0 orders

MS.P.Swathi Bhavani

I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR DIVISION-CUM-XV AD...

264 orders

← View all judges at JCJ Bheemunipatnam