SC No. 50 of 2023 1/35
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE AT ASIFABAD
Present: - Mr. M.V.RAMESH,
Principal Sessions Judge
THURSDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026. [గురువారం� - విశ్వా�వసు నామ సం�వత్స�రం�-మాఘమాసం� శ్వాలివాహన శకం�-1946 సం�వత్స�రం�]
SESSIONS CASE No. 50 of 2023
(In Crime No.114 of 2018 of Chinthalamanepalli Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 304-II r/w 34 IPC and Section 135 of the Electricity Act ,2003 against the Accused No.1 to 4)
COMPLAINANTACCUSED
State represented by the Circle: A1: Sriram Mandal @ Ravi Mandal Inspector of Police, Kowtala. S/o. Chitharanjan Mandal @ Pagal Mandal,Age:38years, Caste:Khatriya, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Village No.1, Ravindranagar, Chinthalamanepalli Mandal of K.B. Asifabad District.
A2: Roop Kumar Mandal S/o.Chindi Charan Mandal, Age:36 years, Caste:Khatriya,Occ:Coolie, R/o.Village No.1, Ravindranagar, ChintalamanepalliMandalof K.B.Asifabad District.
A3: Ram Mandal S/o.Arvind Mandal, Age:30 years, Caste:Khatriya, Occ: Agriculture,R/o.VillageNo.1, Ravindranagar,Chintalamanepalli Mandal of K.B.Asifabad District
A4:KeenaMandalS/o.Niranjan Mandal, Age: 48 years, Caste: Khatriya,Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Village No.1,Ravindranagar, ChintalamanepalliMandalof K.B.Asifabad District
Prosecution conducted by Mr. G.: Accused No.1 to 4 are defended by Jagan Mohan Rao, PublicMr. Dheeraj Boumik, Advocate Prosecutor for the State- Complainant.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 2/35
Nature of offences: Sec.304-II IPC : Culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Sec.34 IPC: When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003:Theft of electricity . Plea of the accused: Pleaded not guilty.
Finding of the Sessions Judge: Found guilty. SENTENCE OR ORDER : In the result, A1 to A4 are found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 304-II r/w 34 IPC and Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and accordingly A1 to A4 are convicted under Section 235(2) Cr.P.C.
for the aforesaid Charge. MOs. 1 to 4, being worthless, shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time. The following sentences are ordered to meet both ends of justice.
i) A1 to A4 each are sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of SEVEN years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only), each in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of THREE months for the offence punishable under Section 304-II r/w 34 IPC; and ii) A1 to A4 each are sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of THREE years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only), each in default to suffer Rigorous
Imprisonment for a period of TWO months for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.Total fine of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only)
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 3/35
: J U D G M E N T :
CORPUS DELICTI (GIST OF THE OFFENCE) :
1.Shortly stated, the accusation levelled against the accused No.1 to 4 in the Final Report filed under Section 173 CrPC by the Circle-Inspector of
Police, Kowtala-PW15, is that this is a case of culpable homicide not amounting murder of one Sukumar Roy S/o.Prasanth Roy, Age:32 years,
Caste:Khatriya, Occ: Agriculutre, R/o.Village No.1, Ravindranagar of
Chinthalamanepalli Mandal (for short ‘the deceased’), causing disappearance of evidence of the offence, and steeling of electricity power occurred on 15.09.2018 at 23-30 hours at the outskirts of village
No.1, Ravindranagar, wherein A1 to A4 have erected electric binding wire with the help of cotton small sticks for hunting wild animals, as a result of which, the deceased unfortunately came into contact with the said live electric wire and succumbed to electric burn injuries and that thereby the accused No.1 to 4 are liable for the offences punishable under Sections 304-II r/w 34 IPC & Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 209 CrPC:
2.The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Asifabad, before whom the
Final Report filed Under Section 173 Cr.P.C., after observing the procedural wrangles under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Asifabad, as the offence punishable under
Sections 304-II r/w 34 IPC and Section 135 of the Electricity Act is
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 4/35
exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions Division, Asifabad and the same was registered as S.C.No.50 of 2023.
EXAMINATION OF THE ACCUSED & FRAMING OF CHARGES UNDER
SECTION 228 (1)(b)(2) CrPC :
3.On appearance of the Accused No.1 to 4, on consideration of the entire material available on record, as it is not a fit case to discharge, charges for the offences punishable under Section 304-II r/w 34 of IPC &
Section 135 of the Electricity Act against the Accused No.1 to 4, framed and explained to them in Telugu language. To which, they have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried for the charge framed.
EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT :
4.To prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as (15) witnesses i.e., PW1 to PW15 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P18 and Mos.1 to MO.4 in support of the case.
EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 313 (1) (b) Cr.P.C. :
5.After completion of the examination of the witnesses for the prosecution, the accused No.1 to 4 were examined under Section 313 (i)
(b) Cr.P.C., explaining the incriminating circumstances that are appearing in the evidence of the prosecution and the accused No.1 to 4 have denied the evidence and pleaded not guilty.
6.POINTS FOR DETERMINATION :
1Whether prosecution could bring home the guilt of A1 to A4 beyond all reasonable doubts for the charges punishable under Sections 304-II r/w 34 of IPC & Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act in this Sessions Case? 2To what sentence and compensation?
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 5/35
POINT No.1:
7.Before adverting to the ocular, documentary, and circumstantial evidence, apart from real evidence adduced by the prosecution, let us have a quick look to the cardinal principles of Criminal law-‘Burden of proof and Doctrine of Innocence’.
BURDEN OF PROOF & DOCTRINE OF INNOCENCE :-
8.It is settled proposition of law as laid down in Babu vs. State
Keralaof [2011 (2) ALT (Crl.) - (275) (SC)]. That in Criminal law every accused is presumed to be innocent unless the guilt is proved. Presumption of innocence is a human right.
9. Adding to the above, Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, deals with the principles of fair trial and it envisages “every one charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he had all the guarantees necessary for his defence”.
DEFENCE OF THE ACCUSED:
10.The plea of A1 to A4 is one of total denial and that a false case was foisted against the accused. It is urged that the hostile evidence of PWs 3 to 5, material contradictions, inconsistencies, variations in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, improper and defective investigation are fatal to the case of the prosecution and A1 to A4 are entitled to the said benefits of doubt and consequential acquittal.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 6/35
KEY WITNESSES TESTIMONY
11.PW1, who is no other than wife of the deceased, deposed that the deceased-Sukumar Roy was her husband who was killed on 15.09.2018.
LW.2-Prasanth Roy & LW.3-Shushma Roy are her parents-in-law, LW.4-
Bidhan Roy is her brother-in-law. LW.5-Bidhan Mandal is her younger brother. she knows LW.6-Marneni Sathaiah, LW.8-Sathyajith Mandal
Barkandas, LW.9-Sanjay Mandal, LW.10-Rakesh Goldhar, LW.11-Manojith
Roy, LW.12-Anil Rapthan, LW.13-Amal @ Amar Roy, LW.14-Sudangshu
Mandal & LW.15-Karthik Sardar. She knows A1 to A4 who are also residents of same village-Village-I, Ravindranagar. On 15.09.2018 at about 07.00 PM her husband-deceased left the house for agricultural field of
Marneni Sathaiah-LW.6 for irrigating the paddy crop from the water tank.
Later on at about 11.00 PM the deceased made a phone call to LW.2, father of the deceased to bring the blankets to the paddy field as he is feeling cold.
12. PW1 further deposed that thereafter her father-in-law-LW.2 and her younger brother-LW.5 left the house along with the blankets to go to paddy field of Sathaiah. At that time when the deceased along with LW.6-
Marneni Sathaiah left the field, proceeded towards roads in order to receive the blankets while they were going towards the roads and reached in between boundary of Sriram Mandal-A1 and Anil Rapthan-
LW.12, the deceased came into contact with live binding wire erected to the field for hunting the wild animals which was connected to the main
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 7/35
live line as a result of which her husband sustained injuries to his both legs, hands, chest, etc., and whereas Marneni Sathaiah escaped unhurt and informed to her over phone. Herself, LW.2, LW.5 and others rushed to the scene of offence and noticed her husband lost consciousness, shifted him to LW.10-RMP at Village No.1, Ravindranagar for treatment, LW.10 examined him and declared brought dead. Thereafter dead body was shifted to her house. A1 to A4 are responsible for the death of her husband as they have erected the sticks, binding wire connected to the main live line for hunting wild animals. Thereafter she gave a report-Ex.P1 to the police.
13.PW2, who is no other than brother-in-law of the deceased, deposed that he knows the deceased-Sukumar Roy who was his brother-in-law. He knows A1 to A4 as they are residents of Village No.1, Ravindranagar. He know PW1, LW.2-Prasanth Roy, LW.3-Shushma Roy, LW.4-Bidhan Roy,
LW.8-Sathyajith Mandal Barkandas, LW.9-Sanjay Mandal, LW.10-Rakesh
Goldhar, LW.11-Manojith Roy, LW.12-Anil Rapthan, LW.13-Amal @ Amar
Roy, LW.14-Sudangshu Mandal & LW.15-Karthik Sardar. The deceased was vendor of Oil Engine Bore-well Motor for the farmers. On 15.09.2018 at 07.00 PM the deceased left the house for agricultural field of LW.6-
Marneni Sathaiah with the Oil Engine Motor. Later on at 11.00 PM the deceased made a phone call to his father-LW.2 asking him to bring the blankets to the field as he is feeling cold. Himself and LW.2 left the house with blanket to go to the said paddy field, while the deceased & LW.6 came opposite wards to receive the blankets. Meanwhile when they
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 8/35
reached the boundary of A1 & LW.12 the deceased came into contact with live binding wire erected to the field for hunting wild animals which was connected to the main live line of 11 KV Transformer. A1 to A4 have erected the said live electric wire. As a result of which the deceased sustained burn injuries to the legs, hands, etc. Later on when they intended to take the deceased to the hospital, Sukumar Roy succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter the dead body was shifted to his house. A1 to A4 are responsible for the death of Sukumar Roy. Police have examined him and recorded his statement. LW.6-Marneni Sathaiah escaped unhurt in the said incident. PW1 gave a report to the police. Witness identified
Ex.P3-photographs of the deceased with burn injuries.
VERACITY OF THE ORAL TESTIMONY OF PW1, PW2 R/W Ex.P1 TO
Ex.P3:
14.At the outset, from the cross-examination of PW1, PW2 several beneficial points have been elicited which are further substantiating the sum and substance of Ex.P1-report given by PW1, who set the criminal law into motion. PW1 in her cross-examination deposed that she is a signatory in English language and she can understand Telugu language though she is not proficient to read and write Telugu language. PW1 also admitted in categorical terms that she has stated before the learned Magistrate-LW23 while recording statement under Section 164 CrPC, after the incident her brother-in-law-PW6 and other villagers when enquired with A3, A3 confessed about the offence committed along with (3) others and the same is marked as Ex.D1. Therefore Ex.D1 is not a contradiction and it is
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 9/35
in tune with her evidence in chief examination. PW1 also clarified and voluntarily stated that the said Amar Roy is the cousin brother of the deceased. She do not remember who drafted Ex.P1. PW1 also stated in the same cross-examination that her father-in-law-LW2 and her brother-
PW2 have taken two blankets to the scene of offence on a motorcycle to comply the phone call of the deceased. Within half an hour PW3 called her father-in-law over phone.
15. PW further deposed that after reaching the scene of offence in the morning police came there. Of course, PW1 also fairly deposed that she is not an eye witness to the incident but the surrounding farmers have seen the activities of A1 to A4. Thus the oral testimony of PW1 is consistent with her version in Ex.P1 and in her chief examination and supporting the case of the prosecution pointing out the individual overtacts of A1 to A4 in arranging the said offending binding wire, tapping the electricity for hunting wild animals and the said offending and incriminating acts of A1 to A4 are having direct nexus with the cause of death of the deceased and since PW3 was just following the deceased at some distance and so he escaped unhurt in the said incident and it is PW2 who informed about the incident to PW1.
16.The learned counsel for the accused contended that PW1 on recall at the closure of trial subsequently, deposed that she do not know the name of the scribe of Ex.P1 who has translated the same into Telugu language. She do not know the contents of Ex.P1. She do not know the
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 10/35
cause of death of her husband and A1 to A4 are not responsible for the death of her husband and therefore since she denied her thumb impression and signature in Ex.P1 and in FIR-Ex.P18, A1 to A4 are entitled to the said benefits of doubt and the oral testimony of PW1 is not reliable in nature.
17.On total assessment of the testimony of PW1 religiously, prima- facie, the said belated plea of the accused is devoid of merits and truth for the reason that when PW1 was confronted with her previous statement by the learned Public Prosecutor in the further cross-examination that she has given evidence on 05.08.2024 both in chief and cross-examination in this Court on receipt of summons from this Court and it is her voluntary statement. She also admitted in categorical terms that it is true having entered into compromise with the accused now she has deposed retracting from her previous deposition, dated 05.08.2024 and turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. Thus the said statement of PW1 further approving the case of the prosecution and the oral testimony of
PW1 recorded on 05.08.2024 is true version, natural, reliable and trustworthy in nature and since she was won over by the accused at belated stage on 29.12.2025 she has deposed retracting her previous statement. Therefore the said subsequent conduct of PW1 is ignorable, not reliable and it is not relevant in appreciating the evidence of PW1 and
Ex.P1 to Ex.P3.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 11/35
18.PW1 also in her further cross-examination, deposed that she is blessed with two sons and one daughter and her children are now under the care and protection of her father-in-law-LW2 and father of the deceased for the past five years. Further she has added that her in-laws harassed her and so she left the company of her in-laws about five years ago and since LW.2 also tutored her children negatively about her. Thus by exhibiting the said conduct of PW1 in her later cross-examination which is tainted and tutored by the accused is for extraneous considerations and so it will not affect the credibility of her testimony both in chief and cross- examination, dated 05.08.2024.
19.Further, the oral testimony of PW2 is in corroboration with the evidence of PW1 and he is not only an eye witness but also important circumstantial witness as the deceased at 11.00 P.M on the date of incident made a phone call to his father-LW2 asking him to bring blankets at the field as he is feeling cold. On the said phone information given by the deceased PW2 and father of the deceased-LW2 left the house with blankets to go to the said paddy field. While the deceased and PW3 came opposite wards to receive the blankets, meanwhile when they reached the boundary of the land of A1 and PW4 the deceased came into contact with live binding wire erected to the said field for hunting wild animals which was further connected to the main live electric line of 11 KV Transformer.
So the oral testimony of PW2 that A1 to A4 have erected the said live electric wire and they are responsible for the death of the deceased is in
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 12/35
tune with the case of the prosecution and supporting the same in all aspects.
20. Virtually nothing was elicited from the cross-examination of PW2 and further PW2 deposed in his cross-examination that he can understand
Telugu language a little bit though he cannot read and write Telugu language comprehensively. He has not given the said blankets to the police. Merely because he do not know the boundaries of the land at the scene of offence that alone is not a ground to discard his oral testimony and absolutely PW2 has no enmity with A1 to A4 to speak falsehood as he is no other than the father of the deceased and also an eye witness to the occurrence. Thus the oral testimony of PW2 is also quite natural, reliable and trustworthy in nature.
VERACITY OF THE ORAL TESTIMONY OF PW.3 TO PW.7 INCLUDING THE
OFFENDING LAND OWNERS.
21.Though PW3 who is an eye witness to the occurrence narrated the manner of incident in tune with the case of the prosecution and also stated that he is following the deceased at some distance and so he escaped unhurt in the said incident but he has simply deliberately deposed that he do not know who erected the said binding wire to the electrical pole and who are responsible for the said offending acts. PW3 though partially did not support the case of the prosecution but in his cross-examination deposed that he cannot identify his Left Thumb
Impression in Ex.P5-Section 164 CrPC statement recorded by the learned
Magistrate. PW3 also admitted in his cross-examination that he has stated
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 13/35
before the learned Magistrate the name of Ram Mandal i.e., A1 as
responsible person for the incident.
22.PW4 is one of the neighbor field owner at the scene of offence and also circumstantial witness to the incident and he also deposed in corroboration with the evidence of PWs1 & 2 in respect of the manner of incident and simply stated that he do not who erected the offending binding wire in between the fields while admitting that in between his land and A1’s land there is a road and the incident occurred at their lands.
So the evidence of PW4 is only helpful to the limited extent that the said offending binding wire was erected between the boundary of his land and the land of A1, as a result of which the deceased received electric shock injuries and died. So also the evidence of PW5-another circumstantial witness and neighbor of the deceased, deposed that the deceased occupation was of irrigating crops from the water tanks through diesel engine on hire basis. On the night of the incident he came to know that the deceased died due to electric shock and injuries due to the electric binding wire erected for hunting wild animals between the land of PW4 and A1. His evidence is also useful to the limited extent that when himself and PW6, LW15 were proceeding on the road they met A3 and they have questioned him about the incident. A3 has not disclosed the manner of occurrence. Thus PW5 also won over by the accused and so he turned hostile to the case of the prosecution at the instance of the accused.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 14/35
23.Coming to the evidence of PWs.6 &7, PW6 is no other than the relative of the deceased and the deceased was cousin brother of PW6.
PW6 deposed that on 15.09.2018 the said Sukumar Roy died due to electric shock injuries due to binding wire erected at the field of PW4 & A1 for poaching the wild animals as the deceased on the date of incident left the village for arranging diesel engine for irrigating the lands of PW3 from the water tank on hire basis. While the deceased was returning to collect blankets due to cold weather he came into contact with the offending binding wire connected to the electric pole and received burn injuries to his legs. On the phone information given by PW3 about the incident PW6 rushed to the scene of offence and noticed the dead body of Sukumar
Roy. The deceased was shifted to one Rakesh, RMP-LW.10. Himself, PW5 & LW.15 went to the house of A3 who is residing nearby and questioned him, A3 made an extra judicial confession that A1 to A4 have erected the offending binding wire and connected to the electric pole, tapped the electricity for poaching the wild animals and A1 to A4 are responsible for the death of Sukumar Roy. Meanwhile when he was busy with helping the deceased family members, A3 left the village and remained absconding.
Police have examined him and recorded his statement.
24.PW7, who is no other than the neighbor of the deceased, deposed that on the date of incident the deceased left the house for agricultural field of PW3 along with Oil Engine for irrigating the crops. Later on at about 11.00 PM PW3 informed to the father of the deceased-LW.2 that the deceased died due to electric shock injuries due to erecting of binding
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 15/35
wire in between the fields of PW4 & A1 for protecting the crops in the field from the wild pigs. Himself, PW2 and LW.9-Sanjay Mandal have shifted the deceased to LW.10-RMP for treatment and LW.10 declared that he is brought dead. The said Sukumar Roy sustained electric shock injuries. Later on he came to know from villagers that the accused are responsible for the death of Sukumar Roy. Police have examined him and recorded his statement.
25.The oral testimony of PW6 is helpful to the case of the prosecution since himself, PW5 and LW15 went to the house of A3 who is residing near by and questioned him. A3 has made an extra judicial confession that A1 to A4 have erected the offending binding wire and connected to the electric pole, tapped the electricity for poaching wild animals and that A1 to A4 are responsible for the death of the deceased.[Emphasis supplied by me] Therefore, the veracity of oral testimony of PW6 is not shaken by the accused in his cross-examination and PW6 further deposed in his cross- examination that on the next day police called him and recorded his statement. Phone call was received by the father of the deceased-LW2 from the deceased for providing blankets. The police have not seized either the diesel oil engine or any blankets from the scene of offence.
Thus the oral testimony of PW6 is quite natural, reliable and trustworthy in nature and absolutely he has no enmity with the accused to speak falsehood. Further the extra judicial confession made by A3 before PW6,
PW5 and LW15 is also relevant and admissible in nature under Section 30
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 16/35
of the Evidence Act as it is not hit by any coercion, inducement or threat and since it is voluntary in nature.
26.So also the oral testimony of PW7, another villager and who helped the deceased family members in shifting the dead body also is in corroboration to the case of the prosecution in respect of manner of the incident, place of the incident, date and time of the incident and the location of the scene of offence. In the cross-examination PW7 deposed that the wife of the deceased-PW1 called him to the scene of offence.
PW7 also fairly deposed that he has not seen the manner of incident and who erected the offending binding wire to the said fields. Thus the oral testimony of PW6, PW7 are also quite helpful to the case of the prosecution and the said evidence is also reliable in nature and not tainted one. Therefore the oral testimony of PWs 3 to 7 is also consistent to the case of the prosecution and forming important link in the chain of the prosecution.
VERACITY OF THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE:
27.PW10, Dr. G. Hymavathi the then Civil Assistant Surgeon, deposed that on 16.09.2018 she received a requisition from SHO,
Chinthalamanepalli Police Station in Crime No.114 of 2018 of
Chinthalamanepalli Police Station to conduct autopsy over the dead body of Sukumar Roy, male, 32 years old. On the same day she has conducted
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 17/35
autopsy over the dead body and noticed the following ante-mortem injuries over the dead body :
1. Entry wound – electric burn injury present over both feet.
2. Exit wound – electric burn injury present over both hands.
3. Ante-mortem electric burn injury of size 12X15 Cm in length and 2X4 cm in width with bone deep laceration present over right knee present with black in clour and everted margins.
4. Ante-mortem electric burn injury of size 15X18 cm in length and 2X4 cm in width with bone deep laceration present over left knee present with black in colour and everted margin present.
5. Around 5X6 cm peeling of skin present over abdomen.
6. Contusion measuring around 4X3 cm present over right thigh region.
7. Contusion measuring around 2X3 cm present over left thigh region.
8. Around 4X5 cm peeling of skin present over left side of the chest region.
After completion of the postmortem examination she has issued
Postmortem Examination Report-Ex.P15 opining that the cause of death is due to electrocution and the approximate time of death is 24 hours prior to postmortem examination.
28.Virtually nothing was elicited from the cross-examination of PW10 either to discredit her testimony or the observations and findings rendered in Ex.P5- Postmortem Examination Report and it is clinchingly establishing that the cause of death of the deceased is due to electrocution and the approximate time of death is 24-00 hours prior to the postmortem examination. Thus the cause of death of the deceased is homicidal one not amounting to murder and it is not natural death.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 18/35
VERACITY OF THE INVESTIGATION:
29.PW13, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, deposed that on 16.09.2018 at 07.30 a.m. PW1 came to the Police Station and presented Ex.P1 and he has registered the same as a case in Cr.No.114/2018 u/Sec.304-II r/w 34
IPC, Sec.135 of the Electricity Act and issued express FIRs-Ex.P18 to all the concerned. He took up investigation, examined PW1 and recorded her statement. Thereafter the CD file was transferred to the CI of Police,
Kowtala Circle since it is grave crime.
30. PW14, the then Circle Inspector of police, deposed that on 16.09.2018 he took up investigation in this case from PW13, verified the
FIR and investigation and found it on correct lines. On the same day he visited the first crime scene i.e., field of the deceased situate at
Ravindranagar village outskirts, observed the scene of offence, summoned PW8 & LW.17, incorporated the details in Crime Details Form-
I, drawn the rough sketch of the scene of offence-Ex.P10 attested by the mediators. During the Ex.P10 proceedings they have seized MO.1-200 meters of binding wire and (40) small cotton plants stems wooden sticks-
MO.2 were seized.
31.PW14 also voiced that on the same day i.e., on 16.09.2018 he has proceeded to Ravindranagar village outskirts at the house of the deceased, observed the scene of offence, prepared Crime Details Form-II, drawn the rough sketch of the scene of offence-Ex.P9 attested by the
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 19/35
mediators. He has visited the house of the deceased at Ravindranagar village and noticed the dead body of Sukumar Roy. They have taken (5) photographs-Ex.P3 and videographs of the deceased. He has secured the presence of LWs.2 to 4, PWs.2 & 3, LW.7, examined them and recorded their statements. In the presence of PW8 & LW.17 held inquest over the dead body and got prepared the inquest panchanama-Ex.P11 attested by the mediators. He has sent the dead body to the Government Hospital,
Sirpur-T for postmortem examination. He gave a requisition to PW11-
Addl. AE, Electricity Department for power supply and PW11 issued
Ex.P16-reports along with log book extract. Thereafter since Regular CI joined, the CD file was transferred to LW.26-CI of Police, Kowtala Circle for further investigation.
32.PW15, the then Inspector of Police deposed that, on 17.09.2018 he took up investigation in this case from PW14, verified the same and found it on correct lines. On the same day he has visited the scene of offence situate at Village No.1, Ravindranagar of Chinthalamanepalli mandal, secured the presence of PW7, LW.9, LW.10, examined them and recorded their statements. During the course of investigation on 26.09.2018 A1 &
A2 have surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sirpur-
T, voluntarily, the learned Magistrate send them to the judicial custody.
On 27.09.2018 on reliable information about the absconding A3 & A4 he rushed to the Village No.1, Ravindranagar near Forest Office at 16-00 hours he has apprehended A3 & A4. He has secured the presence of PW9,
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 20/35
LW.19, interrogated them, A3 & A4 have confessed about the offence committed along with A1 & A2. Pursuant to the confession made by the accused, A3 & A4 lead them to the newly constructed building of
Sudhansan Mandal @ Babu where A3 & A4 hidden binding wire and sticks and the same was seized under a cover of confession and seizure panchanama-Ex.P12 & Ex.P13. It is (50) meters iron binding wire-MO.4 and (10) small sticks-MO.3. He effected the arrest of A3 & A4 and send them to the Court for judicial remand.
33.PW15 further deposed that on 28.09.2018 he has secured the presence of PW5, PW6, LW.15, examined them and recorded their statements and he has collected PostmortemExamination Report from the Medical Officer, report from the Addl. Assistant Engineer, Electricity in respect of the power supply, he has given requisition to the Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial, for recording the statements of
PW1, PW3 u/Sec.164 Cr.P.C. and accordingly LW.23-the learned Magistrate recorded the statements of PW1 & PW3 u/Sec.164 Cr.P.C. he has collected
Land Ownership particulars-Ex.P17 from the Tahsildar, Chinthalamanepalli mandal-PW12. After completing the investigation he laid charge-sheet against A1 to A4 for the offences punishable u/Secs.304-II r/w 34 IPC &
Sec.135 of the Electricity Act as this is a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder of the deceased-Sukumar Roy by stealing the power.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 21/35
VERACITY OF ARREST OF A1 TO A4 R/W DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
LEADING TO THE DISCOVERY OF MATERIAL OBJECTS UNDER SECTION
27 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT:
34.In support of the apprehension of the accused, seizure of incriminating material objects (MO3 & 4) pursuant to the confession made by the accused, the prosecution has got examined PW9, one of the mediators for confession and seizure panchanama. PW9 has deposed that he is working as Forest Beat Officer, Karjelli Range, Balajianukod Section,
Chinthalamanepalli mandal. Previously he worked as such at Sirpur Range,
Kowtala Section from August, 2018 to 31.07.2024. PW9 deposed that on 27.09.2018 the Circle Inspector of Police, Kowtala Circle called him and
LW.19 to the Forest Office, Ravindranagar and noticed A1-Sriram Mandal & A3-Ram Mandal (witness identified A1 & A3 who were standing in the
Court along with A2 & A4) in the police custody. The police have interrogated them in their presence, the accused confessed about the offence committed along with other two accused as a result of which one
Sukumar Roy died in the incident occurred on 15.09.2018 at the outskirts of village No.1, Ravindranagar. Pursuant to the confession made by the accused, the accused lead them to the newly constructed building at
Village No.1, Ravindranagar and the accused have pointed out (50) meters iron binding wire-MO4 and (10) small sticks-MO.3 and the same was seized under a cover of seizure panchanama-Ex.P13 attested by him and LW.19-B.
Eshwar. He has attested the confession panchanama-Ex.P12 and seizure panchanama. It is true on 27.09.2018 he has noticed A3-Ram Mandal & A4-
Keena Mandal in the Police Station, the Circle Inspector of Police
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 22/35
interrogated them, the accused confessed about the offence committed along with A1 & A2. Pursuant to the confession made by A3 & A4, they have lead them to the newly constructed building of one Sudhan Sun
Mandal where A3 & A4 pointed out MOs.3 & 4 and the same was recovered.
35.Virtually nothing was elicited from the cross-examination of PW9 either to discredit his testimony and the veracity of Ex.P12 to Ex.P14 r/w
Mos.3 and 4, except PW9 fairly stated at present that there are no panch slips on Mos 3 & 4. The signatures of A3 and A4 were not obtained in the confession panchanama as well as seizure panchanama i.e., Ex.P12,
Ex.P14. Thus as per the testimony of PW15 the final Investigating Officer that during the course of investigation on 26.09.2018 that one day prior to arrest of A3 and A4, A1 & A2 have surrendered before the Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Sirpur-T voluntarily and so the learned
Magistrate of Sirpur-T sent them to the remand for judicial custody.
36.Factually speaking PW9 is no other than the then Forest Beat
Officer, Sirpur-Range, Kowtala section and another mediator-LW19 is also the then Village Revenue Assistant of Rudrapur village and absolutely they have no enmity with the accused and they are independent public servants and so their evidence is quite reliable and trustworthy in nature.
Though not the confession made by A3 and A4 is not admissible in the evidence, the disclosure statement made by A3, A4 leading to the discovery of Mos.3 and 4 at newly constructed building at Village No.1,
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 23/35
Ravindranagar and seizure of Mos. 3 and 4 under Ex.P13 is relevant and admissible in evidence under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Merely because the panch slips on Mos.3 and 4 were detached due to efflux of time and merely because the signatures of A3 and A4 were not obtained in the confession panchanama as well as seizure panchanama that alone is not a ground to discard the oral testimony of PW9, PW12 to
PW14, Mos.3 and 4 r/w evidence of the final Investigating Officer-PW15.
37.Equally nothing was elicited from the cross-examination of PW15 to discredit his testimony, arrest of A3 & A4 and seizure of Mos.3 and 4 under
Ex.P13. The accused cannot expect any door number to the newly constructed building and hence the door number of the said building was not mentioned in Ex.P13 for want of door number. It was elicited that the said newly constructed building belongs to one Sundanshu Mandal.
Adding to the above the voluntary surrender of A1 and A2 before the
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sirpur-T on 26.09.2018 is also relevant
fact and it is A1 to A4 who have erected the binding wire in between the fields of A1 and PW 3 and PW4.
38.In this case equally nothing was elicited from the cross-examination of PW13 and PW14-First & Second Investigating Officers. PW13 who has registered the case and issued Ex.P18-FIR deposed in his cross- examination that he knows Hindi language and PW1 has given statement in Telugu and Hindi mixed languages. He has translated the Hindi version
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 24/35
of PW1 into Telugu language and recorded the statement of PW1. In
Ex.P1 PW1’s signature and thumb impression were appended.
39.PW14-Second Investigating Officer deposed that now and then they conduct patrolling duty from Chinthalamanepalli village to Ravindranagar- village No.1 onwards. He also fairly deposed that it is true in Ex.P1 the name of A4 was not mentioned as suspect. The evidence of PW14 coupled with the evidence of PW8 who is also the then Forest Section Officer,
Karjelli Range, who acted as one of the mediators for conducting scene observations panchanama at both the scene of offenses and for conducting inquest panchanama over the dead body. PW8 along with
LW17-Ashok, Village Revenue Assistant of Babapur village have accompanied the Investigating Officer-PW14 to the scene of offence and where the Investigating Officer observed the scene of offence and got prepared Ex.P9 & Ex.P10- CDF and drawn rough sketch of the scene of offence.
40.Moreover, the evidence of PW8 is also leading to the fact that after conducting CDF-I & II and drawing rough sketch of the scene of offence under Ex.P9, Ex.P10 at the house of the deceased and at the paddy fields at the outskirts of Ravindranagar village No.1 the police have conducted inquest panchanama over the dead body of the deceased at his house and accordingly PW8 attested Ex.P11-inquest panchanama, and therefore the oral testimony of PW8 coupled with Ex.P9 & Ex.P10 and seizure of MO1- (200) meters of binding wire, MO2-(40) small and thin wooden pegs
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 25/35
(approximate height is (2) feet) from the scene of offence are supporting the case of the prosecution in toto and the seizure of the said Mos.1 and 2 is also incriminating the role of the offenders. Further in the cross- examination PW8 categorically deposed that the police have called him orally and no written requisition was issued to him. He has not signed any panch slips for seizure of Mos 1 and 2. Merely because there is no time and date mentioned in Ex.P3- Photographs that alone is not a ground to discard the oral testimony of PW8 and Ex.P3, Ex.P9 to Ex.P11 and it is also lending support to the case of the prosecution.
VERACITY OF TAPPING OF THE ELECTRICITY UNDER SECTION 135 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT:
41.PW11, Assistant Engineer, TGNPDCL, Bejjur Section and in-charge of
Kowtala Section deposed that he know LW.21-Md. Sadiq Mia and he can identify his hand writings and signatures and he is hospitalized due to ill health for the past six months. On 16.10.2018 LW.21 received requisition from the Circle Inspector of Police, Kowtala Circle to inspect the scene of offence where one person was electrocuted in this case and give a report.
Accordingly LW.21 visited the scene of offence situate at Village No.1,
Ravindranagar of Chinthalamanepally mandal, inspected the scene of offence and furnished report along with attested copy of logbook extract to the effect that there was power supply from the supply line of 11
KV/440 on 16.09.2018 at 23-30 hours at the feeder channel at the scene of offence.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 26/35
42.The oral testimony of PW11 coupled with Ex.P16-Report of the Addl.
Assistant Engineer, (Electricity OP Section), Kowtala NPDCL along with attested copy of logbook extract, dated 14.09.2017-Friday (by oversight 14.09.2017 was mentioned instead of 14.09.2018), 15.09.2018-Saturday at the relevant date and time clinchingly establishes that there was power supply from supply line of 11 KV/440 on 16.09.2018 at 23-30 hours at the feeder channel at the scene of offence. Thus the oral testimony of PW11,
Ex.P16 is also forming link in the chain of prosecution and having nexus to the fact that the offenders tapped the electricity, to the erection of binding wire-MO1 with the help of MO2-wooden pegs at the pady fields at the outskirts of Ravindranagar village No.1 and as a result of which the deceased came into contact and died.
VERACITY OF THE LOCATION OF THE SCENE OF OFFENCE AND
OWNERSHIP OF THE OFFENDING FIELD OF A1:
43.PW12, Bikarna Das, the Tahsildar of Bheemini Mandal, Mancherial district deposed that he can identify LW.22’s-Nadeem Ulla Khan, hand writings and signatures, who died in harness on 04.02.2023 pending the
SC. PW12 deposed that he worked in Chinthalamanepalli Mandal as
Tahsildar from 30.07.2020 to 16.09.2021 and so he can identify the signatures and hand writings of LW22. PW3 deposed with the help of the record in this case. LW.22 received requisition from the Circle Inspector of
Police, Kaghaznagar I/c. Kowtala Circle, calling for the land particulars of field of A1 in Crime No.114/2018 of Chinthalamanepalli Police Station.
LW.22 having verified the Online Record and issued Ex.P17-letter bearing
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 27/35
No.C/4/2019, dated 26.02.2019 stating that the land in an extent of
Ac.5-00 in Sy.No.133/234 belongs to one Sriram Mandal (A1) and his brothers-Ashutosh Mandal, Paritosh Mandal and Robin Mandal each Ac.1- 25 Cents of land as per the E-Sewa Records and pahani issued by the
Village Revenue Officer of Ravindranagar village.
44.The evidence of PW12 coupled with Ex.P17 also remained unchallenged and PW12 is no other than the Tahsildar, Bheemini Mandal currently and worked in Chinthalamanepalli Mandal as Tahsildar from 30.07.2020 to 16.09.2021 and so he identified LW22’s hand writings and signatures as LW22 the then Tahsildar of Chintahalamanepalli who died in harness on 04.02.2023 who issued Ex.P17. The oral testimony of PW12 coupled with Ex.P17 authored by LW22 the then Tashildar indicating that
A1 posses Ac.5-00 of land in Sy.No.133/234 along with his brother-
Ashutosh Mandal, Paritosh Mandal each Ac.1-25 cents of land as per the
E-seva record and Pahani issued by the village Revenue Officer of
Ravindranagar village at the scene of offence. It is never the case of A1 that some unknown offenders erected the said binding wire and tapped the electricity for poaching the wild animals and as such it is A1 to A4 being the offenders who committed the offence lead to the homicidal death of the deceased, which is not amounting murder, therefore, A1 to
A4 have consciously arranged the said binding wire, tapped the electricity and as such all the charges punishable under section 304-II r/w 34 IPC and
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 28/35
Section 135 of the Electricity Act, have been proved beyond all reasonable doubts.
45.The learned counsel for A1 to A4 relied on certain rulings during the course of oral arguments, without submitting the said rulings for reference, and contended that signatures of A3, A4 were not obtained in the confession panchanama, that correction of date in the confession panchanamas covered by Ex.P12, Ex.P14, that the panch witnesses examined are interested officials, non-examination of independent witnesses and since there is no direct evidence connecting incriminating role of A1 to A4 the accused are entitled to the said benefits of doubt and consequential acquittal. In the instant case as per the evidence of
PW9, who is no other than the then Forest Beat Officer, Karjelli Range, coupled with the evidence of the Investigating Officer-PW15, arrest of A3,
A4 taken place on 27.09.2018 and both the witnesses have fairly deposed that the date of arrest of A3, A4 was mentioned as 17.09.2018 by oversight, instead of 27.09.2018 and in view of the said explanation the date mentioned by oversight alone is not fatal to the case of the prosecution and consequent arrest of the accused and remanding them to the judicial custody by the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate is sufficient that the date mentioned as 17.09.2018 instead of 27.09.2018 it is by oversight and on that ground alone the accused cannot claim the major benefit of acquittal.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 29/35
46.Moreover, PW9 is a responsible public servant-Forest Beat Officer and absolutely he has no enmity with the accused to speak falsehood.
Further merely because the signatures of A3, A4 were not obtained by the
Investigating Officer in Ex.P12 to Ex.P14 that alone is not a ground to discard the relevant portions of confession and seizure panchanamas, as obtaining the signatures of the accused in the confession panchanamas is only optional one. Thus the contentions of the accused that there is no menserea in arranging the offending binding wire, that the chain of prosecution broken at every material link is without any merits and valid grounds. Accordingly, this Court has no other alternative except to answer the point as against the accused No.1 to 4 and infavour of the prosecution.
RESULT:
47.In the result, A1 to A4 are found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 304-II r/w 34 IPC and Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and accordingly A1 to A4 are convicted under Section 235(2) Cr.P.C.
for the aforesaid Charge.
MOs. 1 to 4, being worthless, shall be destroyed after expiry of the appeal time.
Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed by him, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 5 th day of February, 2026.
On Godly Service SIGN
PRL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
ASIFABAD
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 30/35
HEARD THE ACCUSED & PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ON THE QUANTUM OF
SENTENCE:
48.Heard A1 to A4 as regards to quantum of sentence to be imposed against them.
1)A1 who is 43 years old, stated that he is eaking out his livelihood as a street vendor of snacks. He is married and blessed with two children and has to look after his wife and children. He studied upto 6th standard. He possess Ac.1-25 cents of land and one small house.
2)A2 who is 41 years old, stated that he is eaking out his livelihood as
Centring worker. He is married and blessed with two children. He do not possess any agricultural land but possess one house. He studied upto 1st standard.
3)A3 who is 32 years old, stated that he is eaking out his livelihood as
Centring worker. He is married and blessed with three sons. He possess Ac.0-50 cents of land and residential house.
4)A4 who is 50 years old, stated that he is eaking out his livelihood as a agricultural coolie. He is married and blessed with two sons and two daughters. He possess Ac.5-00 of land. A1 to A4 have stated with one voice that there is no past criminal record against them and therefore pleads for a lenient view.
QUANTUM OF SENTENCE :
49.Heard A1 to A4 and the learned counsel for the accused as regards to quantum of sentence to be imposed against A1 to A4 for the aforesaid
Charges proved as well as the learned Public Prosecutor representing the
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 31/35
State and the victim and as a result of the illegal acts committed by A1 to
A4 and since one person died due to electric shock injuries, it is not a fit case to take a lenient view but having regard to the educational, cultural, social background of A1 to A4 apart from family obligations, the following sentences are ordered to meet both ends of justice.
i) A1 to A4 each are sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of SEVEN years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only), each in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of THREE months for the offence punishable under Section 304-II r/w 34 IPC; and ii) A1 to A4 each are sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of THREE years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only), each in default to suffer Rigorous
Imprisonment for a period of TWO months for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003
Total fine of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only)
50.It is needless to say that A1 to A4 are entitled to the statutory benefit provided under Section 428 Cr.P.C and the remand period already undergone by A1 & A2 from 26.09.2018 to 12.12.2018, A3 & A4 from 28.09.2018 to 29.11.2018 shall be given set off in the term sentence imposed. The substantive sentences imposed for the offences punishable under Sections 304 Part-II r/w 34 IPC and Section 135 of the Electricity Act shall run concurrently. However, this Court makes it very clear that the
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 32/35
accused shall first undergo the default sentences imposed before commencement of the substantive sentences u/Sec. 31 Cr.P.C.
51.A1 to A4 are also informed their right to prefer an appeal against the Judgment before the Hon’ble High Court for the State of Telangana.
They are also informed their right to claim free-legal-aid in the event of the accused does not possess necessary financial means to engage an advocate to prefer an appeal. The Registry of the Principal District and
Sessions Court, Asifabad is directed to furnish authenticated copy of
judgment to A1 to A4 at free of cost under Section 363(1)CrPC.
ORDER TO PAY COMPENSATION U/S.357 Cr.P.C
52.Out of the fine amount realized, a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) is ordered to be paid to children of the deceased who are now under the care and protection of LW2 & LW3-grand parents of the children, since PW1 deserted the children about more than 5 years ago as admitted by her, in defraying the expenses incurred in the prosecution under Section 357(1)(a) Cr.P.C., payable after expiry of appeal time.
VICTIM COMPENSATION SCHEME U/S.357-A CrPC.
53.Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and invoking the provisions under Section 357-A CrPC, the victim-PW1 needs to be compensated for her physical and mental trauma caused to her, apart from proper rehabilitation and therefore it is a fit case to grant suitable comprehensive compensation to be paid to the victim-PW1. The
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 33/35
Secretary, DLSA, Asifabad, is directed to determine suitable comprehensive compensation in coordination with other departments the
Secretary DLSA, Asifabad, shall see that the victim-PW1 get the determined compensation at an early time, to meet both ends of justice.
Dictated to Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by
me in the open Court on this the 5th day of February, 2026.
On Godly Service SIGN
PRL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
ASIFABAD
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION
PW1: (LW1): Sheela Roy: Complainant, Wife of the deceased
PW2: (LW5): Bidhan Mandal: Brother-in-lawofthe deceased and circumstantial witness
PW3: (LW6): Marneni Sathaiah: Eye witness to the incident
PW4: (LW12) : Anil Rapthan: Neighboring field owner of the scene of offence and circumstantial witness
PW5: (LW14) : Sudangshu Mandal: Brother of wife of the deceased
PW6: (LW13) : Amal @Amar Roy: Brother of wife of the deceased
PW7: (LW8): Sathyajith Mandal : Villager who brought the Barkandasdead body of deceased to Medical Clinic
PW8: (LW16) : Iqbal Mohiuddin, forest : Panch witness for inquest Section Officerand CDF panchanama
PW9: (LW18) : Alam Prabhakar, Forest : Confession&seizure Beat Officer, Kowtalapanchama of A3 and A4
PW10 : (LW20) : Dr.G.Hymavathi, MD, Civil : Medical officer conducted Surgeon, Government autopsy over the dead body Hospital, Sirpur-Tof the deceased and issued detail PME report
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 34/35
PW11 : (LW-): R.Anjal Kumar, : Assistant Engineer, TGNPDCL
PW12 : (LW22) : Bikarna Das, Tahsildar: Tahasildar, Bheemini Mandal, Mancherial district
PW13 : (LW24) : N.Raj Kumar, Sub-: Investigating Officer who Inspector of police, registered the case and Kaghaznagar Rural recorded the statement I/c.Kowtala
PW14 : (LW25) : N.Prasad Rao, Circle-: InvestigatingOfficer Inspector of Police, examined and recorded the Kaghaznagar Rural, statements of LWs2 to 7 and I/C.Kowtalaheld inquest over the dead body of the deceased and seized (200) miters of bind wire and (40) small sticks of cotton
PW15 : (LW26) : D.Mohan, Circle-Inspector : Investigating Officer who of Police, Kowtalafiled charge-sheet
WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF DEFENCE : NONE
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION
Ex.P1:16.09.2018: Telugu written report, given by PW1 to the SHO, Chinthalamanepalli Police Station (one sheet)
Ex.P2:02.11.2018: PW1’s signatures in Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement recorded by the learned
Magistrate-LW.23
: (5) postcard size colour photographs of the Ex.P3:16.09.2018 deceased with burn injuries taken at my house along with CD. Ex.P4:02.11.2018 : PW3’s Left Thumb Impression in Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement, recorded by the Prl. Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Asifabad
: A portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of Ex.P5:16.09.2018 PW3 : A portion of Section 164 Cr.P.C statement of Ex.P6:02.11.2018 PW3 : Entire portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement Ex.P7:17.09.2018 of PW4 : Entire portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement Ex.P8:28.09.2018 of Pw5 : Crime Details Form-II along with rough sketch Ex.P9:16.09.2018 of the scene of offence, Ex.P10 :16.09.2018: Crime Details Form-I along with rough sketch of the scene of offence
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF
SC No. 50 of 2023 35/35
Ex.P11 :16.09.2018: Inquest panchanama, in Cr.No.114/2018 of Chinthalamanepalli Police Station.
Ex.P12 :17.09.2018: Relevant portion of confession panchanama of A3, (in the confession panchanama date was mentioned as 17.09.2018)
Ex.P13 :17.09.2018: Seizure panchanama, 27.09.2018: Relevant portion of confession statement of Ex.P14 : A4, (but in the document the date was wrongly mentioned as 17.09.2018 in all the confession panchanamas and seizure panchanama) Ex.P15 :16.09.2018: Postmortem Examination Report, issued by me in Cr.No.114/2018 of Chinthalamanepalli Police Station
Ex.P16 :14.09.2018: Report of the Addl. Assistant Engineer, Electricity OP Section, Kowtala NPDCL along with attested copy of logbook extract (by oversight 14.09.2017 was mentioned instead of 14.09.2018), 15.09.2018-Saturday at the relevant date and time
Ex.P17 :26.02.2019: Letter bearing No.C/4/2019, along with E-Sewa pattedhar pahani copy issued by the Tahsildar, Chinthalamanepalli village in Cr.No.114/2018 of Chinthalamanepalli Police Station
Ex.P18 :16.09.2018: First Information Report in Cr.No.114/2018 u/Sec.304-II r/w 34 IPC, Sec.135 of the Electricity Act
EXHIBITSMARKEDONBEHALFOFDEFENCE
Ex.D1: Relevant portion in Sec.164 CrPC statement, dt.02.11.2018 MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:
(200) meters of binding wire MO.1
MO.2(40) small and thin wooden pegs approximate height is (2) feet
MO.3(10) small sticks
MO.4(50) meters iron binding wire
On Godly Service SIGN
PRL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
ASIFABAD.
05.02.2026 Prl. S.J, ASF