Page 1 of 6 C.C.No.316 of 2025
Date: 08.05.2026
IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NALGONDA DISTRICT AT
NAKREKAL
Present: Smt. Neelima Muddasani
Junior Civil Judge cum
Judicial Magistrate of First Class
Nalgonda District at Nakrekal.
Thursday, this the 08 th day of May, 2026
CALENDAR CASE No.316 of 2025
Between:
The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Shaligouraram.
....Complainant
A N D
Ganta Veeraiah S/o Ramaiah, Age: 45 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Perkakondaram village of Shaligouraram Mandal.
....Accused
This case is coming up for final hearing before me in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of prosecution and Sri P.Shambaiah, learned counsel
for the accused and upon hearing both sides and having stood over for consideration till this
day, this court delivered the following:
:: J U D G M E N T ::
The Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Shaligouraram filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime No.106/2025 for the offence punishable under Section 106(1) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (herein after referred to as BNS).
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that on 12.06.2025 at 0630 hours PW1/defacto Complainant lodged a complaint stating that on 11.06.2025 at 1600 hours, his elder brother namely Vajja Bixamaiah coming from Shaligouraram to
Thakkellapahad on his Hero Honda motor cycle bearing No. AP 24 P 3893 by
Page 2 of 6 C.C.No.316 of 2025
Date: 08.05.2026
attending his personal work, while he was riding between Bhairavuni Banda X road and Vaddipamula village towards Shaligouraram in a rash and negligent manner on the wrong side of the road. He collided head on with his brother’s vehicle, causing his brother to sustain severe bleeding injuries to his head. The accident was witnessed by veeputi Paramkusham, who immediately informed the complainant about the incident. Upon receiving the information, they rushed to the scene and shifted the injured to Area Hospital, Nakrekal. After preliminary examination, the duty doctors advised shifting him to Government General Hospital, Nalgonda for better treatment. Later he was referred and shifted to Icon Hospital, Nalgonda for further medical care. However while undergoing treatment, he succumbed to injuries at around 1800 hours on the same day. Due to their presence at the hospital and emergency situation, he is submitting the petition belatedly.
3. Based on the contents of the complaint, PW5 has registered a case in Crime
No.88/2025 under Section 106(1) BNS and took up the investigation. During the course of investigation, PW5 has examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the scene of offence, conducted scene of offence panchanama and Inquest panchanama in the presence of mediators LW6 and LW7. Further, PW5 went to Government Hospital, Nalgonda along with two mediators LW8 and LW9 and conducted Inquest panchanama over the dead body of deceased and LW10/Dr.
Abdule Rahman Omer Siddiqui, Assistant Professor has conducted Postmortem to the deceased body and he opined that the cause of death was due to “Head injury”.
Further he gave requisition to LW11/B.Chiranjeevi, AMVI to inspect the crime vehicle, accordingly he inspected the same and opined that the accident did not occur due to any mechanical defects. On 19.07.2025, PW5 served the notice under section 35(3) of B.N.S.S. to the accused and after completion of investigation, he has filed the charge sheet against the accused.
Page 3 of 6 C.C.No.316 of 2025
Date: 08.05.2026
4. Based on the report of the Police, cognizance was taken against the accused for the offence U/Sec 106(1) BNS and issued summons to the accused.
5. On appearance of the accused before the court, he was furnished with the copies of the documents as required U/Sec.230 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNSS). Further, the accused was examined U/Sec.274
BNSS and substance of accusation was read over and explained to the accused, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. The prosecution in support of its case has examined PWs.1 to 5 and got marked
Exs.P1 to P10. The learned APP has given up the evidence of LW3. The evidence of
LW6,8 to 11 are closed by this court since prosecution failed to produce them in spite of granting sufficient time. Prosecution side evidence is closed.
7. After prosecution reported its evidence as closed, accused was examined
U/Sec.351 BNSS, explaining the incriminating material that appeared against him in the prosecution case. The accused denied the prosecution evidence and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.
8. Heard the arguments of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel
for the accused. Perused the record.
Now the point for determination is as follows:
Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence U/Sec.106(1) BNS , beyond reasonable doubt?
POINT:
9. To prove its case, prosecution has examined PWs’1 to 6. PW1 is the complainant and circumstantial witness. PW2 is the wife of deceased and circumstantial witness. PW3 and PW4 are the Eye witness. PW5 is the investigating officer.
Page 4 of 6 C.C.No.316 of 2025
Date: 08.05.2026
10. PW1, who is the complainant and PW2 who is the circumstantial witness deposed that at about 11 months back, they came to know that while deceased was proceeding on the bike, when he reached near Bairavonibanda ross road, he met with an accident and deceased was sustained injuries and shifted to Government
Hospital, Nakrekal, from there he was shifted to ICON hospital, Nalgonda. While undergoing treatment he was died on the same day due to the injuries. But they do not know how the accident was occurred and on whose negligence. They do not know the bearing number of crime vehicle and also its driver and turned hostile and did not support the version of the prosecution. Through this witness prosecution got marked Ex.P1 signature on the report. Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 are their 161 Cr.P.C.
statements.
11. PW3 and PW4 are the eye witnesses deposed that they do not know anything about the facts of the case and accused never committed any offence in their presence and they do not witness any incident and turned hostile and did not support the version of the prosecution, Through this witness prosecution got marked
Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 are their 161 Cr.P.C. statements. The learned APP though cross examined at length nothing could be elicited in favour of the prosecution.
12. PW5 is the Investigating Officer who testified as to the line of investigation.
Through this witness prosecution got marked Exs.P6 to P10 i.e. the FIR, CDF,
Inquest Panchanama and PME report and MVI Report.
13. The accused is not seriously disputing with regard to the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident. It is his specific defence that he was not the driver of the crime vehicle at the time of alleged accident. Though there is ample evidence with regard to the death of the deceased but there is no evidence with regard to identity of the driver of the crime vehicle or as to the rashness or negligence of the accused.
Page 5 of 6 C.C.No.316 of 2025
Date: 08.05.2026
PW1 to PW4 have turned hostile and did not support the case of prosecution.
14. In the absence of any evidence as to the rashness or negligence of the accused or as to the identity of the accused that he was the person who was driving the offending vehicle at the relevant point of time, there is nothing further to discuss except to hold that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused with which he is charged. Accordingly the point is answered against the prosecution.
15. In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offence under Section 106(1)
BNS and accordingly he is acquitted for the said offence under Section 278(1)
BNSS. The bonds and bail bonds of the accused shall be in force for a period of (06) months as per Sec.481 BNSS.
Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 08 th day of May, 2026
Junior Civil Judge cum
Judicial Magistrate of First Class
Nalgonda District at Nakrekal.
APPENDEX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For Prosecution:
PW1/V.Srinivas. - Complainant and circumstantial witness. PW2/V.Andalu. - Circumstantial witness and wife of deceased. PW3/V.Paramkush. - Eye witness PW4/E.Nagaiah. - Eye witness. PW5/D.Saidulu. - Investigating Officer
For Defence:
- None –
EXHIBITS MARKED
For Prosecution:
Ex.P1 is the signature on the Report
Ex.P2 is the Sec.161 Cr.P.C. Statement of PW2 Ex.P3 is the Sec.161 Cr.P.C. Statement of PW3
Page 6 of 6 C.C.No.316 of 2025
Date: 08.05.2026
Ex.P4 is the Sec.161 Cr.P.C. Statement of PW4 Ex.P5 is the Sec.161 Cr.P.C. Statement of PW5 Ex.P6 is the FIR Ex.P7 is the Inquest panchanama. Ex.P8 is the Postmortem Report Ex.P9 is the Crime Details form. Ex.P10 is the MVI Report.
For Defence:
-NIL -
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED
-Nil –
Junior Civil Judge cum
Judicial Magistrate of First Class
Nalgonda District at Nakrekal.