Smt. P. Shirisha

IN THE COURT OF X I V ADDL.JUDGE-CUM-X VIII

ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT SECUNDERABAD .

Present : Smt. P.SHIRISHA XIV Addl. Judge – Cum – XVIII ACJM City Civil Court, Secunderabad

TUESDAY, THE 21 st DAY OF APRIL, 2026

C.C.N o . 2625 OF 20 21

Between:

THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER,

Tukaramgate PS, Hyderabad. … Complainant.

And

A1: Yata Tulasi @ Laxmi W/o Yata Raju, age: 24 years, Occ:Housewife, R/o H.No.9-A/558, Thatti Annaram,R.K.Nagar,HayathNagar, R.R.District, near Irani Hotel, Amberpet, Hyderabad

A2: Yata Swetha, W/o Yata Raju, age: 22 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o H.No.9-A/558, Thatti Annaram,R.K.Nagar,HayathNagar, R.R.District, N/o Patel Nagar, Amberpet, Hyderabad

A3: Yata Renuka, W/o late Y.Gyaneswar, age: 45 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o Opp: Toddy shop, Jaipuri colony, Nagole, N/o H.No.H.No.9- A/558, Thatti Annaram, R.K.Nagar, Hayath Nagar, R.R.District,

A4: Munnelli Kiran, S/o late M.Devadanam, age: 40 years, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o H.No.9-A/558, Thatti Annaram, R.K.Nagar, HayathNagar,R.R.District,N/o Kittamshettipalli (village), Giddaluri (Mandal), Prakasham district, A.P. State 2 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021

A-6: Kavadi Bhagyamma, W/o late Ramulu, age: 65 years, Occ: Sweeper in GHMC (Rtd), R/o H.No.6-1616, Plot No.58, Near Balapur X roads, Meerepet, RR District, N/o Lingala village of Achampet … Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing on 08.04.2026 in the presence of learned APP for Prosecution and Sri S.Narayana, learned Counsel for the accused and after having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This case was transferred to this court from XXII ACMM Court, City

Civil Court, Secunderabad as per orders of Hon’ble MSJ.

2.The brief facts of the prosecution case are that 6.2.2021 at 1930 hours PW1 (Ashish Jain) lodged a complaint in PS Tukaramgate stating that he is running a jewellery shop at Sai Nagar, Tukaramgate as “Trishla Jewellers” since 7 months and on 6.2.2021 at 4 pm while he was in shop, two women entered his shop as customers and asked for silver anklets, while he was showing the anklets to them, other two women entered into his shop and enquired about gold ear tops and he attended both customers, after some time the first two women went away without purchasing anything, after that the second two women also went away without purchasing anything, after that they left from his shop, he weighed the silver box and found shortage of 400 grams, 3 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 then he checked CC TV footage of his shop and noticed that first two women committed theft of silver anklets worth of Rs.20,000/- by diverting his attention. One woman was wearing white and black colour saree aged about 35-40 years and another woman was wearing green colour saree aged about 50-55 years and that he can identify them, if he see them again, hence requested to take necessary action.

3.Basing on the contents of complaint, LW12(R.Yellappa, Inspector of police) registered a case in Cr.No.38/2021, U/sec.380, 420 IPC and handed over case file to LW13(Devija, Sub-Inspector). During the course of investigation, LW13 examined PW1 and recorded his statement and LW13 along with crime team visited scene of offence and examined scene minutely, verified the CC TV footage of scene of offence and summoned two panchas LW2(S.Vishal) and PW3 (Mudith

Jain) and drafted panchanama and rough sketch of scene of offence, after that he collected CC TV footages from the shop of PW1 with the assistance of PW4(K.Raj Kumar) CC TV system Administrator, and after verifying CC TV footages in various places it was noticed that five women i.e. accused came in an auto and stopped at a distance from the shop of PW1, firstly two women entered into the shop and after some time another two women entered into the shop and lastly another women entered, during the conversation, while PW1 was 4 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 attending the secondly entered women, meanwhile the first two women dragged out a bunch of silver anklets from the tray, which was kept before them, finally who entered into the shop picked up the silver article and fled away towards Addagutta X roads in the same auto, the

CC TV footage was converted into CD by PW4 (Raj Kumar).

4.As per instructions of LW12 (R.Yellappa), further investigation was took up by PW5 (G.Thimmappa) Addl.Inspector of police. PW5 deputed

LW9/Shivani, LW10/J.Ashwini, LW11/Kavita, Police Constables for surveillance and prevention of crime, on 15.2.2021 at 8.00 hours, they apprehended the suspected persons who are moving in an auto in suspicious manner at Tukaramgate as their features matched with the features in the CC TV footages of this case and produced before PW5.

On interrogation all the suspected persons admitted their guilt and confessed to have committed the offence, then PW5 secured presence of PW2( Meena Jain) and LW5 (Nikith Raj) and recorded their confession and seizure panchanama of A1 to A4 and they confessed to have committed this offence along with other crimes under various police stations. They confessed that on 6.2.2021 at about 1 pm, A1 and A2 went to Uppal and met with A3, A5 and A6 in the house of A3 and decided to commit another offence, then A1 informed to A4, after some time A4 brought one auto, then A1 to A6 went to a toddy shop at 5 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021

Kummaribasthi, Uppal, after consuming toddy, they proceeded towards

North Lalaguda, Secunderabad, meantime, A1 to A6 observed one jewellery shop at Tukaramgate at about 4 pm, and they found one young person alone in the shop and they decided to commit theft in the shop, then A1 and A5 have entered into jewellery shop and asked

PW1 to show some silver anklets, then PW1 showed some silver anklets, meantime A3 and A6 have entered into the shop, A2 and A4 are waiting outside of the shop and A3 and A6 asked to show gold jewellery and diverted the mind of PW1, then A2 also entered into the shop and asked silver anklets for purchasing in hurry condition, in between A1 dragged a bunch of silver anklets from the tray of silver articles, then A2 picked up the articles and fled away from the shop.

5.In few minutes A1 and A5 also left the shop, after some time A3 and A6 also left the shop and A1 to A6 gathered at a little distance and fled away in the same auto and A1 to A4 have shared the stolen property, in which A1 got 106 gms of silver anklets, A2 got 104 gms of silver anklets, A3 got 101 gms of silver anklets and A4 got 90 gms of silver anklets, A1 to A4 gave Rs.500/- each to A5 and A6. The stolen property was concealed in their respective houses, PW5 recovered the stolen property from possession of A1 to A4 and also seized an auto bearing No.TS13 UC 2717 from possession of A4, one Samsung basic 6 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021

Model cell phone from possession of A1, one oppo smart phone from possession of A3 and one Vivo smart phone from possession of A4 under cover of panchanama. During the course of further investigation,

A1 to A4 confessed that they were previously involved in several crimes pertaining to various police stations.

6.After completion of confession cum seizure panchanama A1 to A4 were brought to PS and PW5 affected the arrest of A1 to A4 and produced them before Hon’ble court. On 23.2.2021 A1 to A3 were taken into police custody and in the custody, A3 confessed that she was involved in a case in Cr.No.213/2019 of PS Narsapur of Medak district and A1 identified the house of A6 and confession of A3 was recorded in the presence of LW6 (S.Anuradha) and LW7 (Sk.Moiz).

7. On 1.3.2021 PW5 deputed LW9/Shivani and LW10/J.Ashwini for apprehension of A6 and they apprehended her and produced before

PW5, on interrogation she confessed to have committed this offence, after that notice was served U/sec.41A crpc to A6 and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against A1 to A4 and A6 stating that as A5 is absconding, a separate charge sheet will be filed after her apprehension.

7 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021

8.The court took cognizance U/Sec.420, 380 r/w 34 IPC and 75 IPC, on appearance of accused case copies furnished to them, they were examined U/sec.239 crpc, charges framed for the offence U/sec.420, 380 r/w 149 IPC, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

9.After completion of prosecution evidence, accused were examined U/sec.313 crpc for the incriminating material against them, for which they denied and reported no defence evidence.

10.The point for determination is: whether the prosecution is

able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable

doubt?

11.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW5 and

Exs.P1 to P8 marked. The evidence of LW2 (S.Vishal), LW5(Nikith Raj),

LW6(S.Anuradha),LW7 (Sk.Moiz) was closed as the prosecution failed to produce them and the remaining evidence of LW9(G.Shiva Rao),

LW10(J.Ashwini), LW11(Kavitha) LW12(R.Yellappa), LW13(Devija) was given up by prosecution.

8 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021

12.PW1 is the defacto complainant he deposed in his chief examination that he is running a jewellery shop by name Trishla

Jewellers at Sai Nagar, Tukaramgate, on 6.2.2021 at about 2 to 3 pm, four women came to his shop and asked him to show silver anklets, he has shown them silver anklets and on the pretext of purchasing they diverted his mind and stolen away 400 gms of silver anklets and when they left he noticed less weight of 400 gms of silver ornaments and with the help of CC TV footages he came to know that they have committed theft of silver ornaments valued Rs.20,000/-, on the same day he went to police station and lodged complaint, witness identified

A1, A2, A3 and A6 as the women who came to his shop.

13.In cross-examination he states that while the incident took place he was the only one present in the shop and he did not handover any copy of stock register to police and PW2 is his relative and she is also witness in CC.3116/2021 on the file of XIX ACMM, Secunderabad and that he did not mention the physical features of the accused in his 161 crpc statement and denies the suggestion that accused is no way concerned with alleged offence and he identified them at the instance of police in the court hall.

9 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 14.PW2 is one of the panchas for confession and seizure panchanama deposed that on 15.2.2021 police called her to the house of A1/Y.Tulasi and she opened the almirah in her house and found silver anklets and two mobiles were found in the house of her friends A2 and

A4, the police seized the above property in her presence, the weight of silver anklets is about 270 grams and conducted panchanama and witness identified the accused in the court hall.

15.In cross-examination PW2 states that PW1 is one of her husband’s brother’s son, she signed on the panchanama in police station and she does not remember the house number of A1 or location and admits that she acted as panch witness in other cases also and she cannot say whether accused confessed regarding other offences or not and denies the suggestion that nothing was seized from possession of accused.

16.PW3 is one of the panchas for scene of observation deposed that on 6.2.2021 at 8 pm, police came to Trishla Jewellery shop and conducted scene of offence panchanama and obtained his signature on it. In cross-examination he admits that PW1 is his cousin and denied that no scene of offence panchanama was prepared in his presence.

10 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021

17.PW4 is police constable, CCTV System Administrator, deposed that LW13/Devija Sub Inspector of PS Tukaramgate informed him about the occurrence of theft and asked him to provide CCTV footages and he has retrieved the same from main road CC TV camera and also CC TV camera from the shop and handed over to LW13 in a pen drive along with Section 65B certificate, Ex.P4 is CD along with Section 65B certificate.

18.In cross-examination PW4 states that he has not seen the CC TV footage and that they informed him from and to time and they copied the data from that particular CC TV and handed over to them and he did not mention in 65B certificate for how long time he has been working as system administrator and he did not mention the date in the certificate and admits that he did not mention from which DVR they have copied the data into pen drive.

19.PW5 is Investigating officer deposed that basing on the complaint given by PW1, LW12/R.Yellappa registered a case in Cr.No.38/2021,

U/sec.380, 420 r/w 34 IPC and handed over CD file to LW13/Devija for further investigation, he examined and recorded the statements of

PW1 and visited scene of offence and drafted CDF in the presence of

LW2 and PW3 and collected CC TV footages with the help of PW4, after 11 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 that he took CD file from LW13 and on 15.2.2021 he arrested A1 to A4 and A6 with the assistance of LW9 to LW12, during interrogation they confessed to have committed the offence and he recorded confessional and seizure panchanama of A1 to A4 in the presence of PW2 and LW5 and seized 106 grams of silver anklets from A1, one Samsung phone, 104 gms of silver anklets from the possession of A2 and 101 gms of silver anklets from the possession of A3 along with Oppo cell phone, 90 gms from the possession of A4 and one Vivo mobile phone pertaining to this case and also seized one auto from A4 and they were remanded to judicial custody, later he obtained police custody of A1 to A3 and recorded confession statement of A3 in the presence of LW6 and LW7 and he issued 41A crpc notice to A6 and A5 is still absconding, after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

20.In cross-examination PW5 admits that PW1 did not mention the descriptive particulars of accused in his 161 crpc statement, the owner of the shop is PW1/Ashish Jain and he did not collect any document to show that PW1 is the owner of the property and he did not verify the stock register of the shop and denies the suggestion that PW2 is interested witness in this case and admits that he has not obtained the signatures of accused on confession and seizure panchanama of A1 to

A4 and that PW4 handed over CD to LW13 and that PW4 downloaded 12 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 the CC TV footages from the shop of PW1 into the CD and handed over to LW13 and he has not verified the CD and he cannot say whether the accused were wearing masks or not and denies the suggestion that as the alleged accused were wearing masks at the time of alleged offence, it is difficult to identify them and denies the suggestion that a false charge sheet was filed against the accused.

21.Perused the evidence on record, according to PW1, he came to know with the help of CC TV footages that 400 grams of silver anklets were stolen from his shop by four women who came to his shop on the pretext of purchasing of ornaments and PW1 and PW2 identified A1 to

A4 in the court.

22.The question of fact is whether the accused are the same persons who went to the shop of PW1 and committed the alleged offence. PW1 in his cross examination states that he did not mention the physical features of accused in his 161 crpc statement and even as per

Investigating officer/PW5 he states that he has not verified the CD whether the accused were wearing masks or not.

23.On perusal of CD/Ex.P4 that was produced in the court, it is seen that the four women who allegedly entered into the shop were wearing 13 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 masks and further as per PW4 who has retrieved the data from CC TV of main road and CC TV of the shop, states that he handed over pen drive to LW13/Sub-Inspector, but whereas Investigating officer/Pw5 states that LW13 handed over CD to him.

24.Further, PW1 did not mention the physical features of the accused in his 161 crpc statement and as per CD/Ex.P4, the women were wearing masks while entering the shop, therefore it is highly improbable to identify the accused in the court hall by PW1 and though

PW2 identified accused, in cross examination she admits that PW1 is her relative and she acted as panch witness in other cases also, therefore the evidence of PW2 appears to be doubtful and prosecution failed to establish the identity of accused beyond reasonable doubt, therefore as there is no sufficient, cogent and convincing evidence on record to hold accused as guilty, they are entitled for benefit of doubt.

25. In the result, the accused A1 to A4 and A6 are found not guilty for the offences under Section 420, 380 r/w 149 IPC and they are acquitted U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C., the bail bonds of the accused, shall stand cancelled after appeal time. The unmarked case property which was handed over for interim custody vide Crl.M.P.No.1525/2021,

Crl.M.P.No.232/2021, Crl.M.P.No.853/2021, shall holds good and final

14 of 14

C.C.No.2625 of 2021 after appeal time and the remaining property shall be handed over to their owners after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, after correction, pronounced by

me in the Open Court on this the 21st day of April, 2026.

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., City Civil Court, Secunderabad.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW1 : Ashish Jain - None -

PW2 : Meena Jain

PW3: M.Mudith Jain

PW4: K.Raj Kumar

PW5: G.Thimmappa

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION :

Ex.P-1: Complaint

Ex.P-2: Confession and seizure panchanama of A1 to A4

Ex.P-3: CDF

Ex.P-4: CD along with Section 65B certificate

Ex.P-5: FIR

Ex.P-6: Confession panchanama of A3

Ex.P-7: Photograph of auto and Vivo phone

Ex.P-8: Photograph of recovered property i.e. silver anklets

FOR DEFENCE:

--Nil--

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., Secunderabad

IN THE COURT OF X I V ADDL.JUDGE-CUM-X VIII

ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT SECUNDERABAD .

Present : Smt. P.SHIRISHA XIV Addl. Judge – Cum – XVIII ACJM City Civil Court, Secunderabad

WEDNESDAY, THE 29 th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

C.C.N o . 2323 OF 20 22

Between:

THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER,

Market PS, Hyderabad. … Complainant.

And

Gopalapuram Santosh Kumar, S/o late Nagabhushanam, age: 45 years, Occ: Goldworks, R/o H.No.7-1-459, First Floor, SVS Residence, Maruthi Veedhi, Near Monda Market, Secunderabad. … Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing on 20.04.2026 in the presence of learned APP for Prosecution and Sri P.Ruthvik, learned Counsel for the accused and after having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This case was transferred to this court from XXII ACMM

Court, City Civil Court, Secunderabad as per orders of Hon’ble

MSJ.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 17.12.2022 at 1830 hours E.Latish Kumar (PW1) came to PS 2 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 and lodged a complaint stating that for the last 10 days he allowed his friend Abhishek (PW2) to park his two wheeler in his apartment as the main road was being laid in front of his friend’s house and that on 17.12.2022 at 4 pm his friend Abhishek came to his apartment to take his vehicle, at that time land owner Santosh/Accused had an argument in disrespectful manner stating that who gave him permission to park his vehicle in the apartment and that he is the owner of the apartment, then his friend Abhishek called him and so he came down and started talking to Santosh, during conversation Santosh pushed him on his left shoulder due to which he fell down from 4 feet staircase and had knee injury, later he went to Vijaya Health care hospital, and requested to take action against Santosh.

3. Basing on the complaint, LW7(S.Kanakaiah, Sub-Inspector of police) registered a case in Cr.No.228/2022, U/sec.341, 324 and 506

IPC and entrusted investigation to PW5 (G.Ramesh Naidu, Sub-

Inspector of police), during the course of investigation, PW5 secured the presence of PW1 who is the victim and recorded his detailed statement and visited scene of offence and secured the presence of Sri

Prakash Kumar (PW3) and Nishith (LW5) and conducted observation panchanama, drafted rough sketch in CDF, further he examined and recorded the statement of B.Abhishek (PW2), Prakash Kumar (LW3).

3 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 4, On 19.12.2022 accused person came to Market PS and appeared

before PW5 and confessed to have committed the offence and he

served notice U/sec.41-A crpc to accused on 20.12.2022, he collected wound certificate from Dr.Narasimha Rao (PW4) who treated PW1 and opined that injuries received by him are simple in nature and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet.

5.The court took cognizance U/Sec.341, 324, 506 IPC, on appearance of accused case copies furnished to him, he was examined

U/sec.251 crpc, substance of accusation for the offences U/sec.341,323

IPC is explained to him, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.After completion of prosecution evidence, accused was examined

U/sec.313 crpc for the incriminating material against him, for which he denied and reported to lead evidence.

7.The point for determination is: whether the prosecution is

able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable

doubt?

8.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PWs 1 to 5 and the evidence of LW3/Prakash Kumar was closed on the report that his 4 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 whereabouts are not known and the remaining evidence of LW5 (Nishith) and LW7 (S.Kanakaiah) was given up by prosecution and

Exs.P1 to P4 marked, the accused did not choose to lead any evidence.

9.PW1(E.Latish Kumar) deposed that he had given permission to his friend Abhishek to park his two wheeler in his apartment as road works were underway, on his request, he allowed him to park his two wheeler, and on 17.12.2022 around 4 pm, Abhishek came to pick his vehicle, then the accused argued with Abhishek that, who gave permission to park his vehicle and that he is the owner of the land, then his friend called, he came down and all of sudden accused pushed him from 4 ½ feet stair case due to which he fell down and received injury on right hand and both the knees, he dialed 100, then he went to police station and they referred him to Vijaya Hospital for treatment, thereafter he lodged Ex.P1/complaint.

10.In cross-examination he states that he resided in the flat from 2011 to 2024, the alleged incident took place on 17.12.2022 and every flat is allotted with two parking places in that residence and he allowed his friend to park his bike in the space provided for his flat and denies that as he parked the vehicle in between the space allotted for accused, when he questioned it, a false case was foisted against him.

5 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022

11.Further PW1 testifies that while he was talking with accused he suddenly pushed him and he received injuries on his both knees as well as on his shoulder and denies the suggestion that accused did not push him and he did not receive any bleeding injuries and that he was deposing false and that as the owner of the flat did not pay the agreed amount to the accused, he filed a false case against him to evade payment.

12.Abhishek was examined as PW2, he states in chief examination that he parked his two wheeler in the cellar of PW1 apartment, as there was road work underway before his house and he took permission from

PW1 to park his vehicle in his apartment and on 17.12.2022 at about 4 pm, he went to get back his two wheeler, then accused stopped him and questioned him that with whose permission he parked his vehicle there, the accused behaved rudely then he called PW1 when he came, the accused and PW1 argued and accused pushed PW1 from four or five stairs from left side due to which PW1 fell down from the stairs and received bleeding injuries on both the knees and left hand, then they went to police station and PW1 lodged a report and he was referred to

Vijaya Health care for treatment.

6 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022

13.In cross-examination PW2 testifies that the alleged incident occurred on 17.12.2022 at his friend’s apartment parking place, police examined him on the same day and he does not have written permission to park the vehicle at his friends apartment and he does not know the parking place, but he parked his vehicle at his friends parking place, he does not know accused and that accused abused

PW1 and he spoke to him harshly and they went to hospital on his two wheeler, further testifies that accused did not use any weapons and he does not know that PW1 was involved in some criminal cases and he cannot say the flat number of PW1, but he resides in 3rd floor and PW1 received severe injuries on knee and left hand and denies suggestion that as there were previous disputes between accused and PW1 regarding maintenance issue they filed a false case against accused and states that they handed over CC TV footage to police.

14.PW3 (Kasinath) is one of the panchas for CDF deposes that on 17.12.2022 police came to opposite house of his house and conducted panchanama in connection with a scuffle between PW1 and accused and obtained his signature on panchanama. In cross-examination he deposes that police came between 7 to 7.30 pm and he cannot say the day and designation of police and they came to know two days prior to date of panchanama regarding the quarrel between accused and PW1 7 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 and police informed that accused beat PW1 and in that connection they came to visit the house and he does not know that PW1 was having the habit of picking up quarrels with every one.

15.PW4(Dr.Narasimha Rao) deposes that he is working as Orthopedic surgeon at Vijaya Health care since 2000, he has attended one patient

Latish Kumar/PW1 on 17.12.2022 at 5.50 pm in Emergency Ward, he had sustained abrasions on both the knees due to a fall over steps and alleged to have been pushed by a known person, the injuries are simple in nature, accordingly he issued medical certificate. In cross- examination he states that he cannot say whether PW1 was intoxicated or not at the time of examination.

16.PW5 (G.Ramesh Naidu, Sub-Inspector) deposes that on 17.12.2022 at 1830 hours LW7 received a complaint from PW1, basing on that he registered a case in Cr.No.228/2022, U/sec.341,324, 506 IPC and handed over CD file to him for further investigation. He examined and recorded the statements of PW1, PW2 and LW3 and visited scene of offence at Maruthi Veedhi, Secunderabad and conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of PW3 and LW5 and on 19.12.2022 the accused appeared before him and he served 41A crpc 8 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 and on 20.12.2022 he collected MC and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet.

17.In cross-examination PW5 states that he does not know that there were earlier disputes between PW1 and accused regarding apartment maintenance and denies the suggestion that he did not examine any independent witnesses and that he did not visit scene of offence and that no alleged incident occurred and states that he does not know whether there were criminal cases pending against PW1 and that he has verified the CC TV footage and the scene of offence is at the parking area.

18.Perused the evidence on record, as per testimony of PW1 (E.Latish Kumar), he gave permission to his friend Abhishek to park his vehicle in the space provided for his flat, then accused who is the owner of the land started arguing with Abhishek that with whose permission he parked his vehicle there, then Abhishek called him, when he came accused argued with him and pushed him from steps, due to which PW1 received injuries on both the knees.

19.PW2/Abhishek evidence is corroborated with the evidence of

PW1, he also testifies that the accused pushed PW1 from four or five 9 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 steps, due to which he received injuries on both the knees, further according to PW3 on 17.12.2022 police came and conducted panchanama. However, he states that two days prior to date of panchanama, he came to know regarding the quarrel, so it is doubtful whether panchanama was conducted on 17.12.2022 or two days after that.

20.PW4 is the doctor who examined Latish Kumar/PW1 and issued wound certificate that PW1 sustained abrasions on both the knees due to a fall from steps.

21.In criminal courts, the evidence of Injured stands on higher footing than other witnesses, if it is found to be trustworthy and reliable.

22.The testimony of PW1/injured and PW2 is corroborating with each other and nothing was elicited in cross examination to disbelieve their version, mere discrepancy in the evidence of PW3 regarding the date of CDF is not fatal to the case of prosecution.

23.The evidence of PW1 and PW2 is consistent, cogent and also supported by evidence of PW4 doctor, therefore it is proved that the 10 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022 accused voluntarily caused hurt to PW1/Latish Kumar and wrongfully restrained PW2/Abhishek, therefore the accused is liable to be punished U/sec.323, 341 IPC.

24. In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offences under

Section 323,341 IPC and he is convicted U/sec.255(2) Cr.P.C.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, after correction, pronounced by

me in the Open Court on this the 29th day of April, 2026.

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., City Civil Court, Secunderabad.

Hearing on quantum of sentence:

Accused stated thathe is having two children who are dependent on him and pleaded mercy of the court, basing on the nature of offence, Probation of Offenders Act cannot be made applicable to this case, therefore the following sentence would meet the ends of justice.

The accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- U/sec.323

IPC and to pay fine of Rs.500/- U/sec.341 IPC, (Total Rs.1500/-

Rupees Fifteen hundred only) and in default of payment of fine, he shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month, the accused is also informed of his right to appeal and free copy of judgment is furnished to him.

11 of 11

C.C.No.2323 of 2022

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION

PW1 : E.Latish Kumar

PW2 : B.Abhishek

PW3: Kasinath

PW4: Dr.Narasimha Rao

PW5: G.Ramesh Naidu

FOR DEFENCE:

-NONE-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION :

Ex.P-1: Complaint

Ex.P-2: CDF

Ex.P-3:Wound certificate

Ex.P-4: FIR

FOR DEFENCE:

--Nil--

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., Secunderabad

IN THE COURT OF X I V ADDL.JUDGE-CUM-X VIII

ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT SECUNDERABAD .

Present : Smt. P.SHIRISHA XIV Addl. Judge – Cum – XVIII ACJM City Civil Court, Secunderabad

MONDAY, THE 20 th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

C.C.N o . 2355 OF 20 20

Between:

THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER,

TIRUMALAGIRI PS, Hyderabad. … Complainant.

And

Turlapati Venkata Suresh Babu,S/o Turlapati Venkata Pandu Ranga Rao, age: 57 years, Occ: Managing Direct of M/s.Spy Care Management Services Pvt. Ltd., R/o H.No.10-3-131, Sacred School Lane, Nehru Nagar, East Marredpally, Secunderabad. … Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing on 16.04.2026 in the presence of learned APP for Prosecution and Sri Mogulaji, learned Counsel for the accused and after having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This case was transferred to this court from XXII ACMM

Court, City Civil Court, Secunderabad as per orders of Hon’ble

MSJ.

2 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 22.6.2019 at 1930 hours LW1/Vineet S.Nair, Defence Estates Officer lodged a complaint in which he stated that he hired five persons of outsourcing staff upto June 2017 and thereafter from July 2017 onwards four more persons were hired through an agency namely M/s. Spy Care

Management Pvt.Ltd situated at Tirumalagiri, Secunderabad and the proprietors are Usha Rani Mantripragada and Suresh V Turlapati, the above agency has raised bills till January 2018 only for the above outsourcing staff, however the salaries were paid till December 2018 for the above staff.

3. Further, the monthly wages bill of 9 persons of temporary staff comes to Rs.1,87,717/- per month, on request of his office, six persons were also engaged for conducting survey of land in Maharashtra through the same agency and accordingly survey was carried by six surveyors, but so far neither the concerned papers nor the bills have been raised regarding survey, however payments have been made to the surveyor from agency.

4. Further while raising the bills, as per norms an amount of @13.61% towards EPF and 4.75% towards ESI have to be deducted and to be deposited in the relevant accounts of 9 persons individuals, 3 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020 but despite repeated requests by his office, no action has been taken by the above agency to pay them their ESI/EPF, thus including EPF and

ESI not deposited for the financial years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 to the tune of total Rs.3,39,210/- (EPD) and Rs.1,22,060/- (ESI) to the temporary staff accounts, total dues of Rs.26,34,157/- are pending to be cleared from his office. The bills were raised on time by the agency, despite repeated requests the agency has not initiated any action and the agency has been operating such contracts in in numerous Defence,

Central and State Govt.Departments or agencies in AP & TS and has been in receipt large sum of money from USA as a part of money laundered from that country, hence requested to take necessary action.

5. As per the contents of complaint, PW3 (D.Venkateshwarlu) Sub

Inspector registered a case in Cr.No.102/2019, U/sec.420, 403, 406 IPC and took up investigation, during the course of investigation, he examined and recorded the statements of LW1, PW1 and PW2, visited accused office at Ravi Cooperative Society, Trimulgherry and enquired with LW4/Ch.Ramesh and after that he recorded the statement of LW4, further during the course of investigation on 4.7.2019 PW3 served notice U/sec.91/160 Cr.P.C. to LW1 and requested him to appear along with documentary evidence and he provided photocopies of agreement and some other photographs for investigation. On credible information 4 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020 he along with LW7/A.Acharya and LW8/Praveen Kumar, proceeded to

Ravi Cooperative Society and apprehended the accused No.1/Turlapati

Venkata Suresh Babu and interrogated him and he confessed his guilt, then PW3 secured two mediators i.e. LW5/K.B.Shankar Rao and

LW6/Alphose Avinash and recorded the confession statement of A1 and affected his arrest and produced him before Hon’ble court. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against A1, stating that a separate charge sheet would be filed against A2 after her apprehension.

6.The court took cognizance U/Sec.420, 403, 506 IPC, on appearance of accused case copies furnished to him, he was examined

U/sec.239 crpc, charges framed for the offence U/sec.420, 403, 406

IPC, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.After completion of prosecution evidence, accused was examined

U/sec.313 crpc for the incriminating material against him, for which he denied and reported no defence evidence.

8.The point for determination is: whether the prosecution is

able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable

doubt?

5 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020 9.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW3 and

Exs.P1 and P2 marked, the evidence of LW1 (Vineet S Nair),

LW4(Ch.Ramesh), LW5(K.B.Shankar Rao) was closed on the report that the address of LW1 is not known and whereabouts of LW4, LW5 is not known and the remaining evidence of LW6 to LW8 was closed as prosecution failed to produce them even after granting sufficient time.

10.PW1 deposed in his chief examination that previously he worked as employee in Defence Estates Office at Secunderabd on contract basis, he used to get salary of Rs.18,000/- per month, he has hired by

Spy Care Management Services run by accused and one Usha rani to work at Defense Estates office and their office people informed that

Rs.1250/- will be deducted as PF every month from his salary and after few months he checked the PF account and noticed that his PF was not deducted from June 2017 to 31st March 2019, later they informed to

LW1 and he lodged report against accused. In cross-examination he states that he used to receive Rs.16000/- as gross salary and he did not file any document to show that he worked at Defence Estates office and received salary of Rs.16000/- and admits that he did not file any document to show that he was hired by Spy Care Management

Services.

6 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020 11.PW2 also deposed that he is working as Data Entry Operator in

Defense Estates office since 2017, his first contractor was Spy Care

Management Services from 5.6.2017 to 31.3.2019, later another contractor came who changed year after year and the Spy Care

Management did not deposit EPF and ESI for a period of two years i.e.

from 2017 to 2019 and his salary was Rs.13,500/- at that time. Further states that his salary of Rs.1800/- was deducted towards EPF and

Rs.150/- for ESI by Spy Care Management Services, but they did not deposit in the concern government account as per the agreement and he has contacted the accused T.Venkat Suresh Babu and one Usha Rani who are the directors of Spy Care Management Services but did not respond, later their Defense Estates Officer lodged a complaint against accused. In cross-examination he admits that he worked under the

Spy Care Management Services from 5.6.2017 to 31.3.2019 only and that an amount of Rs.1250/- was deducted towards EPF and the remaining amount of Rs.550/- would be added by the contractor, totalling Rs.1800/- and that they approached LW1 in the year 2019, that they did not lodge complaint directly before police and denies the suggestion that they were not recruited through Spy Care Management

Services and as such he did not file any document and that accused did not cheat him and has not committed any offence of Criminal breach of trust.

7 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020

12.PW3 is Investigating officer, he deposed that on 22.6.2019, he received a complaint from LW1, basing on that he registered a case in

Cr.No.102/2019 U/sec.420, 403, 406 IPC and took up investigation, he examined and recorded the statement of LW1 on the same day and examined PW1 and PW2 on 23.6.2019 and LW4 on 24.6.2019 and on 4.7.2019 he served notice U/sec.91/160 to LW1 for producing required documents, on 19.12.2019 he apprehended the accused and recorded his confessional statement in the presence of LW5 and LW6 and effected his arrest and produced before Hon’ble court for judicial remand. In cross-examination he states that he has not collected documents from EPF office and denies the suggestion that the panch witnesses are stock witnesses and that the accused is no way concerned with the alleged offence.

13.Perused the evidence on record, the defacto complainant/LW1 was not examined by prosecution, further as per testimony of PW2 and

PW3 they states that they were hired by Spy Care Management services to work at Defense Estates office and that their EPF and ESI was deducted from their salary, but that amount was not deposited in the concern government account, however, no documentary evidence was brought on record to show that the EPF and ESI amounts were deducted by accused and not credited in to the government account.

8 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020

14.Even as per Investigating officer/PW3, he states that he has not collected any document from EPF office, but he collected documents from LW1, but the said LW1 was not been examined by prosecution.

15.Therefore, as there is no sufficient documentary evidence and convincing evidence to prove the guilt of accused, he is entitled for benefit of doubt.

16. In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences under Section 420,403,406 IPC and he is acquitted U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C., the bail bonds of the accused, shall stand cancelled after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, after correction, pronounced by

me in the Open Court on this the 20th day of April, 2026.

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., City Civil Court, Secunderabad.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION

PW1 : G.Sai Kiran

PW2 : M.Chaitanya Kiran Kumar

PW3: D.Venkateshwarlu

FOR DEFENCE:

-NONE- 9 of 9

C.C.No.2355 of 2020

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION :

Ex.P-1: FIR

Ex.P-2: Confession panchanama dt. 19.12.2019

FOR DEFENCE:

--Nil--

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., Secunderabad

IN THE COURT OF X I V ADDL.JUDGE-CUM-X VIII

ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT SECUNDERABAD .

Present : Smt. P.SHIRISHA XIV Addl. Judge – Cum – XVIII ACJM City Civil Court, Secunderabad

MONDAY, THE 20 th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

C.C.N o . 3394 OF 20 21

Between:

THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER,

Trimulgherry PS, Hyderabad. … Complainant.

And

A-1: Dabbugottu Mallikarjun, S/o Laxmi Narsaiah, age: 25 years, Occ: Naik in Indian Army at 207, J&K, (Army No.15241288W, H.No.1-5A, Nasiltrayambakam, Markondapuram, Prakasham District, Andhra Pradesh.

A-2: Kadige Anand, S/o Sayanna, age: 19 years, Occ: Student, R/o H.No.2-20, Bolsa Village, Tanoor (M), Nirmal district

A-3: Gothi Megharaj, S/o Kabirdas, age: 20 years, Occ: Student, R/o Koratikal, Nerediguda (M), Adilabad district

A-4: Hivarale Dondujee, S/o H.Gangadhar, age: 19 years, Occ: Student, R/o Wadgoan, Tanoor mandal, Nirmal district

A-5: Chavan Ambadas, S/o Shyam Rao, age: 20 years, Occ: Student, R/o H.No.5-64, Ammugaon, Kuntala (M), Nirmal district … Accused 2 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021

This case is coming before me for final hearing on 15.04.2026 in the presence of learned APP for Prosecution and Sri Mogulaji, learned Counsel for the accused and after having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This case was transferred to this court from XXII ACMM Court, City

Civil Court, Secunderabad as per orders of Hon’ble MSJ.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 17.3.2021 at 1630 hours, LW1 (Vinith Kumar Tiwari) Defense Personnel filed a complaint in which he stated that he was performing the duties of receptionist at Military hospital and he found two persons by name

Mr.Anand/A2, Megharaj/A3 students appearing for review test medical, in place of A4/Hivarale Dondujee and Chavan Ambadas/A5, all four persons belongs to Adilabad district and requested to take necessary action.

3. As per contents of above complaint, LW10(B.Sravan Kumar),

Inspector of police registered a case in Cr.No.75/2021, U/sec.419, 420 r/w 34 IPC and entrusted investigation to PW2 (Syed Saduddin). LW1 handed over accused persons to Pw2, he has taken them into custody and during the course of investigation, PW2 examined the complainant/LW1, recorded his statement and visited scene of offence 3 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021 and secured the presence of two mediators i.e. PW1(T.R.Murali Mohan) and LW5(M.Raju), he also examined LW2(Sub Manik Lal Singh) and

LW3(Hav Prabhu Jolly) and recorded their statements.

4. On interrogation the accused persons voluntarily admitted to have committed this offence and he recorded confession statement of

A2 in the presence of LW6(F.Naresh) and LW7(Samson) in which he stated that he got acquaintance with one person by name

Mallikarjun/A1 who was the Director of Mother Dream Defence

Academy, he assured that he will help to get a Job in Army and demanded Rs.1,50,000/- and that he agreed, and in the month of

Februrary Government of India has issued notification for Army recruitment rally and they applied for GD Solider post and attended 1.6 km run at Hakimpet Sports School and qualified, the next procedure is to attend medical examination and he has a problem Varicocele, then

A1 suggested him that he has to attend the medical in place of other person and other person will attend the medical test, so that he can qualify the medical and demanded Rs.33,700/- to clear the medical and he attended medical in place of A4 and during the surgical review, the staff observed their identification marks and confirmed that those were not matching with the identification marks mentioned in review form of A4 and A5 and A3 confessed that he attended the medical in 4 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021 place of A5 and A4 and A5 also confessed and was informed by A2 and

A3 to come over to Military hospital, immediately the Army personnel took them to Army recruitment cell, later they brought them to the police station and handed over them to the police personnel.

5. Later PW2 affected the arrest of A2 to A5 and produced before

Hon’ble court and they were sent to judicial remand.

6. PW2 went to Aqua Stay Inn Luzury Rooms, at Regimental Bazar,

Secunderabad and collected the rented room bill copy from above mentioned lodge and examined the lodge owner/Lw8 (Ajay Dusaj) and recorded his statement in Part-II CD, he also collected the application forms and other concerned documents of A2 and A3 from the Director of Recruitment, Army Recruiting Board at Secunderabad. While investigation is in progress, on 13.9.2021 accused No.1 came to PS, on interrogation he confessed that he brought A2 and A3 instead of A4 and A5, later he served notice U/sec.41A crpc to A1 and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

7. The court took cognizance U/Sec.419, 420 r/w 34 IPC. On appearance of accused case copies furnished to them, they were examined U/sec.239 crpc, charges framed for the offences U/sec.419, 5 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021 420 r/w 149 IPC, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

8.After completion of prosecution evidence, accused were examined U/sec.313 crpc for the incriminating material against them, for which they denied and reported no defence evidence.

9.The point for determination is: whether the prosecution is

able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable

doubt?

10.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1 and PW2 and the evidence of LW1/victim, LW2/Sub Manik Lal Singh, LW3/Hav

Prabhu Jolly was closed on the report that they have transferred and their address not known and the remaining evidence of LW5/M.Raju,

LW6/F.Naresh, LW7/Samson, LW8/Ajay Dusaj was closed on a report that their whereabouts were not known and the evidence of

LW9/Praveen Kumar and LW10/B.Sravan Kumar was given up by prosecution.

6 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021

11.PW1 is one of the panchas for CDF turned hostile and deposed that no panchanama was conducted in his presence and one day police obtained his signature on some papers.

12.PW2 is Investigating officer, he deposed that on 17.3.2021 at 1630 hours LW10 received a complaint from LW1, basing on that he registered a case in Cr.No.75/2021, U/sec.419, 420 r/w 34 IPC and handed over case file to him along with accused No.2 to 5 and he has taken them into custody and he recorded the statements of LW1 to

LW3, later visited scene of offence in the presence of PW1 and LW5 and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drafted rough sketch, on interrogation they voluntarily confessed to have committed the offence, as such he secured the presence of LW6 and LW7 and recorded their confession statement, later he affected the arrest of A2 to A5 and produced them before Hon’ble court, later he proceeded to

Aqua Stay Inn Luxury room at Regimental Bazar, Secunderabad and collected rented room bill copy and examined lodge owner and recorded his statement and collected application form and other documents of A2 and A3 from Director of Recruitment, Army recruiting board at Secunderabad, on 13.9.2021 A1 voluntarily came to PS and on interrogation he confessed that he brought A2 and A3 to attend the exam instead of A4 and A5 as such he served 41A crpc notice to 7 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021 accused No.1 and the same was complied, after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet.

13.In cross-examination, he admits that he did not record the confession of A1 and did not seize any material objects like phone from

A1 and did not collect any register from LW1 who was performing duties of receptionist and he has obtained application forms and medical reports from military personnel and that he has not verified its genuinity as they were collected from Military personnel and admits that there are no signatures of accused on confession panchanama and that the complaint ought to have been filed by higher authorities.

14.Perused the evidence on record, except the testimony of PW2 i.e.

investigating officer, there is no other independent and corroborating evidence to show that accused has committed this offence, mere marking application forms and medical reports which are secured from

Military personnel is not sufficient to prove the charges against accused, moreover LW1 is not examined by prosecution, therefore as there is no sufficient, cogent and convincing evidence on record to hold accused as guilty, they are acquitted of all charges agaisnt them.

8 of 8

C.C.No.3394 of 2021 15. In the result, the accused A1 to A5 are found not guilty for the offences under Section 419, 420 r/w 149 IPC and they are acquitted

U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C., the bail bonds of the accused, shall stand cancelled after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, after correction, pronounced by

me in the Open Court on this the 20th day of April, 2026.

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., City Civil Court, Secunderabad.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW1 : T.Murali Mohan

PW2 : Syed Tajuddin

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION :

Ex.P-1: Signature on CDF

Ex.P-2: Complaint

Ex.P-3: CDF

Ex.P-4: Confession statement of A2 to A5

Ex.P-5: Application form along with documents of A5,

Ex.P-6: Application details of A4,

Ex.P-7: Aqua Stay Inn receipt

Ex.P-8: FIR

Ex.P-9: Medical reports of A4, A5

FOR DEFENCE:

--Nil--

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., Secunderabad

IN THE COURT OF X I V ADDL.JUDGE-CUM-X VIII

ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT

SECUNDERABAD .

Present : Smt. P.SHIRISHA XIV Addl. Judge – Cum – XVIII ACJM City Civil Court, Secunderabad

WEDNESDAY, THE 6 th DAY OF MAY, 2026

C.C.N o . 1689 OF 20 22

Between:

THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER,

TUKARAMGATE PS, Hyderabad. … Complainant.

And

Rajath Kumar Gupta, S/o Rajesh Kumar Guptha, age: 27 years, Occ: Production Engineer in NCL at Chopanki, Rajasthan State, R/o Mahadevni Kethan, Chowngundri Bazar, Balliya, Uttar Pradesh State. … Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing on 27.04.2026 in the presence of learned APP for Prosecution and Sri N.Janardhan Reddy, learned Counsel for the accused and after having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This case was transferred to this court from XXII ACMM

Court City Civil Court, Secunderabad as per orders of Hon’ble

MSJ.

2 of 7

C.C.No.1689 of 2022

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 24.7.2022 at 1330 hours LW11/R.Yellappa Inspector of police received a CD file of

Zero FIR in Cr.No.0-1/2022, U/sec.420, 417 IPC of Chegunta PS, Medak

District through Addl.Commissioner of police, Crimes & SIT, Hyderabad.

3. As per complaint, on 7.6.2022, the complainant/LW1 Kumari

Ganta Swathi present at Chegunta stated that she worked as accountant at NCL Buildtek ltd, at Secunderabad from 2017 to 2020 and in the year 2018 she was introduced with one Rajath Kumar

Guptha/accused, resident of Balliya district, UP State and resides in

Bhiwadi, Rajasthan also working in same company as Junior Engineer at Rajasthan branch, when he came to Secunderabad to attend office meeting then he took her mobile No.7993461692 and frequently used to talk with her over phone with his mobile No.7905093686 and 8004048156 regarding office work, later in October 2018 he proposed her and that he will marry her and believing his words, complainant fell in love with him and on 25.9.2020 Rajath Kumar Guptha called her to his house and the complainant went to Bhiwadi, Rajasthan where he introduced her to his family members and friends stating that he will marry her and after four months he was not lifting her phone calls and on 30.5.2022 when complainant made phone call to accused through her friend mobile, he replied that he will not marry her and his mobile 3 of 7

C.C.No.1689 of 2022 phone was switched off and requested to take necessary action against accused who cheated her.

4. On the basis of her complaint, LW10/S.Pochaiah, Sub-Inspector of police, Chegunta PS, Medak district registered Zero FIR and examined complainant, recorded her statement and as per the contents of complaint, place of offence fall under jurisdiction of PS Tukaramgate since both got introduced at the work place at NCL Building,

Secunderabad.

5. On receipt of CD file through proper channel, LW11(R.Yellappa),

Inspector of police has re-registered a case in Cr.No.156/2022

U/sec.417, 420 IPC and handed over case file to

LW13(V.Parameshwari), Sub-Inspector of police for further investigation.

6. During the course of investigation, he secured the presence of

LW1 (Kumari Ganta Swathi), re-examined and recorded her detailed statement and complainant made some more allegations against the accused that the accused caught hold of her hands and chest in the absence of others, basing on the contents of her statement, he added 4 of 7

C.C.No.1689 of 2022 sections 354, 354A, 354D IPC and the memo was submitted to Hon’ble court.

7. Later LW13 visited scene of offence and drawn rough sketch in the presence of PW1(D.Das) and LW7 (M.Yadagiri) and examined

LW5(Madhusudhan Rao) who is the HR Manager of same company and further he secured LW2 (Ganta Tulasi) mother of complainant, LW3 (Ganta Shankar) father of complainant, LW4 (Ganta Suresh) brother of complainant and recorded their statements and also collected photographs of accused and victim and collected some documents from LW1 showing employment of LW1/complainant and accused.

8. On 27.7.2022 at about 1000 hours, accused was apprehended at Secunderabad Railway station and on interrogation he admitted his guiltandLW13securedLW8(KanthiSunder)and

LW9(P.Parashuramulu) and recorded his confession statement and seized one Black colour Samsung mobile phone from his possession containing whatsapp chat, later affected arrest of accused and produced before the Hon’ble court for judicial remand and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

5 of 7

C.C.No.1689 of 2022

9. The court took cognizance U/Sec.354, 354A, 354D, 417, 420 IPC.

On appearance of accused case copies furnished to him, he was examined U/sec.239 crpc, charges framed for the offence U/sec.354, 354A, 354D, 417, 420 IPC, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

10.As there is no incriminating material against accused, 313 crpc examination is dispensed with.

11.The point for determination is: whether the prosecution is

able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable

doubt?

12.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW1/Dummati

Das and the evidence of LW1/Kum.G.Swathi, LW2/Kum.G.Tulasi,

LW3/G.Shankar was closed on the report filed by SHO that LW1 married and went back to home town in AP and LW2 and LW3 also went back to home town, and the remaining evidence of LW4/G.Suresh and LW5/YVR

Madhu Sudhan Rao, LW7/Malothu Yadagiri, LW8/Kanthi Sunder,

LW9/P.Parashuramulu,LW10/P.Pochaiah,LW12/D.Mahesh,

LW13/V.Parameshwari was also closed as the prosecution failed to produce them even after granting sufficient time.

6 of 7

C.C.No.1689 of 2022 13.PW1 is one of the panchas for CDF turned hostile and deposed that in the year 2022 police came to ground floor at NCL head office and informed that an incident occurred previous night and obtained his signature on some papers and he does not know its contents.

14.The prosecution failed to examine victim/defacto complainant and other material witnesses, therefore there is no evidence on record to hold accused as guilty, hence he is acquitted of all charges against him.

15. In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences under Section 354,354A, 354D, 417, 420 IPC and he is acquitted

U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C., the unmarked case property Samsung Galaxy S-8 which was handed over to accused for interim custody vide

Crl.M.P.No.2644/2023 shall holds good and final after appeal time, the

bail bonds of the accused, shall stand cancelled after appeal time.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, after correction, pronounced by

me in the Open Court on this the 6th day of May, 2026.

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., City Civil Court, Secunderabad.

7 of 7

C.C.No.1689 of 2022

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION

PW1 : D.Das

FOR DEFENCE:

-NONE-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION :

Ex.P-1: Signature of PW1 on CDF

FOR DEFENCE:

--Nil--

XIV Addl. Judge–Cum-XVIII ACJM., Secunderabad