Smt. P. Chaitanya

1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:: ANAPARTHI

Present: Smt. P.Chaitanya, J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi

Monday, this the 20th day of November, 2023.

C.C.No. 598/2022

Between:

The State represented by the S.H.O,

Anaparthi Police Station … Complainant

AND

Bheemana Sathibabu, S/o.Suribabu, 41yrs,

D.no.2-340, New colony, Duppalapudi village,

Anaparthi mandal … Accused

This case coming on 17.11.2023 for final hearing before me in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for prosecution and counsel for accused Sri.TVV.Ramana Murthy and having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi Police Station filed charge sheet in Cr.No.165/2020 against the accused for the offence punishable under

Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act.

2. The prosecution case in concise and compact manner has as emerged from the charge sheet are as follows: -

On 05.07.2020 at about 8.30pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to outskirts of Duppalapudi village, there they noticed the accused with a gunny bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 05 liters of I.D arrack in a plastic tin which was purchased by him from unknown person at Mukkinada village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis. Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report,

P.W.2 registered a case in Cr.No.165/2020 under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) 2 r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was released by PW2 after serving notice U/Sec 41(a) CRPC. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence punishable Under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, the copies of case documents were furnished to accused as required Under section.207 Cr.P.C.

5. The accused was examined Under Section.239 Cr.P.C for which, the accused denied the commission of offence and on that a charge Under

Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act was framed, read over and explained to accused in Telugu for which, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case, examined Pws.1 and 2 and got exhibited Exs.P-1 to P-6 and got marked M.O.1.

7. After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined u/sec.313 Cr.P.C with regard to incriminating material found in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8. Heard arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the

State and the learned counsel for the accused.

9. Point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offences Under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition

Act all reasonable doubt?” 10.POINT:-

To prove the guilt of accused prosecution chiefly relayed on the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 and on Exs.P-1 to P-6 and M.O.1.

11. PW.2 deposed that on 05.07.2020 at about 8.30pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to outskirts of Duppalapudi village, there they noticed the accused with a gunny bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 05 liters of I.D arrack in a plastic tin which was purchased by him from unknown person at Mukkinada village at a 3 lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis. Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report, P.W.2 registered a case in Cr.No.165/2020 under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was released by PW2 after serving notice U/Sec 41(a) CRPC. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

12. P.W.2 further deposed that sample bottle was sent for chemical analysis and he received analysis report from the Government Chemical Examiner with opinion that seized sample is illicit distilled liquor and unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. Analysis report is supported with the version of the prosecution that the sample is “Illicit distilled liquor not fit for human consumption”.

13. P.W.2 further deposed that he sent requisition to the Deputy commissioner of prohibition & Excise, Kakinada for destruction of the contraband, accordingly, he received destruction orders from Deputy

Commissioner, in compliance with said destruction proceedings, he destroyed the contraband in the presence of mediators.

14. The staff of PW2, i.e. PW1 also deposed in the similar lines of PW2 regarding seizure of contraband of 05 liters of ID arrack and lifting of 300ml from it as a sample and arrest of accused at outskirts of Duppalapudi village on 05.07.2020 at about 08.30pm under occurrence report. The Evidence of

PW1 is well corroborated with the evidence of PW2 regarding arrest of accused and seizure of contraband, so also, lifting sample and shifting accused and contraband to police station. However, the arrested accused was not produced before the court seeking judicial remand, moreover, accused was released after issuing notice Under section 41(a) CRPC by PW2. If notice under section 41(a) CRPC is complied, then there is no necessity to arrest the accused. But here the procedure adopted by PW2 is quite contra to the guidelines laid down in criminal procedure code and he resorted his own practice.

15.As per occurrence report the scene of offence is outskirts of

Duppalapudi village and time of offence is 08.30pm. as none else were 4 available to act as mediators, as such PW.2 constrained to proceed with occurrence report. Moreover, PW.2 stated that scene offence is busy locality, but no one was secured though available at place of occurrence. So, it appears that whether PW.2 really prepared occurrence report at scene or not.

As such, it creates a doubt about the credibility of the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

16.From the discussion and analogy in foregoing paragraphs, this court is of the firm opinion that the prosecution is failed to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the accused is deserved for benefit of doubt.

17. In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer Grade III, transcribed by her,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 20 th day of

November, 2023.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anaparthi.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution :- For Accused :-

PW1 : V.Trimurthulu - Nil - PW2 : Md.M.R.Ali Khan

Exhibits marked

For Prosecution :- For Accused:-

Ex.P1 : Occurrence report, dt.05.07.2020 -Nil- Ex.P2 : First information Report Ex.P3 : Letter of Advice Ex.P4 : Chemical Examination Report Ex.P5 : Attested copy of Destruction proceedings Ex.P6 : Destruction Mahazarnama

Material objects

MO.1: Sample bottle containing ID arrack

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi.

5

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

In the Court of the Judicial First Class of Magistrate :: Anaparthi

C.C. 598/2022

Date of Offence:05.07.2020

Date of Report :05.07.2020

Date of arrest of Accused :05.07.2020

Date of Release of accused on bail: 05.07.2020

Date of commencement of Trial :05.10.2023

Date of close of Trial:17.11.2023

Date of sentence or order:20.11.2023

Crime No. and Name of the P.S:Cr.No.165/2020 of Anaparthi P.S

Name of the Complainant:S.H.O – Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi P.S

Name of the accused:Bheemana Sathibabu, S/o.Suribabu, 41yrs, D.no.2-340, New colony,

Duppalapudi village, Anaparthi mandal

Offence:U/ Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of APP Act.

Finding :Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.MAGISTRATE

ANAPARTHI

Copy submitted to : The Hon’ble Chief Judl. Magistrate-Cum-Prl.Sr.Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:: ANAPARTHI

Present: Smt. P.Chaitanya, J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi

Monday, this the 20th day of November, 2023.

C.C.No. 283/2022

Between:

The State represented by the S.H.O,

Anaparthi Police Station … Complainant

AND

Musini Veera Venkata Satyanarayana,

S/o.Sriramulu, 39yrs, D.No.27-4-19,

Mandapeta … Accused

This case coming on 17.11.2023 for final hearing before me in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for prosecution and counsel for accused Sri.TVV.Ramana Murthy and having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi Police Station filed charge sheet in Cr.No.94/2020 against the accused for the offence punishable under

Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act.

2. The prosecution case in concise and compact manner has as emerged from the charge sheet are as follows: -

On 07.04.2020 at about 12.30pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to ILTD junction of Anaparthi village, there they noticed the accused with a plastic bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 07 liters of I.D arrack in a plastic tin which was purchased by him from unknown person at Mikkinadapakalu village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis.

Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report,

P.W.2 registered a case in Cr.No.94/2020 under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was released by PW2 after serving notice U/Sec 41(a) CRPC. P.W.2 received destruction 2 order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence punishable Under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, the copies of case documents were furnished to accused as required Under section.207 Cr.P.C.

5. The accused was examined Under Section.239 Cr.P.C for which, the accused denied the commission of offence and on that a charge Under

Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act was framed, read over and explained to accused in Telugu for which, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case, examined Pws.1 and 2 and got exhibited Exs.P-1 to P-6 and got marked M.O.1.

7. After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined u/sec.313 Cr.P.C with regard to incriminating material found in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8. Heard arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the

State and the learned counsel for the accused.

9. Point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offences Under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition

Act all reasonable doubt?” 10.POINT:-

To prove the guilt of accused prosecution chiefly relayed on the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 and on Exs.P-1 to P-6 and M.O.1.

11. PW.2 deposed that on 07.04.2020 at about 12.30pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to ILTD junction of Anaparthi village, there they noticed the accused with a plastic bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 07 liters of I.D arrack in a plastic tin which was purchased by him from unknown person at Mikkinadapakalu village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under 3 occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis. Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report, P.W.2 registered a case in

Cr.No.94/2020 under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition

Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was released by PW2 after serving notice U/Sec 41(a) CRPC. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

12. P.W.2 further deposed that sample bottle was sent for chemical analysis and he received analysis report from the Government Chemical Examiner with opinion that seized sample is illicit distilled liquor and unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. Analysis report is supported with the version of the prosecution that the sample is “Illicit distilled liquor not fit for human consumption”.

13. P.W.2 further deposed that he sent requisition to the Deputy commissioner of prohibition & Excise, Kakinada for destruction of the contraband, accordingly, he received destruction orders from Deputy

Commissioner, in compliance with said destruction proceedings, he destroyed the contraband in the presence of mediators.

14. The staff of PW2, i.e. PW1 also deposed in the similar lines of PW2 regarding seizure of contraband of 07 liters of ID arrack and lifting of 300ml from it as a sample and arrest of accused ILTD junction of Anaparthi village on 07.04.2020 at about 12.30pm under occurrence report. The Evidence of

PW1 is well corroborated with the evidence of PW2 regarding arrest of accused and seizure of contraband, so also, lifting sample and shifting accused and contraband to police station. However, the arrested accused was not produced before the court seeking judicial remand, moreover, accused was released after issuing notice Under section 41(a) CRPC by PW2. If notice under section 41(a) CRPC is complied, then there is no necessity to arrest the accused. But here the procedure adopted by PW2 is quite contra to the guidelines laid down in criminal procedure code and he resorted his own practice.

15.As per occurrence report the scene of offence is ILTD junction,

Anaparthi village as none else were available to act as mediators, as such

PW.2 constrained to proceed with occurrence report. Moreover, PW.2 stated 4 that scene offence is busy locality but no one was secured though available at place of occurrence. So, it appears that whether PW.2 really prepared occurrence report at scene or not. As such, it creates a doubt about the credibility of the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

16.From the discussion and analogy in foregoing paragraphs, this court is of the firm opinion that the prosecution is failed to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the accused is deserved for benefit of doubt.

17. In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer Grade III, transcribed by her,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 20 th day of

November, 2023.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anaparthi.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution :- For Accused :-

PW1 : V.Trimurthulu - Nil -

PW2 : Md.M.R.Ali Khan

Exhibits marked

For Prosecution :- For Accused:-

Ex.P1 : Occurrence report, dt.07.04.2020 -Nil-

Ex.P2 : First information Report

Ex.P3 : Letter of advice

Ex.P4 : Chemical Examination Report

Ex.P5 : Attested copy of Destruction proceedings

Ex.P6 : Destruction Maharzanama

Material objects

MO.1: Sample bottle containing ID arrack

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi.

5

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

In the Court of the Judicial First Class of Magistrate :: Anaparthi

C.C. 283/2022

Date of Offence:07.04.2020

Date of Report :07.04.2020

Date of arrest of Accused :07.04.2020

Date of Release of accused on bail: 07.04.2020

Date of commencement of Trial :05.10.2023

Date of close of Trial:17.11.2023

Date of sentence or order:20.11.2023

Crime No. and Name of the P.S:Cr.No.94/2020 of Anaparthi P.S

Name of the Complainant:S.H.O – Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi P.S

Name of the accused:Musini Veera Venkata Satyanarayana,

S/o.Sriramulu, 39yrs, D.No.27-4-19,

Mandapeta

Offence:U/ Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of APP Act.

Finding :Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.MAGISTRATE

ANAPARTHI

Copy submitted to : The Hon’ble Chief Judl. Magistrate-Cum-Prl.Sr.Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:: ANAPARTHI

Present: Smt. P.Chaitanya, J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi

Monday, this the 20th day of November, 2023.

C.C.No. 456/2022

Between:

The State represented by the S.H.O,

Anaparthi Police Station … Complainant

AND

Vallu Durga Rao, S/o.Raju, 24yrs,

Koppisetti vari peta, Velangi village,

Karapa mandal … Accused

This case coming on 17.11.2023 for final hearing before me in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for prosecution and counsel for accused Sri.PV.Rama Krishna and having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi Police Station filed charge sheet in Cr.No.173/2020 against the accused for the offence punishable under

Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act.

2. The prosecution case in concise and compact manner has as emerged from the charge sheet are as follows: -

On 19.07.2020 at about 5.00pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to ILTD fly over bridge, Anaparthi village, there they noticed the accused with a plastic bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 20 liters of I.D arrack in four plastic covers each contains 5 liters of ID arrack which was purchased by him from unknown person at

Rajanagaram village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis. Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to

Police station. Basing on the occurrence report, P.W.2 registered a case in 2 Cr.No.173/2020 under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition

Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was produced before the Hon’ble Court for judicial remand. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence punishable Under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, the copies of case documents were furnished to accused as required Under section.207 Cr.P.C.

5. The accused was examined Under Section.239 Cr.P.C for which, the accused denied the commission of offence and on that a charge Under

Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act was framed, read over and explained to accused in Telugu for which, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case, examined Pws.1 and 2 and got exhibited Exs.P-1 to P-6 and got marked M.O.1.

7. After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined u/sec.313 Cr.P.C with regard to incriminating material found in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8. Heard arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the

State and the learned counsel for the accused.

9. Point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offences Under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition

Act all reasonable doubt?” 10.POINT:-

To prove the guilt of accused prosecution chiefly relayed on the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 and on Exs.P-1 to P-6 and M.O.1.

11. PW.2 deposed that on 19.07.2020 at about 5.00pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to ILTD fly over bridge, Anaparthi village, there they noticed the accused with a plastic bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 20 liters of I.D arrack in four plastic 3 covers each contains 5 liters of ID arrack which was purchased by him from unknown person at Rajanagaram village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then

PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis. Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report,

P.W.2 registered a case in Cr.No.173/2020 under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was produced before the Hon’ble Court for judicial remand. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

12. P.W.2 further deposed that sample bottle was sent for chemical analysis and he received analysis report from the Government Chemical Examiner with opinion that seized sample is illicit distilled liquor and unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. Analysis report is supported with the version of the prosecution that the sample is “Illicit distilled liquor not fit for human consumption”.

13. P.W.2 further deposed that he sent requisition to the Deputy commissioner of prohibition & Excise, Kakinada for destruction of the contraband, accordingly, he received destruction orders from Deputy

Commissioner, in compliance with said destruction proceedings, he destroyed the contraband in the presence of mediators.

14. The staff of PW2, i.e. PW1 also deposed in the similar lines of PW2 regarding seizure of contraband of 20 liters of ID arrack and lifting of 300ml from it as a sample and arrest of accused at ILTD Fly over bridge, Anaparthi village on 19.07.2020 at about 05.00pm under occurrence report. The

Evidence of PW1 is well corroborated with the evidence of PW2 regarding arrest of accused and seizure of contraband, so also, lifting sample and shifting accused and contraband to police station.

15.As per occurrence report the scene of offence is ILTD Fly over bridge,

Anaparthi village and time of offence is 05.00pm. as none else were available to act as mediators, as such PW.2 constrained to proceed with occurrence report. Moreover, PW.2 stated that scene offence is busy locality, but no one was secured though available at place of occurrence. So, it appears that 4 whether PW.2 really prepared occurrence report at scene or not. As such, it creates a doubt about the credibility of the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

16.From the discussion and analogy in foregoing paragraphs, this court is of the firm opinion that the prosecution is failed to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the accused is deserved for benefit of doubt.

17. In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.188

IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer Grade III, transcribed by her,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 20 th day of

November, 2023.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anaparthi.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution :- For Accused :-

PW1 : V.Trimurthulu - Nil -

PW2 : Md.M.R.Ali Khan

Exhibits marked

For Prosecution :- For Accused:-

Ex.P1 : Occurrence report, dt.19.07.2020 -Nil-

Ex.P2 : First information Report

Ex.P3 : Letter of Advice

Ex.P4 : Chemical Examination Report

Ex.P5 : Attested copy of Destruction proceedings

Ex.P6 : Destruction Mahazarnama

Material objects

MO.1: Sample bottle containing ID arrack

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi.

5

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

In the Court of the Judicial First Class of Magistrate :: Anaparthi

C.C. 456/2022

Date of Offence:19.07.2020

Date of Report :19.07.2020

Date of arrest of Accused :19.07.2020

Date of Release of accused on bail: 04.08.2020

Date of commencement of Trial :05.10.2023

Date of close of Trial:17.11.2023

Date of sentence or order:20.11.2023

Crime No. and Name of the P.S:Cr.No.173/2020 of Anaparthi P.S

Name of the Complainant:S.H.O – Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi P.S

Name of the accused:Vallu Durga Rao, S/o.Raju, 24yrs,

Koppisetti vari peta, Velangi village,

Karapa mandal

Offence:U/ Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of APP Act.

Finding :Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.188 IPC and Sec.7(a) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.MAGISTRATE

ANAPARTHI

Copy submitted to : The Hon’ble Chief Judl. Magistrate-Cum-Prl.Sr.Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE:: ANAPARTHI

Present: Smt. P.Chaitanya, J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi

Monday, this the 20th day of November, 2023.

C.C.No. 610/2022

Between:

The State represented by the S.H.O,

Anaparthi Police Station … Complainant

AND

Bandaru Malleswara Rao @ Siva,

S/o.Venkateswara Rao, 35yrs,

Main road, Duppalapudi village,

Anaparthi mandal … Accused

This case coming on 17.11.2023 for final hearing before me in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for prosecution and counsel for accused Sri.TVV.Ramana Murthy and having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi Police Station filed charge sheet in Cr.No.5/2021 against the accused for the offence punishable under

Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of AP Prohibition Act.

2. The prosecution case in concise and compact manner has as emerged from the charge sheet are as follows: -

On 04.01.2021 at about 7.30pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to outskirts of Duppalapudi village, there they noticed the accused with a plastic bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on enquiry accused revealed that he had 05 liters of I.D arrack in a plastic cover which was purchased by him from unknown person at Rajanagaram village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis.

Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized 2 contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report,

P.W.2 registered a case in Cr.No.5/2021 under Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P.

Prohibition Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was produced before the

Hon’ble Court for judicial remand. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized

contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence punishable Under Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act against the accused.

4. On appearance of the accused, the copies of case documents were furnished to accused as required Under section.207 Cr.P.C.

5. The accused was examined Under Section.239 Cr.P.C for which, the accused denied the commission of offence and on that a charge Under

Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act was framed, read over and explained to accused in Telugu for which, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case, examined Pws.1 and 2 and got exhibited Exs.P-1 to P-6 and got marked M.O.1.

7. After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined u/sec.313 Cr.P.C with regard to incriminating material found in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8. Heard arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the

State and the learned counsel for the accused.

9. Point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for

the offences Under Sec. 7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act all

reasonable doubt?” 10.POINT:-

To prove the guilt of accused prosecution chiefly relayed on the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 and on Exs.P-1 to P-6 and M.O.1.

11. PW.2 deposed that on 04.01.2021 at about 7.30pm on credible information about selling of illicit liquor PW2 secured PW1 and went to outskirts of Duppalapudi village, there they noticed the accused with a plastic bag and try to escape but caught hold by PW2 with assistance of staff, on 3 enquiry accused revealed that he had 05 liters of I.D arrack in a plastic cover which was purchased by him from unknown person at Rajanagaram village at a lower price with intend to sell it for higher price in his village as his income is not sufficient for expenses, then PW2 seized the same under occurrence report as mediators were not available and also draw sample of 300 ml into a bottle for analysis. Then affected the arrest of accused, thereafter arrested accused and seized contraband was brought to Police station. Basing on the occurrence report, P.W.2 registered a case in Cr.No.5/2021 under Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Thereafter, the arrested accused was produced before the Hon’ble Court for judicial remand. P.W.2 received destruction order for seized contraband and chemical analysis report and on completion of investigation, he laid charge sheet.

12. P.W.2 further deposed that sample bottle was sent for chemical analysis and he received analysis report from the Government Chemical Examiner with opinion that seized sample is illicit distilled liquor and unfit for human consumption and injurious to health. Analysis report is supported with the version of the prosecution that the sample is “Illicit distilled liquor not fit for human consumption”.

13. P.W.2 further deposed that he sent requisition to the Deputy commissioner of prohibition & Excise, Kakinada for destruction of the contraband, accordingly, he received destruction orders from Deputy

Commissioner, in compliance with said destruction proceedings, he destroyed the contraband in the presence of mediators.

14. The staff of PW2, i.e. PW1 also deposed in the similar lines of PW2 regarding seizure of contraband of 5 liters of ID arrack and lifting of 300ml from it as a sample and arrest of accused at outskirts of Duppalapudi village on 04.01.2021 at about 07.30pm under occurrence report. The Evidence of

PW1 is well corroborated with the evidence of PW2 regarding arrest of accused and seizure of contraband, so also, lifting sample and shifting accused and contraband to police station.

15.As per occurrence report the scene of offence is outskirts of

Duppalapudi village as none else were available to act as mediators, as such

PW.2 constrained to proceed with occurrence report. Moreover, PW.2 stated that scene offence is busy locality, but no one was secured though available at place of occurrence. So, it appears that whether PW.2 really prepared 4 occurrence report at scene or not. As such, it creates a doubt about the credibility of the evidence of prosecution witnesses.

16.From the discussion and analogy in foregoing paragraphs, this court is of the firm opinion that the prosecution is failed to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the accused is deserved for benefit of doubt.

17. In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec.

248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer Grade III, transcribed by her,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 20 th day of

November, 2023.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anaparthi.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution :- For Accused :-

PW1 : V.Trimurthulu - Nil -

PW2 : Md.M.R.Ali Khan

Exhibits marked

For Prosecution :- For Accused:-

Ex.P1 : Occurrence report, dt.04.01.2021 -Nil-

Ex.P2 : First information Report

Ex.P3 : Letter of advice

Ex.P4 : Chemical Examination Report

Ex.P5 : Attested copy of Destruction proceedings

Ex.P6 : Destruction Maharzanama

Material objects

MO.1: Sample bottle containing ID arrack

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.Magistrate, Anaparthi.

5

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

In the Court of the Judicial First Class of Magistrate :: Anaparthi

C.C. 610/2022

Date of Offence:04.01.2021

Date of Report :04.01.2021

Date of arrest of Accused :04.01.2021

Date of Release of accused on bail: 11.01.2021

Date of commencement of Trial :05.10.2023

Date of close of Trial:17.11.2023

Date of sentence or order:20.11.2023

Crime No. and Name of the P.S:Cr.No.5/2021 of Anaparthi P.S

Name of the Complainant:S.H.O – Sub-Inspector of Police, Anaparthi P.S

Name of the accused:Bandaru Malleswara Rao @ Siva,

S/o.Venkateswara Rao, 35yrs,

Main road, Duppalapudi village,

Anaparthi mandal

Offence:U/ Sec.7(b) r/w 8(b) of APP Act.

Finding :Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:In the result, accused is found not Guilty for the offence under Sec. 7(b) r/w 8(b) of A.P. Prohibition Act. Accordingly, accused is acquitted U/Sec. 248(1) of Cr.P.C for the same. Bail bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after lapse of six(6) months. M.O.1 sample bottle of liquor shall be destroyed after appeal time.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.MAGISTRATE

ANAPARTHI

Copy submitted to : The Hon’ble Chief Judl. Magistrate-Cum-Prl.Sr.Civil Judge, Rajamahendravaram.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,

ANAPARTHI

Present: Smt. P.Chaitanya, J.F.C. Magistrate, Anaparthi

Dated this the 20th day of November, 2023

C.C.No. 43/2021

(Private complaint) Between: Gudala Lova Raju, S/o.Satyanarayana, 35yrs,

D.No.13-257, Business and cultivation,

Anaparthi Sivaru Kothuru,

Anaparthi mandal, Anaparthi PS Limits ...Complainant

And

Pothula Veera Venkata Srinivas Kumar,

S/o.Jagannadha Rao, 48yrs, employee,

D.No.24-11-6/2, Vivers colony,

Opp.Market yard, Korukonda road,

Rajahmundry P.S. Limits …Accused

This case is coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri TV.Narayana Reddy, advocate for complainant and

Sri TVV.Ramana Murhty, advocate for accused and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

O R D E R

Complainant filed by the complaint U/sec 190 of Cr.P.C. with section 138 and 142 of the NI Act against the accused.

Complainant is present and filed petition U/Sec.257 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, petitioner permitted to withdraw his case. Case against accused is dismissed as withdrawn U/Sec.257 Cr.P.C.

Pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20th day of

November, 2023.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

J.F.C.MAGISTRATE,

ANAPARTHI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For complainant:-

P.W.1: G.Lova Raju

For defense:-Nil

EXHIBITS MARKED

For complainant:-

Ex.P1: Original cheque issued by the Accused in favour of the complainant dated 29.04.2018.

Ex.P2: Original counterfoil issued by the Andhra Bank, Anaparthi branch dated 13.06.2018.

Ex.P3: Original memo issued by Andhra bank Anaparthi branch to the complainant dated 14.06.2018.

Ex.P4: Office copy of registered legal notice got issued by the complainant through his advocate to the accused dated 05.07.2018.

Ex.P5: Original postal acknowledgment card from the accused dated 06.07.2018

Ex.P6: Served copy of reply notice issued by the accused through his advocate dated 26.07.2018

Ex.P7: Office copy of re-joinder reply notice got issued by the complainant through his advocate to the counsel for the accused and also the accused dated 08.08.2018

Ex.P8: Original postal receipts in proof of issuance of Re-joinder reply

dated 11.08.2018.

Ex.P9: original promissory note executed by accused in favour of complainant dated 09.10.2016.

For defense:- Nil.

Sd/- P.Chaitanya

Judicial First Class Magistrate,

Anaparthi.