Sri. N. Jesu Ratna Kumar

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

OF I CLASS (EXCISE) :: ELURU.

Present: Sri N.Jesu Ratna Kumar, B.Sc., LL.M.,

Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class (Excise) Eluru. Wednesday, this the 10th day of April, 2013.

C.C.No.130/2010

(Cr.No.25 of 2010 of Eluru Women Police Station)

Between

The State: Sub-Inspector of Police Eluru Women Police Station. … Complainant.

and

1. Jakamsetti Ramu, S/o.Late J.Venkateswara Rao, Age: 30 years, Caste: Settibalija, R/o.Ramalayam street, Chinarangadupalem, Bhimavaram Mandal.

2. Jakamsetti Ganga, W/o.Late J.Venkateswara Rao, Age: 50 years, Caste: Settibalija, R/o.Ramalayam street, Chinarangadupalem, Bhimavaram Mandal.

3. Gubbala Venkata Lakshmi, W/o.G.Yedukondalu, Age: 28 years, Caste: Settibalija, R/o.Ramalayam street, Chinarangadupalem, Bhimavaram Mandal. … Accused.

This case is coming on 09.04.2013 for final hearing before me, in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the state, and of Sri G.V.P.Rama

Rao, Advocate for A-1 to A-3, perusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the argument on both side thiscourt delivered the following order:

J U D G M E N T

1. This case is tried against A-1 to A-3 for the offence under section 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act.

2. The conspectus of the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of P.W.1 with A-1 was solemnised on 31.8.2003. At the time of marriage, parents of P.W.1 gave an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards dowry and an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards Adapaduchu katnam. Parents of P.W.1 also presented three sovereigns of gold, silver articles and house hold articles. After 2 marriage P.W.1 joined accused for conjugal life. A-1 was a taxi driver. P.W.1 and A-1 lived happily for some time. P.W.1 was conceived. Accused did not provide food to P.W.1. All accused harassed P.W.1 physically and mentally with a demand to bring money towards additional dowry. When P.W.1 was 7th month pregnant, she went to her parents’ house. In the absence of P.W.1, accused sell away house-hold articles of P.W.1. After giving birth to a girl baby P.W.1 went back to the house of accused for conjugal life. All accused beat P.W.1 indiscriminately and harassed P.W.1. P.W.1 informed the same to her parents.

A mediation took place in the presence of Junior Paternal Uncle of P.W.1 by name Ketha Ranga Rao and Pala Pandiyya. P.W.1 and A-1 restored their conjugal life. P.W.1 and A-1 lived happily for some time. Again A-1 habituated to bad vices and he used to come to the house in drunken state. A-2 and A-3 and family members of A-1 instigated A-1 to harass P.W.1. In the above circumstances, P.W.1 was again conceived. When P.W.1 was pregnant all accused harassed her without providing food. All accused harassed P.W.1 physically and mentally. When P.W.1 was 4th month pregnant, she went to her parents’ house. She gave birth to a female baby on 22.1.2006. Accused refused to take back P.W.1 for conjugal life. P.W.1 tried to settle the dispute in the presence of mediators. After about three years, with the intervention of market yard chairman Vendra Venkata Swamy, A-1 restored conjugal life with P.W.1.

They started living independently. They lived happily for about 9 months. Again

A-1 to A-3 started harassing P.W.1. They used to beat her indiscriminately. A-2 and A-3 advised A-1 to necked out P.W.1 and to marry another women. A-1 beat PW.1 and necked out from the house. P.W.1 joined her parents along with her children. A-1 started living with his concubine by name Mani. In the above circumstance, P.W.1 lodged Ex.P1, report. Basing on Ex.P1, P.W.4 registered a case in Cr.No.25/10 and issued Ex.P2, FIR. P.W.4 took up investigation and visited Chinna Meram village. P.W.4 secured presence of P.W.1 to P.W.3, L.W.2 (K.Rama Lakshmi), L.W.5 (K.Bhagavannarayana) and recorded their detailed 3 statements. On 17.4.010 at 7.00 A.M., P.W.4 arrested A-1 to A-3 at China

Rangadipalem and produced them before the court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation, L.W.7 (Smt. P.Lakshmi) filed charge sheet against A- 1 to A-3.

3. This case was taken on file under section 498-A read with 34 of

Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of Dowry against A-1 to A-3.

4. Copies of document furnished to A-1 to A-3 in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C. A-1 to A-3 examined under section 239 Cr.P.C. Charge under section 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act were framed against A-1 to A-3, read over and explained to A-1 to A-3 in Telugu under Section 240(2) Cr.P.C. After having understood the same,

A-1 to A-3 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In order to establish the guilt of A-1 to A-3, prosecution examined

P.W.1 to P.W.4. P.W.1 is the de-facto complainant. P.W.2 is younger brother of P.W.1. P.W.3 is neighbour of parents of P.W.1. P.W.4 is Investigating

Officer. Prosecution marked Ex.P1 and Ex.P2. Ex.P1 is report of P.W.1. Ex.P2 is

FIR.

6. After closure of the prosecution evidence, A-1 to A-3 examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. The incriminating evidence adduced by the prosecution is read over and explained to A-1 to A-3 in Telugu. After having understood the same, A-1 to A-3 denied the incriminating evidence and stated that the said evidence is false. A-1 to A-3 reported no evidence in defence.

7. Heard the arguments from both the sides.

4

8. Now, the point for consideration is.

Whether the prosecution has proved guilt of A-1 to A-3 for the

offence under section 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code

and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act beyond all

reasonable doubt or not?

9. POINT: The conspectus of the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of P.W.1 with A-1 was solemnised on 31.8.2003. At the time of marriage, parents of P.W.1 gave an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards dowry and an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards Adapaduchu katnam. Parents of P.W.1 also presented three sovereigns of gold, silver articles and house hold articles. After marriage P.W.1 joined accused for conjugal life. A-1 was a taxi driver. P.W.1 and A-1 lived happily for some time. P.W.1 was conceived. Accused did not provide food to P.W.1. All accused harassed P.W.1 physically and mentally with a demand to bring money towards additional dowry. When P.W.1 was 7th month pregnant, she went to her parents’ house. In the absence of P.W.1, accused sell away house-hold articles of P.W.1. After giving birth to a girl baby P.W.1 went back to the house of accused for conjugal life. All accused beat P.W.1 indiscriminately and harassed P.W.1. P.W.1 informed the same to her parents.

A mediation took place in the presence of Junior Paternal Uncle of P.W.1 by name Ketha Ranga Rao and Pala Pandiyya. P.W.1 and A-1 restored their conjugal life. P.W.1 and A-1 lived happily for some time. Again A-1 habituated to bad vices and he used to come to the house in drunken state. A-2 and A-3 and family members of A-1 instigated A-1 to harass P.W.1. In the above circumstances, P.W.1 was again conceived. When P.W.1 was pregnant all accused harassed her without providing food. All accused harassed P.W.1 physically and mentally. When P.W.1 was 4th month pregnant, she went to her parents’ house. She gave birth to a female baby on 22.1.2006. Accused refused to take back P.W.1 for conjugal life. P.W.1 tried to settle the dispute in the presence of mediators. After about three years, with the intervention of market yard chairman Vendra Venkata Swamy, A-1 restored conjugal life with P.W.1.

They started living independently. They lived happily for about 9 months. Again 5

A-1 to A-3 started harassing P.W.1. They used to beat her indiscriminately. A-2 and A-3 advised A-1 to necked out P.W.1 and to marry another women. A-1 beat PW.1 and necked out from the house. P.W.1 joined her parents along with her children. A-1 started living with his concubine by name Mani. In the above circumstance, P.W.1 lodged Ex.P1, report. Basing on Ex.P1, P.W.4 registered a case in Cr.No.25/10 and issued Ex.P2, FIR. P.W.4 took up investigation and visited Chinna Meram village. P.W.4 secured presence of P.W.1 to P.W.3, L.W.2 (K.Rama Lakshmi), L.W.5 (K.Bhagavannarayana) and recorded their detailed statements. On 17.4.010 at 7.00 A.M., P.W.4 arrested A-1 to A-3 at China

Rangadipalem and produced them before the court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation, L.W.7 (Smt. P.Lakshmi) filed charge sheet against A- 1 to A-3.

10. In order to establish the guilt of A-1 to A-3, prosecution examined

P.W.1 to P.W.4. P.W.1 is the de-facto complainant. P.W.2 is younger brother of P.W.1. P.W.3 is neighbour of parents of P.W.1. P.W.4 is Investigating

Officer.

11. Contents of Ex.P1 disclose that marriage of P.W.1 with A-1 was solemnised on 31.8.2003 and at the time of their marriage, parents of P.W.1 gave an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the accused towards dowry and an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards adapaduchukatnam. Parents of P.W.1 also presented house hold articles and three sovereigns of gold and silver articles. The said transaction took place in the year 2003. In Ex.P1 it is not mentioned that the dowry amount was given on the demand of accused. Except P.W.1, brother of

P.W.1 i.e. P.W.2 and neighbour of parents of P.W.1. i.e. P.W.3, prosecution did not examine any independent witnesses to establish the dowry transaction at the time of marriage of P.W.1 with A-1.

6

12. The evidence of P.W.1 discloses that the accused did not demand for additional dowry. As per the evidence of P.W.1 the harassment of accused was on the ground that P.W.1 was not dutiful and A-1 used to beat her in drunken state. The said allegation of P.W.1 is not attracting the essential ingredients of section 498-A of IPC and the definition of “Cruelty” therein.

13. P.W.1 deposed that when she was 7th month, she was sent to her parents house and accused developed illegal intimacy with a woman by name

Mani. P.W.2 also deposed the same. Except the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 there is no other evidence on record to establish illegal intimacy of A-1 with

Mani.

14. P.W.3 is the independent witness. He is neighbour of L.W.2 (K.Rama Lakshmi) and P.W.2. P.W.3 did not speak about dowry transaction. He deposed that he attend marriage of P.W.1 and A-1. But he did not speak about dowry transaction for quantum of dowry amount. There is no independent evidence to support the evidence of P.W.1 with regard to the dowry transaction.

15. In Ex.P1 it is mentioned that P.W.1 was conceived and all accused harassed P.W.1 without providing food and all accused harassed P.W.1 physically and mentally with a demand to bring money towards additional dowry. P.W.1 deposed that A-1 to A-3, husband of A-3 resided in the same house and when she was conceived accused used to beat her in drunken state and A-1 stated that she was not beautiful and not suit to marry him. P.W.1 further deposed that A-1 used to suspect her chastity and he used to beat her. Contents of Ex.P1 disclose that accused harassed her with a demand to bring money towards

additional dowry. Contrary to this evidence of P.W.1 discloses that when she

was pregnant A-1 harassed her suspecting her chastity and also stating that she is not beautiful and not suit to marry him. The reason for harassment mentioned in Ex.P1 deposed by P.W.1 is not consistent.

7

16. In Ex.P1 it is mentioned that when she was 7th month pregnant, she went back to her parents’ house for delivery. Contrary to this P.W.1 deposed that she was 7th month pregnant she was sent to her parents house.

Contents of Ex.P1 disclose that she went to her parents house. But the evidence of P.W.1 discloses that she was sent to her parents’ house and she came to her parents house. Evidence of P.W.1 is not consistent with the contents of Ex.P1.

17. P.W.1 deposed that accused developed illegal intimacy with a woman by name Mani and in her absence A-1 brought his concubine Mani and A- 2 and A-3 insisted A-1 to harass P.W.1. In Ex.P1 it is mentioned that when she was sent to her parents house for 2nd time delivery, accused developed illegal contact with a women by name Mani. P.W.1 deposed that when she went for delivery for the first time itself A-1 brought his concubine to his house.

Evidence of P.W.1 is not consistent with the contents of Ex.P1.

18. In Ex.P1 it is mentioned that she went to the house of accused along with her daughter and all accused beat her indiscriminately kicked her and harassed her. In Ex.P1 it is further mentioned that she informed to her parents about incident and Junior Paternal Uncle of P.W.1 by name Ketha Rama Rao and another mediator by name Pala Pandiyya conducted mediation and restore conjugal life of P.W.1. Prosecution did not examine Ketha Ram Rao and Pala

Pandiyya. Evidence of independent mediators who are the relatives at the time of dispute is essential to establish mediation.

19. In Ex.P1 it is mentioned that after mediation P.W.1 and A-1 restore their conjugal life and after 2nd month, A-1 used to come to the house in drunken state and beat P.W.1 indiscriminately and she was again conceived. In Ex.P1 it is further mentioned that accused continued to harass P.W.1 and due to the harassment of the accused, she went to her parents’ house when she was 4th month pregnant. In Ex.P1 it is further mentioned that she gave birth to second 8 daughter on 22.1.2006 and accused did not come to visit P.W.1 and accused did not accept for compromise. In Ex.P1 it is also mentioned that after three years a mediation took place before Vendra Venkata Swamy. The said content of Ex.P1 discloses that P.W.1 was with her parents from the date of 2nd delivery for about three years and a mediation took place after three months. Evidence of P.W.1 is silent about three years about P.W.1 staying with her parents for about three years. P.W.1 deposed that they requested elder by name Venkata Swamy and in the presence of elder Venkata Swamy, A-1 accepted to take care of P.W.1 properly. P.W.1 deposed that elder Venkata Swamy compromised the dispute.

Prosecution did not examine the said elder Venkata Swamy. None examination of independent elder is fatal to the case of the prosecution.

20. P.W.1 deposed that accused suspected her and beat her daughter stating that he is not father of her daughter. The date of the incident is not specifically deposed by P.W.1. In Ex.P1 also it is mentioned that A-1 beat P.W.1 stating that he is not father of his daughter. Hence the said allegation is not trust worthy and reliable. P.W.1 deposed that A-1 to A-3 and husband of A-3 were resided in the same house. Contrary to this during cross-examination

P.W.1 deposed that the marriage of A-3 was solemnised about one year prior to her marriage and A-3 is living as tenant in the house of Malli Manikyam. The witness further deposed that there is a street between their house and house of

A-3. There is no consistency in the evidence of P.W.1, as to the residence of A- 3.

21. During cross-examination P.W.1 deposed that accused harassed her when she was residing with them at Bhimavaram. The witness further deposed that Jakkamsetti Kkanthamma, Mahankali were neighbours at

Bhimavaram. The witness deposed that Jakkamsetti Kanthamma was concubine of A-1, as her own relative. The said evidence of P.W.1 discloses that accused harassed P.W.1 and also A-1 was having concubine when they resided at 9

Bhimavaram. Admittedly, P.W.1 did not lodge report against the accused at

Bhimavaram. The said harassment took place at Bhimavaram, which is not within the jurisdiction of this court.

22. P.W.1 during cross-examination deposed that her brother-in-law by name Kodi Gowripathi, Ketha Ranga Rao were present at the time of giving dowry. Prosecution did not examine Kodi Gowripathi, Ketha Ranga Rao in order to establish the dowry transaction.

23. In Ex.P1 it is mentioned that in her presence A-1 to A-3 sell away all her house hold articles. Contrary to this P.W.2 deposed that accused gave house hold articles of P.W.1 to Mani who is concubine of A-1. Evidence of

P.W.2 is not consistent with the contents of Ex.P1.

24. P.W.3 during cross-examination deposed that he came to know about harassment of the accused through L.W.2 (K.Rama Lakshmi). The said evidence of P.W.3 discloses that he is not direct witness for the harassment and he doest not aware of the harassment through P.W.1. Hence evidence of P.W.3 discloses that he is not direct witness.

25. P.W.3 deposed that A-1 accepted to restore conjugal life with

P.W.1 leaving his concubine and hence they left P.W.1 and her two daughters at the house of accused and they came back to Pallam Katlampudi. It shows that

P.W.3 was present at the time of mediation and when P.W.1 and A-1 restored their conjugal life. P.W.1 did not depose about presence of P.W.3 at the time of mediation.

26. Evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.4 is not consistent, cogent and hence not reliable. Prosecution miserably failed to bring home guilt of A-1 to A-3 beyond 10 reasonable doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of A-1 to A-3, as against the prosecution.

27. In the result, A-1 to A-3 found not guilty for the offence under section 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act and A-1 to A-3 are acquitted under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of A-1 to A-3 shall stand cancelled.

Dictated my dictation to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court, this the 10th day of April, 2013.

SPL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

(EXCISE COURT), ELURU.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witness Examined

For Prosecution: For Defence: Nil

P.W.1 : Jakkamsetti Baby

P.W.2 : Ketha Narasimha Rao

P.W.3 : P.Giri Raju

P.W.4 : Smt K.Lakshmi

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence: Nil

Ex.P1 : Report of P.W.1.

Ex.P2 : FIR.

S.J.F.C.M.(E)

Eluru.

11

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT IN C.C.No.130/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE

SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS, EXCISE COURT, ELURU.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Offence Complaint Apprehension Release Taken Commencement Close sentence or report of accused on bail on file of trial of trial of order Prior to 16.04.10 05.07.10 15.05.10 10.07.12 09.04.13 10.04.13 16.04.10 A-1 : 30.04.10 A-2 & A-3 : 28.04.10

Explanation for delay: No avoidable delay took place.

Complainant : The State : Sub-Inspector of Police, Eluru Women Police Station.

S.No. Name of the Father’s name Age Religion Sex Calling Village Mandal Accused

1. Jakamsetti Ramu, S/o.Late J.Venkateswara Rao, 30 years, Settibalija, Male, R/o.Ramalayam street, Chinarangadupalem, Bhimavaram Mandal.

2. Jakamsetti Ganga, W/o.Late J.Venkateswara Rao, 50 years, Settibalija, Female, R/o.Ramalayam street, Chinarangadupalem, Bhimavaram Mandal.

3. Gubbala Venkata Lakshmi, W/o.G.Yedukondalu, 28 years, Settibalija, Female, R/o.Ramalayam street, Chinarangadupalem, Bhimavaram Mandal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence: Under Section 498-A read with 34 of IPC and sec.3 and 4 of DP Act.

Cr.No.25/10

Finding : Not Guilty.

RESULT:A-1 to A-3 found not guilty for the offence under section 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and A-1 to A-3 are acquitted under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of

A-1 to A-3 shall stand cancelled.

SPL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

(EXCISE COURT), ELURU.

Seal

Copy submitted to : The Hon’ble I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, W.G. Eluru.

12 1 At present I am resident with my mother L.W.2 at Katlampudi. A-3 is sister of A-1. A-2 is mother of A-1. My marriage with A-1 was solemnized on 31-8-2003. A-1 is working as driver. AT the time of my marriage, my parents gave an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the accused towards dowry. My parents also gave Rs.5,000/- towards adapaduchu katnam. My parents gave house hold articles and 3 sovereigns of gold and silver articles. After the marriage I joined A-1 for conjugal life at China Rangadupalem. A-1 to A-3, husband of A-3 wee resided in the same house. I was conceived. Accused used to beat me in drunken state when I was pregnant. A-1 13 stated that I am not beautiful and I am not suit for marriage. A-1 used to suspect my chastity land he used to beat me. When I was in 7th month, I was sent to my parents house. I came to my parents house. Accused developed illegal intimacy a woman by name Mani. In my absence, A-1 brought his concubine Mani. A-2, A-3 instigated A-1 when he harassed me and when he brought his concubine to the house. I gave birth to a daughter. Accused did not visit me after new born baby. My mother taken back me back to the house of accused and left me and my daughter in the house of accused. A-1 started harassing me and he used to beat me regularly in drunken state. I was conceived and gave birth to my second daughter. We requested the elders by name Venkataswamy. In the presence of elder Venkataswamy, A-1 accepted that that he will take care of me properly. Elder Venkataswamy compromised dispute. Accused suspected me and beat my daughter stating that he is not the father of my daughter. Accused beat me and necked me out from house by developing illegal contact with a woman by name Mani. I was necked out from the house. I lodged Ex.P.1 report. I was examined by the police. At this stage, the learned A.P.P. seeks permission of the court to declare the witness hostile and to cross examine the witness - Permitted. Cross examination by the learned A.P.P.:- A-1 to A-3 harassed me without providing food when I was pregnant. A-1 to A-3 harassed me with a demand to bring money towards addl. dowry. A-2, A-3 sell away all my house hold articles when I went to my parents house for delivery. A-2, A-3 kicked me without allowing me as stated that I should not enter into their house. A-1 to A-3 need not provided food properly and harassed me when I was conceived second time. I came back to the house of accused after my second delivery with the intervention of elders. As A-2, A-3 did not permit me into the house, as per advise of elders A-1 set up a separate family. After about 9 months A-2, A-3 encourage A-1 to go for second marriage leaving me and my children. I lodged Ex.P.1 report due to the harassment of A-1 at the instance of A-2, A-3. My mother demised on 2-6-2012. I was examined by the police. Cross 2 I am resident of Pallapu Katlampudi. L.W.2 is my mother. She was died in the month of June, 2012. P.W.1 is my elder sister. Marriage of P.W.1 with A-1 was solemnized in the year 2002. Marriage of P.W.1 with A-1 was solemnized Gunupudi temple, Bhimavaram. My parents gave an amount of Rs1,00,000/-, 3 sovereigns of gold and house hold articles to the accused towards dowry. My parents also gave an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards adapaduchu katnam. P.W.1 joined A-1 for conjugal life at China Rangadipalem, Bhimavaram. A-1 used to beat P.W.1 in drunken state and harassed her. A-1 beat P.W.1 stating that P.W.1 is not beautiful and he is not interested on P.W.1 for conjugal life. When P.W.1 was conceived, A-1 continue to harass P.W.1. P.W.1 gave birth to her second daughter. A-1 to A-3 harassed P.W.1 stating that A-1 is not father of second daughter of P.W.1. A-1 developed illegal contact a woman by name Mani. A-1 and his concubine Mani started living in the same house in the absence of P.W.1. At that time P.W.1 came to our house for delivery. A-1 used to beat second daughter of P.W.1 stating that he is not father of 2nd daughter. Accused did not provide food to P.W.1 and harassed her. Accused gave house hold articles of P.W.1 to Many who is concubine of A-1. A-1 to A-3 demanded P.W.1 to bring money towards addl. dowry to continue conjugal life. P.W.1 informed to my mother and to me about the harassment. After the mediation before elders P.W.1 joined accused. A-1 used to beat P.W.1 in drunken state suspecting her chastity as P.W.1 suspecting paternity of daughter of P.W.1, she lodged report in the police station. As accused harassed P.W.1, she came back to my house. I was not examined by the police.

14

Cross examination:

3 I am resident of Pallam Katlampudi. L.W.2 and P.W.2 are my neighbours. I know their daughter P.W.1. Marriage of P.W.1 with A-1 was solemnized in the year 2003. I attended marriage of P.W.1 and A-1, after the marriage P.W.1 joined A-1 for conjugal life at China Rangadipalem, Bhimavaram. P.W.1 and A-1 lived happily for some time. I came to know that A-1 to A-3 harassed P.W.1 with a demand to bring money towards addl. dowry. L.W.2 informed me about harassment of the accused. I along with L.W.5 and other elder try to settle the dispute by way of mediation. When P.W.1 was conceived, she was sent to her parents house for delivery. When P.W.1 gave birth to her first daughter, accused did not visit P.W.1 and her new daughter. Subsequently parents of P.W.1 left her at the house of the accused. Accused harassed, P.W.1 and sent her to her parents house. L.W.2 informed me about harassment of accused. I along with L.W.5 tried to settle the dispute by way of mediation. We came to know that A-1 is having illegal contact with A-1. We questioned A-1, about the reason for sending back P.W.1 to her parents house and also about his illegal contact. A-1 accepted to restore conjugal life with P.W.1 leaving his concubine. Hence we left P.W.1 and her two daughters at the house of the accused and we came back to Pallam Katlampudi. Later P.W.1 came back to her parents house as A-1 to A-3 harassed P.W.1 with a demand to bring money towards addl. dowry on the ground that P.W.1 gave birth to two female children. Mother of P.W.1 ie., L.W.2 informed me about harassment of the accused. P.W.1 reported against accused to the police. Mahila police organised police. Elders came from China Rangadipalem. After mediation, accused taken back P.W.1 and their two daughters to their house. Again accused to continue harass P.W.1 with a demanded to bring money towards addl. dowry and sent back P.W.1 to her parents house. I came to to know P.W.1 lodged report. Father of P.W.1 was died even before her marriage. Mother of P.W.1 ie., L.W.2 was died about one year back. I was examined by the police. Cross examination:

4 I am resigned Head Constable. I worked as Head constable, Eluru woman P.S. from the year 2009 to 2001. On 16-4-2010 at 11 a.m. P.W.1 came to police station and lodged Ex.P.1 report. Basing on Ex.P.1, I registered a case in Cr.No.25/2010 and issued Ex.P.2 F.I.R. I submitted original F.I.R. to Hon’ble court and copies to the authorities concerned. I took up investigation, and visited Chinna Meram village. I secured the presence of P.W.1, L.W.2, P.W.2, P.W.3, L.W.5 and recorded their detailed statements. On 17-4-2010 at 7 a.m. I arrested A-1 to A-3 at China Rangadipalem and produced them before the court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation, L.W.7 filed charge sheet against the accused. Cross examin

IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS (EXCISE)

-CUM-IV ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: ELURU.

Present: Sri.N.Jesu Ratna Kumar,

Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class (Excise) Eluru

Friday, this the 22nd day of February, 2013

C.C. No.158 of 2008

Between:

Dakarapu Rajeswara Rao … Complainant

and

Mallampalli Srinivasa Rao

... Accused

This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s.138 of N I Act against the accused.

This case is coming on this day before me for hearing, in the presence of

Additional Public Prosecutor for Complainant and of Sri.N.Narasimha Rao advocate for

accused and upon perusing the material on record, the Court made the following

DOCKET ORDER DATED: 22.02.2013

Complainant called absent. No representation. Process not filed. Inspite of repeated adjournments complainant is not attending the court. There is no representation

for the complainant. This case is coming for filing process to issue fresh NBW. At this

stage, attendance of complainant is necessary for filing process. Today complainant called absent. No representation. Complaint is dismissed under section 204 Cr.P.C.

Pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 22nd day of February, 2013

Sd/-N.Jesu Ratna Kumar

Spl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class (Excise) Eluru

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on either side.

Sd/-NJRK

SJMFC(E), Eluru

IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS (EXCISE)

:: ELURU.

Present: Sri N. Jesu Ratna Kumar

Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class (Excise) Eluru

Monday, this the 01st day of April, 2013

C.C. No.87 of 2010

Between:

Shaik Ibrahim … Complainant

and

Koripalli Nagaraju Gandhi

... Accused

This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s.138 of N I Act against the accused.

This case is coming on this day before me for hearing, in the presence of

Additional Public Prosecutor for Complainant and accused and upon perusing the material

on record, the Court made the following

DOCKET ORDER DATED : 01.04.2013

Complainant and accused present. Crl.M.P.1340/13 filed under section 257 Cr.P.C. is allowed. Accused is acquitted under section 257 Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused, if any, shall stands cancelled.

Pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 01st day of April, 2013.

Sd/- N. Jesu Ratna Kumar

Spl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class (Excise) Eluru