M. Saritha

Dt. 21.10.2020 1 CC No.374 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS,

THORRUR.

PRESENT: Smt. M.Saritha,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur.

Wednesday, this the 21st day of October, 2020.

CC.No. 374 of 2017

Between:-

The State of Telangana rep., through S.H.O, P.S. Nellikuduru … Complainant.

AND

Burgula Sharath, S/o. Venkataiah, Age : 25 years, Caste : Mala, Occu : Car driver, R/o. Brahmanakothapally of Nellikdur Mandal.

… Accused.

****

This case came before me on 20.10.2020 for final hearing and disposal in the presence of learned APP for the state and Sri A.Premchander, learned counsel

for accused upon hearing on both sides, stood over for consideration till this

day, this court delivered the following :

J U D G M E NT

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Nellikudur, filed charge sheet against accused for the offences u/s. 354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of I.P.C. in

Cr.No.18/2017 with a prayer to punish the accused for the alleged offences.

2.The case of prosecution in brief is that:

Prior to 15-02-2017, the accused followed LW2/Perumandla Kalyani in the name of love and thereby harassed her that he will damage their reputation. Later on 15-2-2017 in the afternoon hours, the accused came to the house of LW2/Kalyani and threatened her and also forcibly

Dt. 21.10.2020 2 CC No.374 of 2017

took her to a far of distance upon which she raised hue and cries the accused fled away from the scene. As such written information lodged by LW1/Perumandla Chandramouli before police.

3.Basing on the written Information LW14/G.Raj Kumar, SI of Police,

Thorrur, registered a case in Cr.No.18/2017 for the offences punishable u/s.354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of Indian Penal Code against accused and issued FIR and took up the investigation. After completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet for the offences punishable u/s.354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511of IPC against accused.

4. This court took cognizance for the offences punishable u/s. 354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of IPC against accused and issued process. On appearance of accused copies of documents furnished to him as contemplated u/s. 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined u/s. 239 of CrPC, charges u/s. 354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of I.P.C. framed against him, read over and explained to him for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.As there is no incirminating evidence found in the evidence of proseuction witnesses, examination of accused u/s. 313 CrPC., is dispensed.

Heard arguments on both sides. 7.

Dt. 21.10.2020 3 CC No.374 of 2017

8.Now, the point that arises for determination is:-

“Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to record a

conviction against the accused for the offences punishable u/s.

354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of IPC ? ”.

9.EVIDENCE ON RECORD: The prosecution examined PWs.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P3. PW.1 is the informant and victim. PW-2 is husband of PW1.

10.POINT: PW1 and PW2 who were the complainant and daughter of complainant / victim deposed that they did not know anything about the incident and turned hostile and not supported the version of prosecution. In view of the evidence of PWs-1 and 2, learned APP has given up the evidence of remaining witnesses. Since the prosecution failed to examine the material witnesses and the witnesses examined by the prosecution exhibited hostile attitude, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

11.Therefore, there is no cogent and reliable evidence on record to implicate the complicity of the accused in the commission of the offence.

It is well known that penal statutes should be strictly construed and the prosecution need to prove the alleged offence beyond all reasonable doubts, which is lacking in the present case on hand. The material produced by the prosecution is not sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Thereby, the point is decided in favour of the defence and against prosecution.

Dt. 21.10.2020 4 CC No.374 of 2017

12.IN THE RESULT, accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s. 354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted u/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of accused and sureties shall stands cancelled after expiry of six months. No property.

Typed to my dictation, after correction pronounced by me in the open Court on 21st day of October, 2020.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Thorrur.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witness Examined

For Prosecution: For defence

PW1 (LW1): Perumandla Chandramouli – Complainant NONE

PW2 (LW2): Perumandla Kalyani – Victim

Exhibits Marked :

For Prosecution: For defence

Ex.P1 – Signature of PW1 on written informationNIL

Ex.P2 – 161 CrPC statement of PW1

Ex.P3 – 161 CrPC statement of PW2

Number of Material Objects Marked: NIL.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur.

Dt. 21.10.2020 5 CC No.374 of 2017

:: CALENDER EXTRACT ::

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT

THORRUR.

CALENDER CASE NO. 374 / 2017

01.Name of the Police Station:: Nellikuduru

02.Crime Number:: 18/2017

03.Offence:: u/s.354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 IPC

04. Name of the accused:: Burgula Sharath

05.a) Date of offence:: 15-02-2017

b)Date of Complaint:: 17-02-2017

c)Date of apprehension :: 03-03-2017

d)Date of Release:: 16-03-2017

e)Commencement of trial :: 20-10-2020

f)Close of trial:: 20-10-2020

g)Date of Judgment:: 21-10-2020

06.RESULT: In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s. 354(D), 506, 363 r/w. 511 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted u/s. 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of accused and sureties shall stands cancelled after expiry of six months. No property.

07.Explanation for delay::Due to non-production of the witnesses in time, the delay is caused in disposal of this case.

Dis.No. Date: -10-2020

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur. To The Hon’ble I-Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Warangal.

Dt. 20.10.2020 1 CC No.201 of 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS,

THORRUR.

PRESENT: Smt. M.Saritha,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur.

Tuesday, this the 20th day of October, 2020.

CC.No. 201 of 2016

Between:-

The State of Telangana rep., through S.H.O, P.S. Thorrur … Complainant.

AND

Mangalapally Yakaiah, S/o. Mysaiah, Age : 35 years, Caste : Madiga, Occu : Coolie, R/o. Ambedhkar Nagar, Thorrur.

… Accused.

****

This case came before me on 19.10.2020 for final hearing and disposal in the presence of learned APP for the state and Sri V.Mahesh, learned counsel for accused upon hearing on both sides, stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following :

J U D G M E NT

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Thorrur, filed charge sheet against accused for the offences u/s. 452, 354 of I.P.C. in Cr.No. 63/2016 with a prayer to punish the accused for the alleged offences.

2.The case of prosecution in brief is that:

On 18-3-2016 at 0500 hours, the accused suddenly came to the house of LW1/Mangalapally Sumalatha and caught hold her hand by forcing her to sleep with him, upon which she raised hues and cries. On hearing noise LW3/NakirikantiVenkatmma came to the house of

Dt. 20.10.2020 2 CC No.201 of 2016

LW1/Sumalatha, on seeing her the accused escaped from the scene. As such written information lodged by LW1/Mangalapally Sumalatha before police.

3.Basing on the written Information LW7/M.Linga Reddy, ASI of

Police, Thorrur, registered a case in Cr.No.63/2016 for the offences punishable u/s.452, 354 of Indian Penal Code against accused and issued

FIR and took up the investigation. After completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet for the offences punishable u/s.452, 354 of IPC against accused.

4. This court took cognizance for the offences punishable u/s. 452, 354 of IPC against accused and issued process. On appearance of accused copies of documents furnished to him as contemplated u/s. 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined u/s. 239 of CrPC, charges u/s. 452, 354 of

I.P.C. framed against him, read over and explained to him for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.As there is no incirminating evidence found in the evidence of proseuction witnesses, examination of accused u/s. 313 CrPC., is dispensed.

Heard arguments on both sides. 7.

Dt. 20.10.2020 3 CC No.201 of 2016

8.Now, the point that arises for determination is:-

“Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to record a

conviction against the accused for the offences punishable u/s.

452, 354 of IPC ? ”.

9.EVIDENCE ON RECORD: The prosecution examined PWs.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P3. PW.1 is the informant and victim. PW-2 is husband of PW1.

10.POINT: PW1 and PW2 who were the complainant/victim and husband of complainant deposed that they did not know anything about the incident and turned hostile and not supported the version of prosecution. In view of the evidence of PWs-1 and 2, learned APP has given up the evidence of remaining witnesses. Since the prosecution failed to examine the material witnesses and the witnesses examined by the prosecution exhibited hostile attitude, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

11.Therefore, there is no cogent and reliable evidence on record to implicate the complicity of the accused in the commission of the offence.

It is well known that penal statutes should be strictly construed and the prosecution need to prove the alleged offence beyond all reasonable doubts, which is lacking in the present case on hand. The material produced by the prosecution is not sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Thereby, the point is decided in favour of the defence and against prosecution.

Dt. 20.10.2020 4 CC No.201 of 2016

12.IN THE RESULT, accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s. 452, 354 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted u/s.248(1)

Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of accused and sureties shall stands cancelled after expiry of six months. No property.

Typed to my dictation, after correction pronounced by me in the open Court on 20th day of October, 2020.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Thorrur.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witness Examined

For Prosecution: For defence

PW1 (LW1): Mangalapally Sumalatha – Complainant – VictimNONE

PW2 (LW2): Mangalapally Chandraiah – Husband of PW1

Exhibits Marked :

For Prosecution: For defence

Ex.P1 – Signature of PW1 on written informationNIL

Ex.P2 – 161 CrPC statement of PW1

Ex.P3 – 161 CrPC statement of PW2

Number of Material Objects Marked: NIL.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur.

Dt. 20.10.2020 5 CC No.201 of 2016

:: CALENDER EXTRACT ::

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT

THORRUR.

CALENDER CASE NO. 201 /2016

01.Name of the Police Station:: Thorrur

02.Crime Number:: 63/2016

03.Offence:: u/s.452, 354 of IPC

04. Name of the accused:: Mangalapally Yakaiah

05.a) Date of offence:: 18-03-2016

b)Date of Complaint:: 19-03-2016

c)Date of apprehension :: 22-03-2016

d)Date of Release:: 04-04-2016

e)Commencement of trial :: 19-10-2020

f)Close of trial:: 19-10-2020

g)Date of Judgment:: 20-10-2020

06.RESULT: In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable u/s. 452, 354 of IPC and accordingly he is acquitted u/s. 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bonds and bail bonds of accused and sureties shall stands cancelled after expiry of six months. No property.

07.Explanation for delay::Due to non-production of the witnesses in time, the delay is caused in disposal of this case.

Dis.No. Date: -10-2020

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur. To The Hon’ble I-Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Warangal.

CC. No.57/2014 Dt:28.06.2019

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

OF FIRST CLASS, THORRUR

PRESENT: SMT. M.SARITHA,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

THORRUR

FRIDAY, THIS 28 th DAY OF JUNE, 2019

CC.NO. 57 /2014

Between:-

State through P.S Rayaparthy... Complainant.

And

Enagandula Sambaiah ... Accused.

a) Serial No. of the case: C.C.No. 57 / 2014

b) Date of the commission of offence: 11.08.2013

c) Name of the complainant: State through PS Rayaparthy

d) Name of the accused persons, their parentage and residence :

Enagandula Sambaiah, S/o. Somaiah, Age: 26 years, Occ: Plumber, Caste: Kummari, R/o. Garibnagar, Labour Colony, Warangal.

e) Offence complained of: U/s 304-A ,337 of IPC

f) Plea of the accused and their examination: not guilty

g) Final Order: Accused is acquitted

h) Date of Order: 28.06.2019.

This case came before me for final hearing on 27.6.2019 in the presence of the Asst. Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri.E.Raju, Advocate for the accused and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police P.S. Rayaparthy laid charge sheet against accused for the offence punishable U/Sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC.

2.The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the complainant

LW1/Ubbani Sheshirekha, lodged report with police, stating that on 11.8.2013 in the evening hours at about 18.50 hours, her husband i.e., deceased/U.

Laxminarayana while returning from his work, when he reached near

Dayyalavagu outskirts of Mylaram village, the accused/E.Sambaiah drove his

CC. No.57/2014 Dt:28.06.2019

Hero Honda Splender bike bearing No. AP 36 M 2565 in rash and negligent manner and dashed to her husband/U.Laxminarayana’s bicycle from behind, due to which he sustained injury to his left knee and severe injury to head. As such she lodged written information to police.

Basing on written information of PW1/U.Shashirekha, LW14/M.Ranjith

Kumarm, SI of police registered a case in Cr.No.138/2013 for the offence

U/sec.304-A, 337 of IPC and after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

3.This court has taken cognizance for the offences punishable U/Secs. 304-

A, 337 of IPC against the accused and numbered as CC.57 of 2014.

4. After the appearance of the accused, copies of the documents, as required under Sec.207 Cr.P.C, were furnished to him.

5. The accused was examined under Sec.251 of Cr.P.C., for the offences punishable U/Secs. 304-A, 337 of IPC, the substance of accusation leveled against him, read over and explained to him in Telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.The prosecution has examined Pws.1 and 2, and got marked Ex.P1 to P3 on its behalf.

7.Learned APP given up the evidence of remaining prosecution witness. As there is no incriminating material in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the examination of accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with.

8.Heard both sides.

9.In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined Pws 1 and 2.

PW1 is the complainant and PWs.2 is the eye witnesses.

CC. No.57/2014 Dt:28.06.2019

10.Perused the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Pws 1 and 2 did not support the case of the prosecution and they were declared turned hostile.

PWs.1 and 2 are clearly stated in their cross-examination that they are compromised the case with accused out of the court. In view of the evidence of

Pws. 1 and 2, learned APP given up the evidence of the prosecution, as no purpose would be served with their examination. As there is no incriminating material in the evidence of the witnesses, the examination of the accused

Under Section 313 Cr.P.C is dispensed with. From the above, it is clear that absolutely there is no evidence on record to show that the accused. Hence, the accused is entitled for acquittal.

11. In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence U/Sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC, accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec. 255 (1) of CrPC. The bonds and bail bonds executed by the accused shall stands cancelled after six month.

Dictated to Typist, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in

the open court on this the 28th day of June, 2019.

Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION:-

Pw.1: U.Shashirekha:Complainant/wife of deceased

Pw.2: T.Gopal Reddy: Eye witness to the incident.

EXHIBITS MARKED

Ex.P1 : Written information

Ex.P2: 161 statement of PW1

Ex.P3 : 161 statement of PW2

FOR DEFENCE: -Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur.

CC. No.57/2014 Dt:28.06.2019

C A L E N D A R E X T R A C T

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, THORRUR

C.C.NO. 57 / 2014

1. Name of the Complainant : PS Rayaparthy

2. Name of the Accused : Enagandula Sambaiah,

3. Offence under section : U/s.304- A, 337 of IPC

4. Date of offence : 11.08.2013

5. Date of complaint : 11.08.2013

6. Date of arrest : 20.08.2013

7. Date of release : 20.08.2013

6. Date of Commencement of trial : 27.06.2019

7. Date of closure of trial : 27.06.2019

8. Date of Judgment : 28.06.2019

9.Finding of the Court : In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence U/Sec. 304-A, 337 of IPC, accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec. 255 (1) of CrPC. The bonds and bail bonds executed by the accused shall stands cancelled after six month.

10.Explanation for delay::Due to non-production of the witnesses in time, the delay is caused in disposal of this case.

Dis.No.Date:

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Thorrur. To

The Hon’ble I-Addl. District and Sessions Judge,

Warangal.

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge

AT THORRUR ,WARANGAL

(Presided Over by M. Saritha)

CC/39/2017

PS.Nellikudur Through Police Station Officer Nellikudur P.S 137, PS.Nellikudur

THORRUR WARANGAL

PS.Nellikudur VERSUS Bhukya Hathiram Age: 45 Kesamudram village and Mandal Mahabubad District.

2:Guguloth Nanu Mecharajupally of nellikudur mandal.

3:Gandu Veeraiah Mecharajupally of Nellikudur mandal.

4:Badavath Yaka Peddathanda Mecharajupally of nellikudur mandal.

5:Kondamangali Somla Jamathanda of Nellikudur mandal.

6:Vankudoth Ravi kumar Rangapuram Kesamundra mandal ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: APP, Advocate for Sri.P. Yankambarm appearing for Bhukya Hathiram Advocate ,

ORDER

Accused No.1 to 6 are present. The voluntarily came forward to admit their guilt in this case. Hence, proceeded for examination U/sec.239 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly after furnishing copies to them, they are examined U/Sec.239 of CrPC explaining the substance of the accusation leveled against them for the offence U/sec.379 of IPC, Sec.181 of MV Act against A1 to A6 and pleaded guilty for the above said offence. This court accept the plea of the accused as true and voluntary one, without there being any threat, coercion or duress. Hence, This court find the accused guilty of the offences U/Sec. 379 of IPC and convict them for the same U/Sec. 241 of CrPC. Heard the accused on the quantum of sentence, they pleaded mercy on the ground that they committed mistake and they further children and old aged parents and they are the only person to look after their family and now they are repenting for their mistake. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, the accused No.1 to 6 are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) for the offence U/sec.379 of IPC and A1 to A6 are further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each (Rupees five hundred only) for the offence Sec.181 M.V. Act. In case of default of payment of fine, they shall suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months each. Total fine amount is Rs.33,000/- (Rupees Thirty three thousand only). The bonds of accused shall stands canceled forthwith. No property.

(M. Saritha) Junior Civil Judge

THORRUR WARANGAL

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge

AT THORRUR, MAHABUBABAD

CC/177/2023 (PROSECUTION): State of Telangana of PS. Maripeda Through Police Station Officer Maripeda P.S 21 , Maripeda Maripeda Circle Igp, Warangal Region Mahabubabad

THORRUR WARANGAL

State of Telangana of PS. Maripeda VERSUS

Shiva Kumar Pulasani Age: 23 R/o. Gajiredipally, Kadiri village and Mandal, Satyasai District, AP.

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 05-05-2023)

ORDER

Accused is produced from District Jail Khammam and he is examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C. and framed the charges under section 457, 380 of IPC, read over and explained to the accused in telugu, for which he pleaded guilty. Accused is convicted under Section 241 of The Code of Criminal Procedure and Sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months Ten days (3 months 10 days ) for the offence under Section 457 and to pay fine of Rs.50/-, in default to pay the fine amount, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for ten days and further Sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months Ten days ( 3 months 10 days) for the offence under Section 380 and to pay fine of Rs.50/-, in default to pay the fine amount, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for ten days. The remand period already undergone by the accused shall be set off u/s. 428 of Cr.P.C. The unmarked case property which was already given vide Crl.M.P.No.112/2023 shall be made absolute after expiry of appeal time.

Date : 05-05-2023 Junior Civil Judge

THORRUR MAHABUBABAD

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS