Sri. R. Ajay Kumar

1CC 295 of 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

AT: UTNOOR

Present:- Sri R. AJAY KUMAR

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Utnoor (Dated this the 25 th day of August, 2022)

CC. 295 of 2018

( Crime No.129 of 2018 of Utnoor PS)

Between: The State of Telangana, through, Station House Officer, Utnoor P.S. ...Prosecution A n d

Chowhan Ramkumar S/o Prahalad, age: 27 yrs, Caste: Lambada, R/o Naddamguda village of Utnoor Mandal.

...Accused.

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of APPO for the State and Sri B.Jagan, Advocate counsel for the accused and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following.

-:J U D G M E N T:-

01)The above accused is indicated for the offence under sections 354-D and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) in Cr.No. 129 of 2018 by the Sub-inspector of Police, Utnoor Police Station.

02) The brief facts of the charge-sheet are as follows:-

For the past year, the accused has been stalking PW1 on the account of love and marriage. Following that, on 29-06-2018, at about 14.00 hrs, while

Pw1 was alone in her house, the accused went to her house and expressed his love and readiness to perform marriage, as well as stated to visit his house in the absence of inmates, and threatened that if she did not visit his house, he would forward her photos on whatsapp and flee away by making gestures. Enraged with

JFCM,UTNOOR.

2CC 295 of 2018 the actions of the accused, Pw1 consumed pesticide poison and she was shifted to the hospital. Later, Pw1 went to the police station and lodged the report, dated 29- 06-2018.

03)Based on the report dated 29-06-2018, the Lw8/Sub-Inspector of Police registered a case in Cr. No. 129 of 2018 for the offence U/sec. 354-D and 509 of

IPC, issued an FIR, and took up investigation. During the course of the investigation, Lw7/WPC examined and recorded the statement of Pw1. Later, Lw8-

SI of police visited the scene of offence situated at Naddamguda and conducted

CDF in the presence of Pws 4 & 5 and examined and recorded the statements of

Pws 2 & 3. On 07-07-2018 at 16.00 hrs., he arrested the accused and released him on bail after obtaining sureties. After collecting the medical report and completing the investigation, Lw9/SI of police filed the charge-sheet against the accused for the offence U/sec. 354-D, 509 of IPC.

04)Upon receipt of the charge sheet, my learned predecessor took cognizance for the offence U/sec. 354-D, 509 IPC against the accused and assigned the case number as CC. 295 of 2018.

05) On appearance of the accused, copies were furnished to him under Section 207 of Criminal Procedure Code (herein after referred as Cr.P.C.) and accused is examined under Section 239 of Cr.P.C in respect of accusations for the offence under Sections 354-D, 509 IPC, read over and explained to him in his vernacular language, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

06)Out of (09) witnesses, prosecution got examined (05) witnesses. PW1 is the informant/Victim. Pw2 is the father of the Victim. Pw3 is the grand father of the

Victim. Pws 4 & 5 are the mediators to the CDF. The evidence of Lws 6 to 9 was given up by the learned APP as the material witness had turned hostile. On behalf of the prosecution, Exs.P1 to P4 were marked.

JFCM,UTNOOR.

3CC 295 of 2018

07)As, no incriminating evidence appearing from the prosecution witnesses against the accused, section 313 Cr.P.C examination is dispensed with.

08)Heard the arguments of learned Appo and learned counsel for accused.

09) Now the points for determination in this case are:

I) "Whether the accused, on or before 29-06-2018, at about 14.00 hrs,

followed Pw1 to foster her personal interaction despite her clear indication

of disinterest, and thus committed an offence punishable under Section

354-D of Indian Penal Code?"

II) "Whether the accused insulted the modesty of Pw1 on 29-06-2018 at

about 14.00 hrs by making gestures to her with a sign to call her to the

house and thus committed an offence punishable under Section 509

Indian Penal Code?"

Points I & II :-

Both points are addressed together for clarity, brevity, and to avoid repetition.

10)Pw1/Victim testified that, about 4 years ago, she went to her relatives house without informing to her parents. Following that, her parents gave missing report to the police against the accused.She also testified that she had no knowledge of the facts of the case and that she had never been stalked or insulted. She failed to support the prosecution case and completely turned hostile.

11) Pws 2 & 3 who are father and grand father of the Victim, testified that they knew nothing about the facts of the case, failed to support the prosecution case and completely turned hostile.

12)Pws 4 & 5, who are mediators to the CDF, denied their presence at the scene of offence and turned hostile.

13)As seen from the above, there is no single piece of incriminating evidence deposed by Pws 1 to 5 against the accused. Pws 1 to 5 completely turned hostile and failed to support the prosecution's case. There is no evidence to connect the

JFCM,UTNOOR.

4CC 295 of 2018 accused to the alleged incident. None of the witnesses testified that accused stalked or insulted Pw1's modesty, made gestures against her. In the absence of any evidence against accused, he cannot be said to be found guilty. As the material witnesses turned hostile and failed to support the prosecution case the learned APP given up the evidence of Lw6-Medical Officer, Lw7-Women Police officer, Lws 8 & 9/ Investigation officers. There are no eyewitnesses to prove the allegations against the accused that he outraged the modesty of Pw1. Pw1, an victim, turned hostile and deposed no incriminating evidence against the accused.

In view of any angle, the prosecution miserably failed to prove their case against accused for the offence U/secs. 354-D, 509 IPC. Accordingly, accused is entitled to acquit. The points are answered in favour of accused and against the prosecution.

14)In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offence U/sec. 354-D, 509

IPC and he is acquitted U/sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, accused is set at liberty forthwith. The bail bonds of the accused, if any, shall be in force for a period of (06) months as per section 437-A Cr.P.C. There is no such thing as case property or unmarked property in this case to pass final orders.

(Typed to my dictation, on computer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court this 25 th day of August-2022.)

Judicial Magistrate Of First Class,

Utnoor.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence: PW1 Smt Jadhav Karuna, Informant/Victim NIL PW2 Sri Jadhav Thukaram, father of the Victim PW3 Sri Jadhav Deshai, grand father of the Victim PW4 Sri Jadhav Ramesh, mediator to the CDF PW5 Sri Ch. Prahalad , mediator to the CDF

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence: Ex.P1 Signature of the Pw1 on report, dated 29-06-2018 NIL

JFCM,UTNOOR.

5CC 295 of 2018

Ex.P2 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1. Ex.P3 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2 Ex.P4 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW3.

Judicial Magistrate Of First Class,

Utnoor.

JFCM,UTNOOR.

6CC 295 of 2018

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS: UTNOOR

C.C.NO. 295 OF 2018

1. Name of the Police Station Utnoor

2. Description of the accused Chowhan Ramkumar S/o Prahalad, age: 27 yrs, Caste: Lambada, R/o Naddamguda village of Utnoor Mandal.

4. a) Date of Occurrence 29-06-2018

b) Date of Complaint 29-06-2018

c) Date of Apprehension 07-07-2018

d) Date of Release on bail -

e) Date of Commencement of 23-08-2022 trial

f) Date of Close of trial 24-08-2022

g) Date of Judgment 25-08-2022

5. Offence 354-D, 509 IPC

6. Finding Not guilty

7. Sentence or order : In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offence U/sec. 354-D, 509 IPC and he is acquitted U/sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, accused is set at liberty forthwith. The bail bonds of the accused, if any, shall be in force for a period of (06) months as per section 437-A Cr.P.C. There is no such thing as case property or unmarked property in this case to pass final orders.

8. Explanation for delay No delay :

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

UTNOOR.

JFCM,UTNOOR.

CC/274/20221 / 1Dt: 24-08-2022

IN THE COURT OF THE Junior Civil Judge: UTNOOR

Present: Junior Civil Judge, UTNOOR ____ day, this the __ day of ____, 20__

CC/274/2022

Between:

State of Telangana through SI of Police, Utnoor Address: SHO,PS, Utnoor … Plaintiff/Petitioner AND

Jugnak Manikrao Address: S/o.Malku, R/o.Khampur village of Narnoor mandal … Defendent/Respondent

Counsel for : APP,Advocate

Counsel for : ,Advocate

This (case type) having come before me for hearing today, having heard and considered the record, this court delivered the following :

ORDER

Perused the case record and available documents. Found material. Asper G.O.M.S.No.732,dt.5.12.1991. Sec.506 is cognizance is the state of A.P. However, cognizance is taken for the offence U/sec. 323,506 IPC against the accused. Register as CC and issue summons to Accused. Accused d is present. Copies furnished U/s.207 Cr.P.C. He is examined U/s. 251 Cr.P.C. by explaining the substance of accusation leveled against him for the offence U/sec.323,506 IPC, for which, the accused voluntarily pleaded guilty, this court warned the accused that if he pleads guilty, it can be taken against him and in spite of the said warning, Accused

CC/274/20221 / 1Dt: 24-08-2022 admitted his guilty. Hence, this court feels that the guilty of the accused is voluntarily. Which is accepted by this court. Hence, accused is convicted U/s.252 of Cr.P.C. for the offence U/s..323,506 IPC. On questioning the quantum of sentence, the accused pleaded mercy. Considering the submission made by the accused, this court cannot take lenient view because the nature of offence against the accused. Hence, Accused is sentence to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- For the offence punishable U/sec 323 IPC. Further the accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence punishable U/sec. 506 IPC. And accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- for the offence punishable U/sec.323 and 506 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one week for each count. The unmarked property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

This Order Generated in Case Information System (CIS) on 24-08-2022 Junior Civil Judge UTNOOR (Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services” from Android or iOS)

CC/271/20221 / 1Dt: 22-08-2022

IN THE COURT OF THE Junior Civil Judge: UTNOOR

Present: Junior Civil Judge, UTNOOR ____ day, this the __ day of ____, 20__

CC/271/2022

Between:

State of Telangana,SHO NAROOOR Address: Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Narnoor , Adilabad Dist.

… Plaintiff/Petitioner AND

Rajpange Bheemrao Address: Mahadapur,Narnoor,Adilabad,Telangana 2:Rajpange Prahlad Age: 45 Occupation :

3:Rajpange Suryakath Age: 23 Occupation :

4:Rajpange Sambaji Age: 36 Occupation :

5:Rajpange Rajkumar Age: 45 Occupation … Defendent/Respondent

Counsel for : APP,Advocate

Counsel for : ,Advocate

CC/271/20221 / 1Dt: 22-08-2022

This (case type) having come before me for hearing today, having heard and considered the record, this court delivered the following :

ORDER

A1 to A5 are present. Defacto- Complainant/Lw1/Rajpange Sanju and Lw2-Rajpange Savithribai/ mother of the victim are present. Court constable- Raju Naik is present. Defacto complainant/Lw1 and /Lw2 stated in the petition that they intends to compromise the case with the A1 to A5. Heard, on both sides. Perused the material on record, the offence punishable U/sec. 509,323,506 r/w 34 IPC are compoundable, U/sec. 320(1) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, in the circumstances set out in the petition and in the interest of justice, permission is granted to compromise the matter as both parties voluntarily came forward to compromise the case. Compromise is recorded. In the result the award is passed in terms of settlement in turn in between the parties. As A1 to A5 and complainant are compromised the matter U/sec. 320(2) Cr.P.C., this petition is allowed and A1 to A5 are acquitted for the offence U/sec. 509,323,506 r/w 34 IPC and their bail bonds if any, shall stand cancelled.

This Order Generated in Case Information System (CIS) on 22-08-2022 Junior Civil Judge UTNOOR (Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services” from Android or iOS)

CC/270/20221 / 1Dt: 22-08-2022

IN THE COURT OF THE Junior Civil Judge: UTNOOR

Present: Junior Civil Judge, UTNOOR ____ day, this the __ day of ____, 20__

CC/270/2022

Between:

State of Telangana PS NARNOOR Address: Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Narnoor , Adilabad Dist.

… Plaintiff/Petitioner AND

Rajpange Dadharao Address: Mahadapur,Narnoor,Telangana 2:Rajpange Damodhar Age: 34 Occupation :

3:Rajpange Arun Age: 69 Occupation :

4:Rajpange Sanjeev Age: 44 Occupation … Defendent/Respondent

Counsel for : APP,Advocate

Counsel for : ,Advocate

This (case type) having come before me for hearing today, having heard and considered the record, this court delivered the following :

CC/270/20221 / 1Dt: 22-08-2022

ORDER

A1 to A5 are present. Defacto- Complainant/Lw1/Rajpange Sanju and Lw2-Rajpange Savithribai/ mother of the victim are present. Court constable- Raju Naik is present. Defacto complainant/Lw1 and /Lw2 stated in the petition that they intends to compromise the case with the A1 to A5. Heard, on both sides. Perused the material on record, the offence punishable U/sec. 509,323,506 r/w 34 IPC are compoundable, U/sec. 320(1) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, in the circumstances set out in the petition and in the interest of justice, permission is granted to compromise the matter as both parties voluntarily came forward to compromise the case. Compromise is recorded. In the result the award is passed in terms of settlement in turn in between the parties. As A1 to A5 and complainant are compromised the matter U/sec. 320(2) Cr.P.C., this petition is allowed and A1 to A5 are acquitted for the offence U/sec. 509,323,506 r/w 34 IPC and their bail bonds if any, shall stand cancelled.

This Order Generated in Case Information System (CIS) on 22-08-2022 Junior Civil Judge UTNOOR (Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services” from Android or iOS)

CC/2/20201 / 1Dt: 24-08-2022

IN THE COURT OF THE Junior Civil Judge: UTNOOR

Present: Junior Civil Judge, UTNOOR ____ day, this the __ day of ____, 20__

CC/2/2020

Between:

PS Utnoor Address: Utnoor … Plaintiff/Petitioner AND

Tallapally Jairaj and others Address: S/o. Balaiah, Age 49 years, Caste SC Nethakani, Occ. Horticulture Sub Assistant , ITDA, Utnoor.

… Defendent/Respondent

Counsel for : APP,Advocate

Counsel for : ,Advocate

This (case type) having come before me for hearing today, having heard and considered the record, this court delivered the following :

ORDER

A1 to A4 are present. Despite Several chances and conditional orders, Complainant failed to adduce the evidence. Counsel for complainant reported no instructions. Hence, the case is dismissed for non adducing the complainant evidence.

This Order Generated in Case Information System (CIS) on 24-08-2022 Junior Civil Judge UTNOOR

CC/2/20201 / 1Dt: 24-08-2022 (Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services” from Android or iOS)