Smt P.J. Sudha

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE :

NELLORE (COURT OF SESSION : NELLORE DIVISION : NELLORE)

Present: Smt. P.J. Sudha,

III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Monday, this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Crl.M.P.No.52 5/ 2026

(Crime No. 19 /2026 of Kaluvoy Police Station)

Konda Sudarsan Reddy, Son of Seshu Reddy, Aged 35 years, Resident of Munnelli Rajupalem Village, B.Koduru Mandal, Y.S.R.

Kadapa District.... Petitioners/Accused

Vs., State : Rep. by Station House Officer, Kaluvoy police station, SPSR Nellore District.…Respondent/Complainant.

This petition is coming on this day for hearing before me, in the presence of Sri K.Suresh Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner/Accused and of Sri M.C. Krishna, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/Complainant and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court made the following:

O R D E R

This is an application filed by the petitioner/Accused under Section 483 of BNSS, seeking regular bail, in connection with Crime No.19/2026 of

Kaluvoy Police Station registered for the offence under sec.318 (4), 69, 79, 351 (3) of BNS.

2.It is the case of prosecution that the Defacto Complainant is a widow having two sons. In November, 2024 she got acquaintance with the petitioner/Accused and he promised that he will marry her. Believing his words, she had sexual intercourse with him. While so, under the pretext of purchasing a plot in the name of the Defacto Complainant at Nellore, the petitioner induced the Defacto Complainant to arrange money by selling one of her plots and mortgaging the other. Accordingly she gave Rs.1,80,000/- in cash and 9 sovereigns of gold ornaments to the petitioner. After receiving the same, he

2

started avoiding her and when she demand him to return her money and gold, he refused and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence the petitioner/accused cheated her, explicated her physically on the false promise of marriage, dishonestly took her money and gold. Basing on the report of the

Defacto Complainant a case in Cr.No.19/2026 under Sec.318 (4), 69, 79, 351 (3) of BNS was registered against the petitioner/accused.

3.It is the contention of the petitioner that he did not commit any offence and he is falsely implicated in this case. Material part of the investigation is completed and charge sheet also filed and as such there is no need continue the judicial custody. Further the petitioner is the sole bread winner of his family consisting of old aged parents and his entire family is depending upon him. The petitioner is having permanent residence and he is in judicial custody since 19.03.2026 and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation and also ready to produce sufficient sureties and abide by the conditions if any imposed by the court and prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

4.Notice given to Additional Public Prosecutor.

5.Heard both the counsel.

6.Now the point for consideration is that:- “Whether the Petitioner/Accused is entitled for bail as prayed for”?

7.POINT :

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he did not commit any offence as alleged, and most of the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed and prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.03.2026 and and the petitioner is ready to furnish sufficient sureties and abide by the conditions imposed by the court and prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

8.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail and submitted that the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed.

9.Upon considering the above submissions and on perusal of the record, it shows that the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also

3

filed. Hence considering that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.03.2026, and the submission of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to furnish sufficient sureties and abide by the condition imposed by the court, this court inclined to allow the petition by imposing certain conditions.

10.In the result, the petition is allowed, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing bond for Rs.30,000/- with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Atmakur and on such release the petitioner shall not cause any threat to the witnesses or influence them.

Typed on my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. P.J. SUDHA

III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore. Copy to 1 The Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Atmakur 2 The Station House Officer, Kaluvoy Police Station.

3 The Superintendent, Central Prison, Nellore

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE :

NELLORE (COURT OF SESSION : NELLORE DIVISION : NELLORE)

Present: Smt. P.J. Sudha,

III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

Monday, this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Crl.M.P.No.502/2026

(Crime No.52/2026 of Dargamitta Police Station)

1. Shaik Khaleel @ Syed Khaleel, Son of Late Shafi Uddin.

2. Peddi Rajesh Reddy,

Son of Gopi Reddy.... Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2

Vs., State : Rep. by Inspector of Police, Dargamitta police station, SPSR Nellore District.…Respondent/Complainant.

This petition is coming on 08.05.2026 for hearing before me, in the presence of Sri V.Upendra Rao, Advocate for the Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 and of Sri M.C. Krishna, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/Complainant and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court made the following:

O R D E R

This is an application filed by the petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 under Section 483 of BNSS, seeking regular bail, in connection with Crime

No.52/2026 of Dargamitta Police Station, Nellore registered for the offence under sec.103 (1) r/w 3 (5) of BNS.

2.It is the case of prosecution that the deceased Syed Rafi is brother of A1 and there is enmity and previous grudges between them. While so, on 12.04.2026 during the Odugulu function of A1’s son, sound system was arranged and A2 is the owner of the said sound system. In view of previous enmity between the deceased and A1, he kicked the sound system arranged by the A1 and which lead to a quarrel with A2 and then both A1 and A2 in order do away the life of the deceased, dragged him near to the house of the deceased,

A2 beat him with a stick on the left side of the temple and when the deceased

2

resisted, A2 caught hold him and A1 stabbed him with a knife indiscriminately on the chest and stomach and immediately he was shifted to the hospital and the doctors declared that he had already lost his breath. Basing on the report of the Defacto Complainat a case in Cr.No.52/2026 for the offence under Sec.103 (1) r/w 3 (5) of BNS was registered against the petitioners/A1 and A2.

3.It is the contention of the petitioners that the they did not commit any offence as alleged and they are falsely implicated in this case. The deceased Syed Rafi is having criminal antecedents and he was involved in several criminal cases and he might have died in other circumstances and the petitioners are no way connected with the alleged murder of Syed Rafi. A1 is having wife and two children and A2 is having wife and two children and all are entirely depend on the petitioners/A1 and A2. It is further submitted that material part of the investigation is completed and they are ready to cooperate with the investigation and also ready to produce sufficient sureties and abide by the conditions if any imposed by the court and prays to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

4.Notice given to Additional Public Prosecutor.

5.Heard both the counsel.

6.Now the point for consideration is that:- “Whether the Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 are entitled for bail as prayed for”?

7.POINT :

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and did not commit any offence, and most of the investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet and prays to enlarge the petitioners on bail. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to furnish sufficient sureties and abide by the conditions imposed by the court and prays to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

8.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail and stating that the investigation is not completed, A1 was involved in

Cr.No.144/2023 under Sec.324 of IPC of Dargamitta P.S., A2 was involved in

Cr.No.371/2022 under Sec.435 of Dargamitta P.S. and if the petitioners

3

enlarged on bail at this stage, they may tamper the evidence and cause threat to the witnesses.

9.As could be seen from the record, it shows that the investigation is not completed. Hence considering the gravity of offence, nature of allegations made against the petitioners/A1 and A2 and the stage of investigation as well as objections of learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this court is not inclined to allow the petition at this stage.

10.In the result, the petition is Dismissed.

Typed on my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. P.J. SUDHA

III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.

APNE000036582022

Presented on : 13-07-2022

Registered on : 25-08-2022

Decided on : 08-05-2026

Duration : 3 years, 9 months, 26 days

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE: NELLORE

Present: Smt. P.J. Sudha ,

III Additional District Judge, Nellore

Friday, this the 08th day of May, 2026.

E.P.No .858/2022

ARC.No.471/2019

Between:

M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Limited, having its Registered Office at 123, Angappa Naiken Street, Chennai and having its Administrative Office at No.3-6-478, 4th Floor, Anand Estates, Liberty Road, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad, having its Branch Office at Nellore – 3 Represented by its GPA Sri A.Ramana Reddy. …Decree Holder And:

1. Pasam Venkata Ramanaiah, Son of Krishnaiah, Aged about 36 years, D.No.2-2-17, Jangam Street, Kovur Village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

2. Machepalli Subramanyam, Son of Meeraiah, Aged about 62 years, D.No.2-9-87/2, Koneti Kayyalu, Kovur Post and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. …Judgment Debtors This petition is coming on this day for steps against J.Dr Nos.1 and 2

before me in the presence of Sri D.S.V.Rama Krishna Kumar, Advocate for the D.Hr.,

and J.Dr Nos.1 and 2 remained exparte and this Court delivered the following:

This Execution Petition filed by the Decree-holder under Order

XXI Rule 22, 43, 66 and 64 CPC, to attach and sell the EP schedule movable

properties of J.Dr Nos.1 and 2 in realization of the award amount.

O R D E R

Steps not taken. D.Hr called absent and there is no representa-

tion on behalf of D.Hr. Hence E.P. is dismissed for default.

Pronounced by me in the open Court this the 08th day of May,

2026.

Sd/- Smt. P.J. SUDHA

III Additional District Judge

NELLORE.

APNE000059382025

Presented on : 28-08-2025

Registered on : 05-09-2025

Decided on : 08-05-2026

Duration : 0 years, 8 months, 11 days

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE: NELLORE

Present: Smt. P.J. Sudha , III Additional District Judge, Nellore

Friday, this the 08th day of May, 2026.

E.P.No. 550 of 2025

Tr.Arb.No508/2019

Between:

M/s.Shriram Finance Limited, Chennai Formerly Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, having its registered Office at Mylapore, Chennai, having branch office at D.No.24-1-1681, 4thFloor, Brahmanandapuram, Dargamitta, Nellore City, Rep. by its Special Power of Attorney Holder and Authorized Signatory Ulava Lakshmana Naidu, Son of Venkata Krishnaiah, aged about 51 years, Nellore City, SPSR Nellore Distritct …D.Hr/Claimant And:

1. Sannapaneni Babu Naidu, Son of Siva Sankar Naidu, aged about 56 years, Resident of Door No.23/1488, Lecture’s colony, DCBC, Nellore City, SPSR Nellore District.

2. Pilli Subbareddy, Son of Krishna, Aged about 61 years, Residing at D.No.24/1/1403, 5th Street, J.V.R. Nagar, Nellore City, SPSR Nellore District. …J.Drs/Respondents This petition is coming on this day for payment of process before me in the presence of Sri Divi Nageswara Rao Advocate for the D.Hr/Claimant and this Court delivered the following:

2 APNE000059382025

This Execution Petition filed by the Decree-holder under Order

XX1 Rule 22, 37, 38 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 to arrest the Judgment

Debtor Nos.1 and 2 and send them to the Civil Prison in realization of EP amount.

O R D E R

Batta not paid. D.Hr called absent. No representation.

Hence E.P. is dismissed for default.

Pronounced by me in the open Court this the 08th day of

May, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. P. J. SUDHA

III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

NELLORE.

APNE000064722025

Presented on : 23-10-2025 Registered on : 30-10-2025 Decided on : 08-05-2026 Duration : 0 years, 6 months, 16 days

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, NELLORE

Present: Smt. P.J. Sudha , III Additional District Judge, Nellore

Friday, this the 08th day of May, 2026. * * *

E.P.No. 766 of 2025

OS.No.40 of 2024

Orimpati Masthanamma Mahesha, Wife of Ravindra Reddy, Aged 43 years, Doctor by profession, Resident of D.No.16-2-540, Sankara Aghraharam, Nellore city, SPSR Nellore District.... D.Hr/Plaintiff

Vs.,

Nalubolu Parandamareddy Son of Basireddy, Aged 73 years, Re- tired Government Employee Resident of Aditya Nagar, Nellore city, SPSR Nellore District. … J.Dr/Defendant

This petition coming on this day for confirmation of sale before me in the presence of Sri P.Vijayakumara Reddy, Advocate for the D.Hr/Plain- tiff and J.Dr/Defendant remained set exparte and having stood over for con- sideration to this day, this Court made the following:-

This Execution Petition filed by the Decree-holder under Order XXI Rule 54, 64 and 66 CPC, to attach the EP schedule property of J.Dr and sell the same in realization of the award amount.

O R D E R

Sale papers and Encumbrance Certificate not filed D.Hr called absent and there is no representation on behalf of D.Hr. Hence E.P. is dismissed for default.

Pronounced by me in the open Court this the 08th day of May,

2026.

Sd/- Smt. P.J.SUDHA

III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

NELLORE.