Smt. P Srivani

1 C.C.No.289 of 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS FOR RAILWAYS, KAZIPET

Present: Smt.P.Srivani,

Judl.1st Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Thursday, this the 07th day of March, 2019

C.C.No.289 OF 2018.

Between:

Sri Madhu Kotla The Sub-Inspector, RPF, Mahbubabad Post.

...Complainant

AND

Daravath Naga, S/o Bixam, Age: 34 yrs, Occ: Driver R/o Patchya Thanda, Chivvemla (M), Suryapet District.

... Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Learned Public Prosecutor for Railways and of Sri S.Ramu, Advocate for accused and the matter having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

PW.1 / The Sub-Inspector, Mahbubabad Post, filed a Final

Complaint before this Court against accused in Cr.No.621 of 2018 for the offences Under Sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

That on 01.06.2018 at about 12.30 hours, PW.1 got an information from Security Control, Secunderabad that one Lorry was struck up at LC Gate No.83 in between Mahbubabad and Gundrathimadugu

Railway Stations and damaged height gauge. Basing on the information

PW.1 along with the staff and LW.3/SSE/P.Way/Mahbubabad attended the 2 C.C.No.289 of 2018 spot, prepared the joint observation, took the photographs of the scene of offence and then, examined and recorded the statement of LW.4/D.Ram

Babu, On duty gate man and came to know that the lorry height is more than height gauge, however, the driver crossed the LC Gate negligently, resulting the offence. Hence, he examined the accused in the presence of mediators LW.5/K.Srinu and LW.6/R.Mallesh, for which, he revealed his identity and voluntarily confessed about commission of offence. So, PW.1 recorded the statement of accused, seized the crime vehicle in the presence of panch witnesses under cover of panchanama, returned to the Post along with accused and crime vehicle and basing on the material, he registered the case as in Cr.No.621/2018 for the offences under sections 154 and 174(c) of the Railway Act and released the accused on bail with an instruction to appear before the Court as and when summoned. On the same day PW.1 obtained memo and Train Detention Certificate from LW.7/Station

Superintendent, Mahbubabad and submitted crime and occurrence report

before Court.

During the course of enquiries, on 03.06.2018 PW.1 obtained

Damage Certificate from LW.3/SSE/P.Way/Mahbubabad to the tune of

Rs.2,000/-. On 03.06.2018 PW.1 examined and recorded the statements of mediators LW.5/K.Srinu and LW.6/R.Mallesh. On 08.06.2018 PW.1 released the crime vehicle to the owner as per Orders of the Court vide

Crl.M.P.No.1460/2018, dt.04.06.2018 and after completion of enquiries

filed final complaint before this Court.

3 C.C.No.289 of 2018

3. This court took cognizance for the offences Under Sections 154 and 174(C) of Railway Act.

4. The accused, when was present, copies of case documents were furnished to him.

5. The accused when was examined Under Section 251 of Cr.PC, by explaining the accusation levelled against him for the offences Under

Sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act in Telugu Language, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 and given up the evidence of LW.2/G.Satyanarayana, LW.3/B.Meghanath, LW.4/D.Ram babu, LW.5/K.Srinu, LW.6/R.Mallesh and LW.7/S.Venkata Mohan and during the course of Trial, the prosecution got marked Exs.P-1 to P-13.

7. After closing of the prosecution evidence, when Accused was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by explaining all the incriminating evidence available in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence on his behalf. Hence, defence side evidence was closed.

8. Heard both the prosecution as well as the Learned Counsel for the accused.

9. Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences Under Sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act, beyond reasonable doubt or not?

10. Perused the evidence coupled with Exhibits.

4 C.C.No.289 of 2018

POINT:

11. P.W-1 is the Enquiry Officer. According to PW.1, on 01.06.2018 he received an information from Security Control, Secunderabad that one Lorry bearing No.TS 29 T 6219 has been struck up in the LC Gate

NO.83 between Mahbubabad and Gundrathimadugu Railway Stations, resulting the damage to the height gauge. So, he rushed to the spot, caused

Joint Observation along with LW.3/SE/P.Way/Mahbubabad, took the photographs of the scene of offence. Ex.P.1 Memo, Ex.P.5 Joint

Observation Report, Ex.P.9 Rough Sketch and Ex.P.7 Occurrence Report are proving the occurrence of offence.

12. According to PW.1, he enquired and recorded the statement of on duty gate man and came to know mode of the incident, enquired the accused in the presence of mediators LW.5/K.Srinu and LW.6/R.Mallesh, for which, accused revealed his identity and confessed about the offence, so, he recorded the statement of accused under cover of panchanama and Seizure list, returned to the Post along with the accused and crime vehicle and registered a case as in Cr.No.621/2018 for the offences Under sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act. Ex.P.6 Statement of On duty Gateman is proving the mode of occurrence of offence. Ex.P.12 Carbon copy of Statement of accused and Ex.P.13 Panchanama are proving that accused voluntarily confessed about the offence. Apart from this, Exs.P2 and P3 the statements of mediators are clearly proving that a accused gave his statement out of free will and voluntarily before PW.1. Besides this, Ex.P8 Damage Certificate 5 C.C.No.289 of 2018 and Ex.P.10 Train Detention Certificate are also found in support of case of prosecution. On the other hand, there is no cross examination except a single suggestion that accused never committed any offence, however same was denied by PW.1. Hence the evidence of PW.1 remained un-rebutted.

14. In the light of above discussion, I hold that prosecution proved the guilt of accused for the offences U/s 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act.

15. In the result, Accused is found guilty for the offences Under

Sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act and accused is convicted

U/sec.255(2) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offences Under Sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act.

The crime vehicle Lorry bearing No.TS 29 T 6219 which was already handed over to owner for interim custody as per orders in Crl.MP

No.1460/2018, dt.08.06.2018 shall be retained by him after appeal time is over.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 07th day of March, 2019)

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

Heard the accused, on quantum of sentence. He submitted that he is very poor and having old aged parents, besides wife and children. He further submitted that if, he is sent to the Jail, his family would be put to suffer, since he is the sole bread winner of his family and he promised that he won’t commit offence again and pleaded mercy of the Court.

6 C.C.No.289 of 2018

Upon hearing the accused on the quantum of sentence, it is observed that the accused is very poor and having still obligations towards his family and if he is sent to jail, his family would literally be on roads.

As the offence is against the public entrepreneur, this court is not inclined to invoke the provisions of Probation of offenders Act, levying of fine would meet the ends of justice rather sending him to jail.

In the result, Accused is found guilty for the offences Under Sections 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act. Accordingly, he is convicted under section.

255(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence U/secs. 154 and 174(c) of Railway Act.

Keeping in view of the submission made by the accused before this court, I further hereby pass a sentence to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three

Thousand only) for the offence U/sec.154 of Railway Act. In default of payment of fine, shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of One month. I further hereby pass a sentence to undergo to pay a fine of

Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) for the offence U/sec.174(c) of

Railway Act. In default of payment of fine, shall undergo Simple

Imprisonment for a period of Twenty Days. Total fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees

Five Thousand only).

Copy of Judgment is served to the accused. Accused is hereby informed about their right to appeal and right to have legal Aid in the appellate Court also.

The crime vehicle Lorry bearing No.TS 29 T 6219 which was already handed over to owner for interim custody as per orders in Crl.MP 7 C.C.No.289 of 2018

No.1460/2018, dt.08.06.2018 shall be retained by him after appeal time is over.

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

P.W-1 Madhu Kotla NIL

Exhibits Marked

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P-1 is the Memo - Nil - Ex-P2 is the statement of mediator LW.5/Kastala Srinu, Ex-P3 is the statement of mediator Lw.6/Ramachi Mallesh, Ex-P4 is the acknowledgment for releasing of crime vehicle, Ex-P5. is the joint observation report, Ex-P6 is the statement of on duty gateman LW.4/ Dasari Rambabu, Ex-P7 is the occurrence report, Ex-P-8 is the damage certificate, Ex-P9. is the rough sketch, Ex-P10 is the train detention certificate, Ex-P11 is the five photos with CD, Ex-P12 is the carbon copy of confessional statement of the accused (original statement was filed in some other crime as stated by the witness), Ex-P13. is the panchanama.

Material Objects

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

-Nil - - Nil –

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet. // True copy //

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS FOR

RAILWAYS, KAZIPET

Present: Smt.P.Srivani,

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Friday, this the 8th day of March, 2019.

C.C.No.225 OF 2018

Between:

Sri.S.Venkataswamy, Sub Inspector of Police, RPF, Ramagundam.

...Complainant

AND

Indra Singh, S/o Ajmeer Singh, Age: 25 yrs, R/o Dhirauli (V), Bhitharabar (Thasil), Gird(Skethr), Gwaliyor (District), Madyapradesh State

... Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Learned Public Prosecutor for Railways and of Sri A.P.Vijay Kumar, Learned Counsel for the accused and the matter having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

The Sub Inspector of Police, RPF, Ramagundam filed final complaint against the accused in Cr.No.680 of 2017 for the offence U/Sec.154 of Railway Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is:

That on 30-07.2017 at about 6.10 PM, P.W-1 received information from Security control that one Lorry struck up on the track at K.M.O. 147 / 6-5 between

Armour and Morthad Railway station. So P.W-1 visited the spot along with L.W-4

SSE/ PWI/constructions/NZP, conducted joint observation report, noticed the same .

He there examined the duty trackman L.W.5, recorded his statement, seized the

Lorry M.P07 HB 3572 which was loaded with Oranges, handed over the

Page 1 of 6 oranges to Lw-6 chowhan, kept the lorry in safe custody returned to the post , registered a case as in Cr.No.680/2017 for the offence U/sec.154 of railway Act, then he secured complaint from Lw-4/SSE/PWI/Constructions and train detention particulars from Lw-7/Station Master/Armour. On 1-8-2017 he recorded the statement of Lw-8/Aslam.

On 2-8-2017 the accused voluntarily surrendered before Pw-1 as such he enquired the driver of the crime vehicle, in the presence of the panch witnesses,

L.W.9/Nani, L.w-10, Yadagiri, the accused confessed that he while passing the gate out of hurry, had struck up the Lorry . Hence P.W-1 recorded his confessional statement, arrested the accused, produced before the court and the accused was remanded to Judicial custody and was later released on bail. During the course of enquiry , on 5-8-2017 examined and recorded the statement of of mediators L.W-, 9/Nani, L.w-10, Yadagiri , and after completion of enquiry laid charge sheet before the court, along with the damage certificate.

3. This court took cognizance for the offence Under Section.154 of Railway Act .

4. The accused when was present, copies of case documents were furnished to him.

5. The accused was examined Under Section 251 of Cr.PC by explaining the charges of accusation levelled against him which were read over and explained to him in Telugu Language, for which, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.W.1, given up the evidence of L.W-2 to 10 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-17.

7. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused when was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by explaining all the incriminating evidence available in

Page 2 of 6 the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence on his behalf.

8. Heard both the prosecution as well as the Learned Counsel for the accused.

9. Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences Under Section 154 of Railway Act beyond reasonable doubt or not?

10. Perused the evidence coupled with Exhibits.

11. P.W-1 is the enquiry officer cum complainant in this case. According to P.W-1, 30-07.2017 at about 6.10 PM, P.W-1 received information from Security control that one Lorry struck up on the track at K.M.O. 147 / 6-5 between Armour and

Morthad Railway station. So P.W-1 visited the spot along with L.W-4 SSE/

PWI/constructions/NZP, conducted joint observation report, noticed the same . Ex.P- 14 joint observation report cum damage assessment report is proving the same, he there examined the duty trackman L.W.5, recorded his statement, Ex.P12 the statement of the duty gate man is also proving the occurrence of the offence. seized the Lorry M.P07 HB 3572 whcih was loaded with Oranges , handed over the oranges to Lw-6 chowhan, kept the lorry in safe custody returned to the post , registered a case as in Cr.No.680/2017 for the offence U/sec.154 of railway Act, then he secured complaint from Lw-4/SSE/PWI/Constructions and train detention particulars from Lw-7/Station Master/Armour.Ex.P5 and Ex.P11 ids proving the same. On 1-8-20`17n he recorded the statement of Lw-8/Aslam .Ex.P16 si proving the same. On 2-8-2017 the accused voluntarily surrendered before Pw-1 as such he enquired the driver of the crime vehicle, in the presence of the panch witnesses, L.W-, 9/Nani, L.w-10, Yadagiri, the accused confessed that he while passing the gate out of hurry, had struck up the Lorry . Hence P.W-1 recorded his

Page 3 of 6 confessional statement, arrested the accused, produced before the court and the accused was remanded to Judicial custody and was later released on bail. During the course of enquiry , on 5-8-2017 examined and recorded the statement of of mediators L.W-, 9/Nani, L.w-10, Yadagiri , under Ex.P-8 and 9, and the statements of the mediators under, are proving that P.W-1 enquired the accused in the presence of the panch witnesses in whose presence the accused confessed the offence. Ex.P-7 the statement of the accused is also proving that he admitted the guilt. Ex.P10 is the seizure list under which P.W-1 has seized the crime vehicle and documents related to.

12. On the other hand when perused the cross examination of the P.W.1,it is observed that accused gave a single line suggestion stating that accused never committed any offence, which would not lead him for acquittal in this case, since, there is no other worthful cross examination of P.W-1 which destroys the case of the prosecution.

13. In the light of the evidence of P.W-1, Exs.P-1 to P-17, the prosecution proved he guilt of the accused for the offence U/sec/154 of Railway Act.

14. In the result, the accused is found guilty for the offence U/sec.154 of Railway

Act and he is convicted U/sec.255(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence U/sec.154 of Railway

Act.

(Typed, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 08th day of March, 2019)

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Page 4 of 6

Heard the accused on quantum of sentence. He submitted that if he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment, his family would suffer irreparable loss since they are solely dependant on him for their livelihood and thereby pleaded mercy.

This court is not inclined to invoke the provisions of the probation of offenders act as the offence is against the public property.

Upon hearing the accused on the quantum of sentence, it is observed that the accused is poor and his family is depending on him and they accused is having still obligations towards his family and if they is sent to jail, his family literally would be on roads. In all the circumstances stated by accused, this court feels that imposing of fine to him would meet the ends of justice, rather sending him to jail,

In the result, accused is found guilty for the offence U/sec.154 of the

Railway Act, accordingly, accused is convicted under section.255(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence 154 of the Railway Act. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances stated before this court by accused, keeping in view of damage of the property as

Rs.5,000/- ,I hereby pass a sentence to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand

Only) for the offence U/sec.154 of the Railway Act. In default of payment of fine, accused shall undergo simple Imprisonment for three months. Copy of Judgment is served to the accused. Accused is hereby informed about his right to appeal and right to have legal Aid in the appeal. The crime vehicle MP 07 HB 3572 which was given to the owner for the interim custody vide Crl.M.P.No. 818/17 Dt.4.8.17, shall be retained by him after appeal time is over.

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Page 5 of 6

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

P.W-1: S.Venkataswamy , Sub Inspector of Police, RPF, Ramagundam. --None-- Dt.25.02.2019

Exhibits Marked

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P-1 is the all concerned message issued - Nil - by SSE/P-way /construction /Nizamabad Ex-P2 is the statement of Lw-6/Abhay Chouhan Ex-P3 is the acknowledgment for releasing of crime vehicle Ex-P4 is the eight photos with CD Ex-P5 is the complaint issued by SS/Armour Ex-P6 is the seizure panchanama at about 9.00 hours dt. 2-8-2017 Ex-P7. is the statement of the accused Ex-P8 is the statement of mediator Lw.10/P.Yadagiri. Ex-P9. is the statement of mediator Lw.9/ Angothu Nani Ex-P10 is the seizure list Ex-P11 is the train detention certificate Ex-P12 is the statement of Lw.5/Rakesh, on duty track man Ex-P13 is the statement of Lw.3 /Bablu, cleaner of the crime vehicle Ex-P14. is the joint observation report. Ex-P15 is the rough sketch Ex-P16 is the statement of Lw8/Aslam Khan/Owner of the lorry. Ex-P17 is the panchanama dt: 30-7-2017

Material Objects

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

--Nil-- --Nil--

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet. // True copy //

Page 6 of 6

1 C.C.No.313 of 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS FOR RAILWAYS, KAZIPET

Present: Smt.P.Srivani,

Judl.1st Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Friday, this the 08th day of March, 2019

C.C.No.313 OF 2018

Between:

Sri.M.Venkata Reddy The Sub-Inspector, RPF, Khammam Post.

...Complainant

AND

Badavathu Ravi, S/o Bhadru, Age: 44 yrs, R/o Kevula thanda, Jangilgonda, Mahbubabad District.

... Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Learned Public Prosecutor for Railways and of Sri Ch.Ramesh, Advocate for accused and the matter having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

PW.1 /The Sub-Inspector, RPF, Khammam Post filed a Final

Complaint before this Court against the accused in Cr.No.09 of 2018 for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

That on 18.06.2018 at about 09.30 hours PW.1 while was on rounds along with his staff at KM No.484/4-6, near A Cabin in Khammam

Railway Station, found the accused under suspicious circumstances carrying weighty Polythene bag. So, he detained the said person, enquired 2 C.C.No.313 of 2018 him in the presence of mediators LW.3/V.Laxman and LW.4/P.Krishna

Goud, for which, he revealed his identity and confessed to have committed theft of 30 ER Clips, since the accused failed to produce any voucher or receipt, PW.1 seized 30 ER Clips under cover of panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and as lead and shown by the accused PW.1 visited the place from the where the accused committed theft of property, prepared observation panchanama, recorded the confessional statement of accused, returned to the post along with the accused and property and registered a case in Cr.No.09/2018 for the offence under section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act and produced the accused before the Court. Accused was remanded to judicial custody, later he was released on bail.

During course of enquiries, on 19.06.2018 PW.1 obtained theft memo and Case Property Certificate from LW.5/SSE/P.Way./Dornakal. On 30.06.2018 PW.1 recorded the statements of mediators LW.3/V.Laxman and

LW.4/P.Krishna Goud and after completion of enquiries, filed final complaint.

3. This court took cognizance for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act.

4. The accused, when was present, copies of case documents were furnished to him, recorded the statement of complainant.

5. The accused when was examined Under Section 246(1) of Cr.PC, he denied of committing offence and on perusal of record, a charge Under

Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Acts has been framed, read over and explained to 3 C.C.No.313 of 2018 him in Telugu Language, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.W.1, given up the evidence of LW.2/I.Jaipal, LW.3/V.Laxman, LW.4/P.Krishna Goud and

LW.5/T.Nagaraju and during the course of trial, the prosecution got marked

Exs.P-1 to P-10 and MOs.1 and 2.

7. After closing of the prosecution evidence, when Accused was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by explaining all the incriminating evidence available in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence on his behalf. Hence, defence side evidence was closed.

8. Heard both the prosecution as well as the Learned Counsel for the accused.

9. Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act beyond reasonable doubt or not?

10. Perused the evidence coupled with Exhibits.

POINT:

11. P.W-1 is the Enquiry Officer –cum-complainant. According to the evidence of Pw.1, on 18.06.2018 at about 09.30 hours he apprehended the accused who was found under suspicious circumstances near A Cabin in 4 C.C.No.313 of 2018

Khammam Railway Station, enquired him in the presence of mediators

LW.3/V.Laxman and LW.4/P.Krishna Goud, for which, accused revealed his identity and committed theft of 30 ER Clips. So, he seized 30 ER Clips under cover of panchanama and seizure list, visited the place from where accused committed theft of property, prepared observation panchanama and recorded the confessional statement of accused, then, returned to the post and registered a case in Cr.No.09/2018 for the offence U/s 3(a) of RP(UP)

Act and produced accused before the Court. Ex.P.1 Panchanama, Ex.P.3

Observation Panchanama, Ex.P.4 Statement of accused coupled with Ex.P.2

Seizure list are supporting the version of PW.1 and are clearly proving that accused voluntarily confessed about committing theft of 30 ER Clips and same was seized by PW.1.

12. According to PW.1, he obtained theft memo and case property certificate from the concerned. Ex.P.6 Theft memo and Ex.P.7 Case Property

Certificate are clearly proving that MO.1 belongs to Railways. Whereas, the statements of mediators under Exs.P8 and P9 are also found in support of

PW.1 and are proving that accused made voluntary confessional statement in their presence before PW.1. On the other hand, it is observed that there is no cross examination except a single suggestion that accused never committed any offence and said suggestion was also denied by PW.1. Hence, I hold that evidence of PW.1 holds good.

5 C.C.No.313 of 2018

13. In the light of above discussion, I hold that prosecution proved the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act.

14. In the result, Accused is found guilty for the offence Under

Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act and accused is convicted U/sec.248(2) of

Criminal Procedure Code for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP)

Act.

MO.2 i.e. 30 ER Clips which was given for safe custody to the concerned RPF, vide CPR No.101/2018, dt.25.08.2018 shall be returned to concerned after appeal time is over with proper acknowledgment to be file

before this Court. MO.1 Polythene bag shall be destroyed after lapse of

appeal time The bail bonds of accused stall stand in force till six months from the date of this Judgment U/s 437-A of Cr.P.C.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 08th day of March, 2019)

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

6 C.C.No.313 of 2018

Heard the accused, on quantum of sentence. He submitted that he is very poor and doing coolie work and he has to take care of his children.

He further submitted that if, he is sent to the Jail, his family would be put to suffer, since he is the sole bread winner of his family and he promised that he won’t commit the offence once again and thereby pleaded mercy of the court.

Upon hearing the accused on the quantum of sentence, it is observed that the accused is very poor and he has to take care of his family.

As the offence is against the public entrepreneur’s property, this court is not inclined to invoke the provisions of Probation of offenders Act.

Hence, levying of fine would meet ends of justice rather sending him to Jail.

In the result, Accused is found guilty for the offence U/sec.3(a) of RP (UP) Act. Accordingly, accused is convicted under section. 248(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence U/sec.3(a) of RP (UP) Act. Keeping in view of the submission made by the accused before this court, I hereby pass a sentence to pay a fine of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees One Thousand and Five Hundred only) for the offence U/s 3(a) of RP (UP) Act. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of Fifteen days.

Copy of Judgment is served to the accused. Accused is hereby informed about their right to appeal and right to have legal Aid in the appellate Court also.

7 C.C.No.313 of 2018

MO.2 i.e. 30 ER Clips which was given for safe custody to the concerned RPF, vide CPR No.101/2018, dt.25.08.2018 shall be returned to concerned after appeal time is over with proper acknowledgment to be file

before this Court. MO.1 Polythene bag shall be destroyed after lapse of

appeal time The bail bonds of accused stall stand in force till six months from the date of this Judgment U/s 437-A of Cr.P.C.

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

P.W-1: M.Venkata Reddy NIL

Exhibits Marked

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P-1 is the Panchanama. - Nil - Ex-P2 is the seizure list, Ex-P3 is the observation panchanama, Ex.P4 is the statement of the accused, Ex-P5 is the rough sketch, Ex-P6 is the theft memo, Ex-P7 is the case property certificate, Ex-P8 is the statement of mediator Lw.3/ V.Laxman, Ex-P9 is the statement of mediator Lw.4/P.Krishna Goud, Ex-P10 is the one photo with CD

Material Objects

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

M.O-1 is the one polythene bag - Nil – M.O-2 is the 30 ER Clips.

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet. // True copy //

1 C.C.No.243 of 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS FOR RAILWAYS, KAZIPET

Present: Smt.P.Srivani,

Judl.1st Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Thursday, this the 07th day of March, 2019

C.C.No.243 OF 2018

Between:

Sri.V.Samba Murthy The Sub-Inspector, RPF, Warangal Post.

...Complainant

AND

Badavath Shankar, S/o Fakeera, Age: 53 yrs, Occ: Coolie, R/o H.No.3-111/1, Badi Thanda, Kesamudram, Mahbubabad.

... Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Learned Public Prosecutor for Railways and of Sri S.Ramu, Advocate for accused and the matter having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

PW.1 /The Sub-Inspector, RPF, Warangal Post filed a Final

Complaint before this Court against the accused in Cr.No.09 of 2018 for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

That on 05.06.2018 at about 11.30 hours PW.1 while was on rounds along with his staff in Warangal Railway Station near B Cabin Area, found the accused under suspicious circumstances carrying a weighty 2 C.C.No.243 of 2018 polythene bag. So, he detained the said person, enquired him in the presence of mediators LW.3/M.Raju and LW.4/T.Sampath, for which, he revealed his identity and confessed that he purchased 32 ER Clips from unknown person at Kesamudram, since the accused failed to produce any voucher or receipt, PW.1 seized 32 ER Clips under cover of panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses, recorded the confessional statement of accused, returned to the post along with the accused and property and registered a case in Cr.No.09/2018 for the offence under section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act and produced the accused before the Court. Accused was remanded to judicial custody, later he was released on bail.

During course of enquiries, on 09.06.2018 PW.1 obtained theft memo and Case Property Certificate from LW.5/SSE/P.Way./Mahbubabad.

On 15.06.2018 PW.1 recorded the statements of mediators LW.3/M.Raju and LW.4/T.Sampath and after completion of enquiries, filed final complaint.

3. This court took cognizance for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act.

4. The accused, when was present, copies of case documents were furnished to him, recorded the statement of complainant.

5. The accused when was examined Under Section 246(1) of Cr.PC, he denied of committing offence and on perusal of record, a charge Under

Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Acts has been framed, read over and explained to 3 C.C.No.243 of 2018 him in Telugu Language, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.W.1, given up the evidence of LW.2/D.Jagjeevan, LW.3/M.Raju, LW.4/T.Sampath and

LW.5/B.Meghanath and during the course of Trial, the prosecution got marked Exs.P-1 to P-9 and MOs.1 and 2.

7. After closing of the prosecution evidence, when Accused was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by explaining all the incriminating evidence available in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence on his behalf. Hence, defence side evidence was closed.

8. Heard both the prosecution as well as the Learned Counsel for the accused.

9. Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act beyond reasonable doubt or not?

10. Perused the evidence coupled with Exhibits.

POINT:

11. P.W-1 is the Enquiry Officer –cum-complainant. According to the evidence of Pw.1, on 05.06.2018 at about 11.30 hours he apprehended the accused who was found under suspicious circumstances carrying one 4 C.C.No.243 of 2018 polythene bag in Warangal Railway Station near B Cabin area, enquired him in the presence of mediators LW.3/M.Raju and LW.4/T.Sampath, for which, accused revealed his identity and confessed that he purchased 32 ER Clips from unknown person at Kesamudram near Railway Station. So, he seized 32 ER Clips under cover of panchanama and seizure list and recorded the confessional statement of accused, then, returned to the post and registered a case in Cr.No.09/2018 for the offence U/s 3(a) of RP(UP) Act and produced accused before the Court. Ex.P.1 Panchanama, Ex.P.2 Confessional statement of accused coupled with Ex.P.3 Seizure list are supporting the version of PW.1 and are clearly proving that accused voluntarily confessed that he purchased of 32 ER Clips and same was seized by PW.1.

12. According to PW.1 he obtained theft memo and case property certificate from the concerned. Ex.P.5 Theft memo and Ex.P.6 Case Property

Certificate are clearly proving that MO.1 belongs to Railways. Whereas, the statements of mediators under Exs.P7 and P8 are also found in support of

PW.1 and are proving that accused made voluntary confessional statement in their presence before PW.1 out of free will and consent. On the other hand, it is observed that there is no cross examination except a single suggestion that accused never committed any offence and said suggestion was also denied by PW.1. Hence, evidence of PW.1 holds good.

13. In the light of above discussion, I hold that prosecution proved the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence Under Section 5 C.C.No.243 of 2018 3(a) of RP (UP) Act.

14. In the result, Accused is found guilty for the offence Under

Section 3(a) of RP (UP) Act and accused is convicted U/sec.248(2) of

Criminal Procedure Code for the offence Under Section 3(a) of RP (UP)

Act.

MO1 i.e. 32 ER Clips was given for safe custody to the concerned RPF, vide CPR No.75/2018, dt.10.08.2018 shall be returned to concerned after appeal time is over with proper acknowledgment to be file

before this Court. MO.2 i.e., one polythene bag shall be deposited before

the Court and shall be destroyed before the Presiding Officer after appeal time is over. The bail bonds of accused stall stand in force till six months from the date of this Judgment U/s 437-A of Cr.P.C.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 07th day of March, 2019)

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

Heard the accused, on quantum of sentence. He submitted that he is very poor and doing coolie work and he has to take care of his children. He further submitted that if, he sent to the Jail, his family would be put to suffer, since he is the sole bread winner of his family and he promised that he won’t commit the offence once again and thereby pleaded mercy of the court.

6 C.C.No.243 of 2018

Upon hearing the accused on the quantum of sentence, it is observed that the accused is very poor and he has to take care of his family.

As the offence is against the public entrepreneur’s property, this court is not inclined to invoke the provisions of Probation of offenders Act. Hence, levying of fine would meet ends of justice rather sending him to jail.

In the result, Accused is found guilty for the offence U/sec.3(a) of RP (UP) Act. Accordingly, accused is convicted under section. 248(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence U/sec.3(a) of RP (UP) Act. Keeping in view of the submission made by the accused before this court and value of case property as Rs.1,600/-, I hereby pass a sentence to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees

Two Thousand only) for the offence U/s 3(a) of RP (UP) Act. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of Twenty days.

Copy of Judgment is served to the accused. Accused is hereby informed about their right to appeal and right to have legal Aid in the appellate Court also.

MO1 i.e. 32 ER Clips was given for safe custody to the concerned

RPF, vide CPR No.75/2018, dt.10.08.2018 shall be returned to concerned after appeal time is over with proper acknowledgment to be file before this

Court. MO.2 i.e., one polythene bag shall be deposited before the Court and shall be destroyed before the Presiding Officer after appeal time is over.

7 C.C.No.243 of 2018

The bail bonds of accused stall stand in force till six months from the date of this Judgment U/s 437-A of Cr.P.C.

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

P.W-1: V.Samba Murthy NIL

Exhibits Marked

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P-1 is the Panchanama. - Nil - Ex-P2 is the confessional statement of the accused, Ex-P3 is the seizure list, Ex-P4 is the rough sketch, Ex-P5 is the theft memo, Ex-P6 is the case property certificate, ExP7 is the statement of mediator LW.3/ M.Raju, Ex-P8 is the statement of mediator LW.4/T.Sampath, Ex.P-9 is the one photo with CD

Material Objects

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

M.O-1 is 32 ER Clips - Nil – M.O-2 is one Polythene bag.

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

// True copy //

1 C.C.No.07 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

CLASS FOR RAILWAYS, KAZIPET

Present: Smt.P.Srivani,

Judl.1st Class Magistrate for Railways, Kazipet.

Wednesday, this the 06th day of March, 2019

C.C.No.07 OF 2017

Between:

Sub Inspector of Police, RPS, Kazipet.

...Complainant

AND

Bhukya Uma @ Ravi, S/o Ambria, Age: 25 yrs, Occ: Begging in Trains, R/o Ward No.18, Chaman, Back Side of Devi Theatre, Jangaon of Warangal District.

... Accused

This case is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Learned Public Prosecutor for Railways and of Sri S.Ramu, Learned Counsel for the accused and the matter having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following.

JUDGMENT

LW.7/ The Sub-Inspector of Police, RPS, Kazipet filed a Charge

Sheet before this Court against the accused in Cr.No.119 of 2016 for the offence Under Section 384 of IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

That on 22.08.2015 at about 07.30 hours PW.1 went to Ghanpur

Railway Station for selling Samosa, returned to Kazipet, boarded Sirpur

Kagaznagar Express Train in General Coach, when the train was running between Ghanpur and Kazipet, one unknown Hijra approached him and demanded for money. When PW.1 refused, Hijra threatened him and 2 C.C.No.07 of 2017 forcibly taken Rs.230/- from his pocket. Hence, he informed the GRP who escorted the train. Immediately, police chased Hijra, caught him, enquired him and came to know the name. immediately, he reported to the Police

Basing on the report of PW.1, PW.4 registered a case as in

Cr.No.119/2016 for the offence U/s 384 of IPC, examined and recorded the statement of PW.1, enquired the accused in the presence of mediators PWs 2 and 3, for which he confessed about the offence. So, PW.1 recorded the confessional statement of accused seized net cash of Rs.230/- under cover of panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses, arrested him and produced before the Court, later he was released on bail. Further PW.4 examined and recorded the statement of LW.4/R.Venu Gopal, RPC and

LW.5/V.Srinivas, RPC, further investigation was taken up by LW.7/SI, RPS,

Kazipet and he in turn filed charge sheet before this Court.

3. This court took cognizance for the offence Under Section 384 of IPC.

4. The accused, when was present, copies of case documents were furnished to them.

5. The accused when was examined Under Section 239 of Cr.PC, they denied of committing offence and on perusal of record, a charge Under

Section 384 of IPC has been framed, read over and explained to them in

Telugu Language, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws 1 to 4, given up the evidence of LW.4/R.Venu Gopal, LW.5/V.Srinivas and 3 C.C.No.07 of 2017

LW.7/P.Dayakar and during the course of Trial, the prosecution got marked

Exs.P-1 to P-9 and MO.1.

7. After closing of the prosecution evidence, when Accused was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by explaining all the incriminating evidence available in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused denied the same and reported no defence on his behalf. Hence, defence side evidence was closed.

8. Heard both the prosecution as well as the Learned Counsel for the accused.

9. Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence Under Section 384 of IPC beyond reasonable doubt or not?

10. Perused the evidence coupled with Exhibits.

POINT:

11. According to PW.1, about three years back, on one day, when he was travelling in Intercity express train, stood near the door, meanwhile, two Hijras approached him and taken Rs.230/-. Hence, he gave report to the

Police. Though PW.1 narrated the story as to how the offence happened, but, he failed to identify the accused as offender. Moreover, as per evidence of

PW.1, offenders were two in number, whereas, charge sheet is filed against sole against. Hence, evidence of PW.1 is no way helpful to the prosecution case.

4 C.C.No.07 of 2017

12. PWs 2 and 3 are the panch witnesses, but, both of them turned un-friendly to the case of prosecution and stated that he never acted as panch witness in this case, but, the police obtained his signatures on some papers, as PWs.2 and 3 are turned un-friendly to the prosecution case, learned prosecution declared them as un-friendly to their case, cross examined them, but, failed to get material in favour of them. So, evidence of PWs.2 and 3 are not helpful to the prosecution case.

13. According to PW.4, basing on the report given by PW.1, he registered a case as in Cr.No.119/2016 for the offence U/s 384 of IPC, enquired the accused the presence of mediators PWs 2 and 3, for which, accused confessed about the offence, so, he recorded the confessional statement of accused, seized cash of Rs.230/- and produced accused before the Court and charge sheet was filed by LW.11/SI, RPS, Kazipet, but, the panch witnesses did not support the version of PW.1. So, the confession- cum-Seizure panchanama is not proved, moreover, the crucial witness failed to identify the accused as offender. So, evidence of PW.4 cannot be based to convict the accused.

14. In the light of above circumstances, I hold that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offence under section 384 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt and Accused is liable to be acquitted.

5 C.C.No.07 of 2017

15. In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence Under

Section 384 of IPC accordingly accused is acquitted U/sec.248(1) of

Criminal Procedure Code for the offence Under Section 384 of IPC. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled after lapse of appeal time.

M.O.1 Net cash of Rs.230/- which was handed over to PW.1 as per

Orders of the Court vide Crl.M.P.No.297/2019, dt.23.01.2019 shall be retained by him after appeal time if over.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 06th day of March, 2019)

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

P.W-1: Mohammed Khaleel NIL P.W-2: A.Venkataiah P.W-3: D.Chirutha P.W-4: Y.N.Venkat Reddy

Exhibits Marked

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

Ex.P1 : Report - Nil – Exs.P2 to P4 : Signatures of PW.2 on the Panchanama Exs.P5 to P7 : Signatures of PW.3 on the Panchanama Ex.P.8 : FIR Ex.P9 : Confession Panchanama Material Objects

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

MO.1 : Net cash of Rs.230/- - Nil –

Sd/-

Judl. First Class Magistrate for Railways Kazipet. // True copy //