Currently Serving

Sri M.Satish Kumar

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex · Sangareddy · Telangana

Sri M.Satish Kumar, Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy, is posted at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex, Sangareddy, Telangana, India. 39 court orders on record since 2026. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CRLMP, F, EP cases.

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

CRLMP.BAIL/1000242/2026

State of Telangana, PS. Narayankhed vs Shaik Nizam

15 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT ::

SANGAREDDY

PRESENT: Sri M.Satish Kumar Family Judge-cum-IV Addl District and

Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Friday, the 15th Day of May, 2026

Crl.MP. No. 242 of 2026

in

Cr.No. 84 of 2026

P.S. Narayankhed BETWEEN: Shaik Nizam S/o. Shaik Ali, Age: 63 years, Occ: Driver, R/o. H.No. 8-4-549/287, Nethaji

Nagar, Erragadda, Hyderabad. ...Petitioner/Accused No.6

AND The State of Telangana,

through SHO, P.S Narayankhed. ...Respondent/Complainant

This Petition is coming on before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Mirza Shoeb Baig, Counsel for Petitioner/Accused No.6 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

:: ORDER ::

1. This Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of bail to the

Petitioner/Accused No.6 for the offences punishable under Sections 305 (b), 111 of BNS &

Section 25 (1) (1A) of Arms Act – 1959 in Cr.No.84 of 2026 of P.S Narayankhed. The

Petitioner/Accused No.6 was remanded to judicial custody on 04-05-2026.

2. The counsel for the petitioner argued that Petitioner/Accused No.6 is innocent, he did not commit any crime, he is falsely implicated in this case, hence prayed the court to allow the petition.

3. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor filed counter and opposed the bail and prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

5. Now the point for consideration is whether the Petitioner/Accused No.2 is entitled for grant of bail as prayed for?

POINT:

6.The petitioner is accused No.6 for the offences U/sec. 305 (b), 111 of BNS &

Section 25 (1) (1A) of Arms Act 1959 in Cr.No.84 of 2026 of P.S Narayankhed and

Petitioner/accused has been remanded to judicial custody since 04-05-2026.

7.The case of the prosecution is that, this is a case of "Theft of transportation vehicles (Eicher, DCM, Tipper) and organized crime and also illegal possession of fire arms (country made) and ammunition, knives. Accused No.6 is the member of organized gang and other accused possess deadly weapons and commit theft of vehicle in

Maharashtra and Karnataka state and sell the same vehicles in Telangana State and

Vehicles committed theft in Telangana State will sell in Karnataka and Maharashtra state to mislead the police. On 09.04.2026 at 23.00 hrs near Jal Ganesh (Shekar) tire puncture shop at Manoor X road, Narayankhed town, Sangareddy District. Accused No.1 & 2 has committed theft of DCM No. AP28-TE-3708 which was parked near Shekar (Jal Ganesh) tire puncture shop, Manoor X road, Narayankhed town and Accused No.6 used to receive the stolen property of A1, A2 through A6 and A8 and Accused No.6 sold the stolen property by scrab and taken share of amount.

8.The counsel for the Petitioner/Accused No.6 filed a judgment Nagamma @

Nagarathna Vs State of Karnataka, Dt: 22-09-2025 of Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein

Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Crl.Appeal NO.425 of 2024 that:-

Section 25 of the Evidence Act mandates that no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence and Section 26 also restricts any confession by a person in the custody of a police officer from being proved against him unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate. In State of Criminal Appeal No.425 of 2014 U.P. v. Deoman Upadhyaya6, this Court had considered the impact of Section 25 and 26, in paragraph 7, from which the relevant portion is extracted herein below:

3 “The expression, "accused person" in Section 24 and the expression "a person accused of any offence" have the same connotation, and describe the person against whom evidence is sought to be led in a criminal proceeding. As observed in

Pakala Narayan Swami v. Emperor by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, "Section 25 covers a confession made to a police officer before any investigation has begun or otherwise not in the course of an investigation". The adjectival clause "accused of any offence" "is therefore descriptive of the person against whom a confessional statement made by him is declared not provable, and does not predicate a condition of that person at the time of making the statement for the applicability of the ban. Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act by its first paragraph provides "No confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a police officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence". By this section, a confession made by a person who is in custody is declared not provable unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate”.

9.But as per the remand case diary, the allegations against the

Petitioner/Accused No.6 is grievous in nature and investigation is still pending.

Considering the serious allegations against the Petitioner/Accused No.6, this court is not inclined to allow the petition at this stage.

In the Result, the Petition is Dismissed. (Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 15 th Day of May, 2026)

FAMILY JUDGE-CUM-IV ADDL

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

SANGAREDDY

Copy to:

1. JFCM, Narayankhed

2. Mirza Shoeb Baig, Advocate for Accused No.6

CRLMP.BAIL/1000241/2026

State of Telangana, PS. Narayankhed. vs Syed Sayeed

15 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT ::

SANGAREDDY

PRESENT: Sri M.Satish Kumar Family Judge-cum-IV Addl District and

Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Friday, the 15th Day of May, 2026

Crl.MP. No. 241 of 2026

in

Cr.No. 84 of 2026

P.S. Narayankhed BETWEEN:

A-5: Syed Sayeed S/o. Syed Rasheed, Age: 32 years, Caste: Muslim, Occ: Driver, R/o. Arsh Mahal, Kishanbagh, Hyderabad. A-7: Mohammed Saleem S/o.Sharfuddin, Age: 50 years, Occ: Scrap Business, R/o. Asha Residency, IDA

Jeedimetla, Hyderabad. ...Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7

AND The State of Telangana, through SHO, P.S Naraynakhed.

...Respondent/Complainant

This Petition is coming on before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Md. Akbar Ali, Counsel for Petitioner/Accused No. 5 & 7 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

:: ORDER ::

1. This Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of bail to the

Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7 for the offences punishable under Sections 305 (b), 111 of

BNS and Section 25 (1) (1A) of Arms Act – 1959 in Cr.No. 84 of 2026 of P.S Narayankhed.

The Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7 were remanded to judicial custody on 04-05-2026.

2. The counsel for the petitioners argued that Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7 are innocent, they did not commit any crime, they are falsely implicated in this case, hence prayed the court to allow the petition.

3. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor filed counter and opposed the bail and prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

5. Now the point for consideration is whether the Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7 are entitled for grant of bail as prayed for?

POINT:

6.The petitioners are accused for the offences U/sec. 305 (b), 111 of BNS and

Section 25 (1) (1A) of Arms Act 1959 in Cr.No.84 of 2026 of P.S Narayankhed and

Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7 has been remanded to judicial custody since 04-05-2026.

7.The case of the prosecution is that, this is a case of "Theft of transportation vehicles (Eicher, DCM, Tipper) and organized crime and also illegal possession of fire arms (country made) and ammunition, knives. Accused No.5 & 7 are members of organized gang and other accused possess deadly weapons and commit theft of vehicle in

Maharashtra and Karnataka state and sell the same vehicles in Telangana State and

Vehicles committed theft in Telangana State will sell in Karnataka and Maharashtra state to mislead the police. On 09.04.2026 at 23.00 hrs near Jal Ganesh (Shekar) tire puncture shop at Manoor X road, Narayankhed town, Sangareddy District. Accused No.1 & 2 has committed theft of DCM No. AP28-TE-3708 which was parked near Shekar (Jal Ganesh) tire puncture shop, Manoor X road, Narayankhed town and Accused No.5 & 7 used to receive the stolen property of A1, A2 through A6 and A8 and Accused No.5 & 7 sold the stolen property by scrab and taken share of amount equally.

As per the remand case diary, theallegations against the

Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7 are grievous in nature and investigation is still pending.

Considering the serious allegations against the Petitioner/Accused No.5 & 7, this court is not inclined to allow the petition at this stage.

In the Result, the Petition is Dismissed.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 15 th Day of May, 2026).

FAMILY JUDGE-CUM-IV ADDL

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

SANGAREDDY

Copy to:

1. JFCM, Narayankhed

2. Md.Akbar Ali, Advocate for Accused.

CRL.MP/1001026/2026

State of Telangana, PS. Ameenpur vs Vanne Haribabu

19 May 2026

1 of 3

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT ::

SANGAREDDY

PRESENT: Sri M.Satish Kumar Family Judge-cum-IV Addl District and

Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

TUESDAY, THE 19th DAY OF MAY, 2026

Crl.M.P.No. 26 of 2026

IN

Cr.No. 753 of 2026

(P.S Ameenpur)

Between:

Vanne Hari Babu, S/o. Venkateshwarlu, Age: 41 years, Occ: TTI (Travelling Ticket Inspector), R/o. Plot No.45, Road No.2, Srujan Laxmi Nagar Colony, Beeramguda,

Ameenpur, Sangareddy....Petitioner/Accused No.2

A N D The State of Telangana

Through , SHO, PS, Ameenpur. ...Respondent/Complainant

PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 483 (1) (b) OF BNSS

This Petition is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri G.Ravinder Goud, Advocate for Petitioner/Accused No.2 and

Sri.B.Sree Ramulu, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent/

Complainant upon perusing the material on record having heard, both sides and having stood over for consideration the court made the following:

:: O R D E R ::

1. This petition is filed under Section 483 (1) (b) of BNSS, by the

Petitioner/Accused No.2 praying to relax the condition of attendance before the P.S

Ameenpur on every Monday and Saturday after 12.00 hours till further order imposed by this court in Crl.MP. 52 of 2026, Dt.06-03-2026.

2. The brief averments of the petition are that, the petitioner/accused in a

TTI (Travelling Ticket Inspector) and the Petitioner/Accused no.2 had approached his Employer i.e. Railway Authorities (Divisional Commercial Manager) on 2 of 3 07-04-2026 for revokal the Deemed Suspension but the Railway authorities (Divisional Commercial Manager) had not considered his request and issued a proceeding Vide No.BZA/Comm/Non-vig/Sus/01/2026 stating that in view of "conditional bail " granted by this court and since the nature of ticket checking duties to be performed by the petitioner as TTI on revocation and the said copy is filed for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble court. The Petitioner/Accused No.2 is the only bread earner of his family, as such the said condition imposed by this court may be released or else he will be put to hardship as such prayed to relax the said condition.

3. Notice given to learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and he opposed to allow the petition.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

5. Now the point for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for?

POINT:

6. As seen from the record, this court granted bail to the Petitioner/Accused

No.2 in Crl.MP.No.52 of 2026 in Crime No. 753 of 2026 on 06-03-2026 directing the

Petitioner/Accused No.2 to attend the SHO, concern on every Monday and

Saturday after 12.00 hours, till further orders. As per the above said orders, the

Petitioner/Accused No.2 has been attending the SHO concerned on every Monday and Saturday and sincerely complying the orders of this Court.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of counsel for Petitioner/Accused No.2, the bail condition of the Petitioner/Accused

No.2 to appear before the SHO, P.S. Ameenpur is modified.

3 of 3

8. In the Result, the petition is partly allowed and the Petitioner/Accused

No.2 is directed to attend before the SHO, P.S Ameenpur on every Sunday between 10-00 a.m to 12-00 noon till filing of charge sheet.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19 th Day of May, 2026.

IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge Sangareddy

Copy to:

1. Prl. JFCM, Sangareddy

2. Sri G.Ravinder Goud, Advocate for Petitioner/Accused No.2

3. SHO, PS Ameenpur

4. Superintendent, Central prison at Kandi, Sangareddy.

CRLMP.BAIL/1000236/2026

State of Telangana, PS. Hathnoora vs Chittari Dasharath

18 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT ::

SANGAREDDY

PRESENT: Sri M.Satish Kumar Family Judge-cum-IV Addl District and

Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Monday, this the 18th day of May, 2026

Crl.MP. No. 236 of 2026

in

Cr.No.98 of 2026

P.S. Hathnoora BETWEEN:

A-1: Chittari Dasharath S/o. Late Narsimulu, Age: 46 years, Caste: Budugajangam, Occ: Pvt Job, R/o. Mucherla Village. A-2: Chittari Mukesh S/o. Dasharath, Age: 18 years, Caste: Budugajangam, Occ: Student, R/o. Mucherla Village. A-3: Chittari Srinivas S/o. Late Dasthagiri, Age: 29 years, Caste: Budugajangam, Occ: Driver, R/o. Venkatreddynagar, Now Mucherla Village,

Hathnoora Mandal, Sangareddy District. ...Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3

AND The State of Telangana,

through Jinnaram Circle of P.S Hathnoora. ...Respondent/Complainant

This Petition is coming on before me for hearing in the presence of M/s. V.Prabhu, Counsel for Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

:: ORDER ::

1. This is Second Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 352

R/w 3 (5) of BNS in Cr.No. 98 of 2026 of P.S Hathnoora. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3 were remanded to judicial custody on 10-04-2026.

2. The counsel for the petitioners argued that Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3 are innocent, they did not commit any crime, they are falsely implicated in this case, hence prayed the court to allow the petition.

3. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor filed counter and opposed the bail and prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

5. Now the point for consideration is whether the Petitioner/Accused No.

1 to 3 are entitled for grant of bail as prayed for?

POINT:

6.The petitioners are accused No.1 to 3 for the offences U/sec. 109, 352 R/w 3 (5) of BNS in Cr.No.98 of 2026 of P.S Hathnoora and Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3 has been remanded to judicial custody since 10-04-2026.

7.The case of prosecution is that, on 03-04-2026, the grand son of complainant/Chittari Durgaiah namely Nihal was attacked by a stray dog and when the

Durgaiah tried to rescue his grand son Nihal that, stray dog attacked him also, upon which to protect them, he hit that stray dog, later that dog ran way and after few hours that stray dog died, due to which the Accused No.1 to 3 came to the house of Durgaiah abused and attacked them with iron rods and knifes, due to which the Durgaiah sustained bleeding injuries.

As per the remand case diary, theallegations against the

Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3 are grievous in nature and investigation is still pending. Considering the serious allegations against the Petitioner/Accused No.

1 to 3 and there is no change in the circumstances, this court is not inclined to allow the petition at this stage.

In the Result, the Petition is dismissed.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 18 th day of May, 2026)

FAMILY JUDGE-CUM-IV ADDL

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

SANGAREDDY

Copy to: All concerned

CRLMP.BAIL/1000237/2026

State of Telangana, PS. Sangareddy Rural vs Pathri Naresh

15 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT ::

SANGAREDDY

PRESENT: Sri M.Satish Kumar Family Judge-cum-IV Addl District and

Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Friday, Dated this the 15th day of May, 2026

Crl.MP. No. 237 of 2026

in

Cr.No. 317 of 2026

P.S. Sangareddy (R) BETWEEN:

Pathri Naresh S/o. Late Narsimulu, Age: 38 years, Caste: Budigejangam, Occ: Labour, R/o. Near Yellamma Kucha, Pitlam Village, Kamareddy District.

...Petitioner/Accused

AND The State, through P.S. Sangareddy Rural.

...Respondent/Complainant

This Petition is coming on before me for hearing in the presence of

Sri N.Krishna, Counsel for Petitioner/Accused and the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor for the State and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

:: ORDER ::

1. This Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail to the

Petitioner/Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302 of IPC in Cr.No.317 of 2024 of P.S Sangareddy Rural. The Petitioner/Accused was remanded to judicial custody on 04-04-2026.

2. The counsel for the petitioner argued that Petitioner/Accused is innocent, he did not commit any crime, he is falsely implicated in this case, hence prayed the court to allow the petition.

3. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor filed counter and opposed the bail and prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

5. Now the point for consideration is whether the Petitioner/Accused is entitled for grant of bail as prayed for?

POINT:

6.The petitioner is accused for the offences U/sec. 302 of IPC in Cr.No. 317 of 2024 of P.S. Sangareddy Rural and Petitioner/accused has been remanded to judicial custody since 04-04-2026.

7.The case of the prosecution is that, on 19-06-2024 at 17.30 hours, the petitioner/accused and deceased/Jalagadige Chanti went to Kisansagar tank bond at

Kandi village and Mandal and together consumed beer and meanwhile scolding was taken place between them and in the tussle deceased caught hold the shirt of accused and torn off, due to which the accused became furious and took a stone and beat on the head and nearby right side ear of the deceased with force, due to which the deceased fell down and died on the spot.

As per the remand case diary, theallegations against the petitioner/accused are grievous in nature and investigation is still pending.

Considering the serious allegations against the petitioner/Accused, this court is not inclined to allow the petition at this stage.

In the Result, the petition is dismissed.

(Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 15 th day of May, 2026)

FAMILY JUDGE-CUM-IV ADDL

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

SANGAREDDY

Copy to:

1. Addl. JFCM, Sangareddy 2.Sri N.Krishna, Advocate for Accused.

Order Record 27 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CRL.MP/1001026/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Ameenpur vs Vanne Haribabu	19 May 2026	Petition is partly allowed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000236/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Hathnoora vs Chittari Dasharath	18 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000237/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Sangareddy Rural vs Pathri Naresh	15 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000241/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Narayankhed. vs Syed Sayeed	15 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000242/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Narayankhed vs Shaik Nizam	15 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000244/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Narayankhed. vs Mohammad Jaffar Ali	15 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLRP/2/2026	Boga Vijay Bhaskar vs Ch.Rajyalaskhmi	14 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
MVOP/79/2024	Rohan vs Kalivala Yadagiri	13 May 2026	Petition is partly allowed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000240/2026	State of Telangana, PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Syed Tasaduq/Md. Tasaduq	13 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000229/2026	State of Telangana in Cr.No. 104 of 2026 P.S Hathnoora vs Kondi Nagesh	11 May 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000230/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Patancheru in Cr.No. 506 of 2026 vs B. Saikiran Goud	11 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
SC/208/2022	State of Telangana P.S. Sadasivpet vs Vs1. Methari Anil Raj	08 May 2026	Acquitted	—
F.C.O.P/33/2025	Nulka Sanjeev kumar vs Pupala Karuna Kumari	08 May 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000218/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Hathnoora in Cr.No. 218 of 2026 vs Neeruidi Rathnaiah	07 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000223/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Koheer in Cr.No. 27 of 2026 vs Palle Ravi	07 May 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
F.C.O.P/31/2025	Raikode Rajendar vs Thalelma Gayathri	05 May 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000205/2026	State of Telangana of Cr.No. 134 of 2026 of P.S Zaheerabad vs Syed Tasaduq alias Md. Tasaduq	29 Apr 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000188/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Ameenpoor in Cr.No. 139 of 2026 vs Kandikanti Raji Reddy @ Raju Reddy	28 Apr 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000189/2026	State of Telangana of p.S Hathnoora in Cr.No. 98 of 2026 vs Chittari Dasharath	28 Apr 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
F.C.O.P/27/2025	Dubbas Sridhar Raju vs D.Nandana Kumari	27 Apr 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
F.C.O.P/28/2025	Patlolla Sai Kiran Reddy vs Chinoori Saidivya Reddy	27 Apr 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/100187/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Patancheru in Cr.No. 506/2026 vs Buneti Saikiran Goud	24 Apr 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
EP/52/2025	Md Athique vs M/s National Insurace Company Ltd	22 Apr 2026	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000172/2026	State of Telangana of Cr.No. 27/2026, P.S Koheer vs Palle Ravi	20 Apr 2026	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/100141/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Narayankhed in Cr.No. 41 of 2026 vs Vakdoth Mena Bai	17 Apr 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/100145/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Narayankhed in Cr.No. 41 of 2026 vs Nunawath Sudheer Kumar	17 Apr 2026	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000132/2026	State of Telangana of P.S Kalher in Cr.No. 11/2026 vs Naikoti Pandari	17 Apr 2026	Petition is allowed.	—

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		16
Apr 2026		23

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri M.Satish Kumar handled?

Sri M.Satish Kumar has handled 39 court orders since 2026 at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 28 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri M.Satish Kumar hear?

Based on available records, Sri M.Satish Kumar primarily handles Civil matters (Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases, CRL) and Motor Accident matters (Motor Accident Claims) at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Sri M.Satish Kumar currently posted?

Sri M.Satish Kumar is posted as Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex, Sangareddy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Sri M.Satish Kumar available online?

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

How fast does Sri M.Satish Kumar dispose cases?

Sri M.Satish Kumar disposes approximately 28 cases per month, based on 39 orders handled over their tenure at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Sri M.Satish Kumar serving?

Sri M.Satish Kumar has been serving at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex since 2026. and is currently posted there.

Case Types

CRLMP 69%

F 13%

EP 8%

SC 3%

CRLRP 3%

CRL 3%

MVOP 3%

Posting History

Apr 2026 — Present

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy · 39 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. G.bhavani Chandra

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

412 orders

Smt. K. Jayanthi,

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangare...

2,402 orders

Smt D.Madhavi Krishna

Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs and ST...

42 orders

Smt. R. Sreelekha

Fast Track Sessions Court for expeditious disposal...

25 orders

Mrs. T Durga Rani Kalidindi

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

710 orders

Ms. Amishi Jajiyan

Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for trial o...

3 orders

Salma Fatima

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

19 orders

Smt Dhana lakshmi

I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Additional...

1,673 orders

DVR Tejo Karthik

Principal Senior Civil Judge -cum-Assistant Sessio...

513 orders

Deepti

Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Assis...

294 orders

← View all judges at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex