Sri R Thirupathi

1

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF

CASES UNDER S.Cs. AND S.Ts. (P.O.A.) ACT-CUM-VII ADDL. DISTRICT

AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KHAMMAM.

Present: R. THIRUPATHI,

Judge, Family Court - cum-VI Addl. District and

Sessions Judge, Khammam,

FAC. Spl. Sessions Judge for trial of cases under S.Cs., and S.Ts., (P.O.A.) Act-cum-VII Addl., District and Sessions Judge, Khammam.

Thursday, the 12th day of August, 2021.

SESSIONS CASE No. 32 of 2019

==============================================================

1.Name of the complainant:The State of Telangana represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Khammam Town.

2.Name of the accused:A.1) Vankayalapati Venkateswara Rao S/o Bhadraiah, Caste: Kamma, Occu: Business, persons R/o Plot No.406, S.V. Power Plaza Apartment, R/o Bank Colony, Khammam.

A.2) Vanakalayapati Sudha @ Vijaya Laxmi W/o Venkateswar Rao, Caste: Kamma, Occu: House wife, R/o Plot No.406, S.V. Power Plaza Apartment, R/o Bank Colony, Khammam.

3.Crime Number:173 of 2018

4.Section of law:Under Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (r) & 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

5.Prosecution conducted by:Sri B. Krishna Mohan Rao, Special Public Prosecutor, Khammam,

6.Defence conducted by:Sri J. Sarat Kumar Reddy, Advocate for the Accused.

7.Plea of the accused :Pleaded not guilty.

8.Finding of the Court:Not guilty.

9Result: In the result, the accused are acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C., for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and their bail bonds shall stand canceled.

2

This case is coming up before me for final hearing on this day in the presence of Sri B. Krishna Mohan Rao, Special Public Prosecutor for the State and that of Sri J. Sarat Kumar Reddy, Advocate for the accused; upon perusing material papers on record; upon hearing the arguments on both sides and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Khammam Town has filed a charge sheet against the accused in Crime No.173/2018 of P.S.

Khammam II Town for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, as culled out from the charge sheet, can be summarized, as follows:

(i). PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) is the defacto-complainant and victim and he belong to Madhiga caste, which is a scheduled caste,

PW.2 (Bathula Aruna @ Dobbeti Aruna) is his wife and both are residents of VDO’s Colony, Khammam. Accused are also residents of

Bank Colony, Khammam and they belong to Kamma caste, which is a non-scheduled caste.

(ii). PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) obtained hand loan of Rs.7,00,000/- in the year 2012 from Accused No.1 and registered his plots Nos.203 and 406 in Bank Colony, Khammam in favour of Accused No.1. They have settled amounts in the year 2014 and it was found that PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) has to pay Rs.66,00,000/- to 88,00,000/-. PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) failed to execute the registered sale deed for an extent of two acres in Sy.No.203 and 406 in favour of Accused No.1 and

Maddineni Venkata Ramana (LW.11) registered the said land vide 3 document No.4551/2014 and became owner of the said land. Some monetary transactions took place between PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) and Accused No.1 from 2006 to 2013 and PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) was asking Accused No.1 to return pronotes and cheques obtained by him but Accused No.1 asked him to pay interest. While PW.1 (Dabbeti

Venkanna) undertook to finish the works in the plots, PW.1 (Dabbeti

Venkanna) and PW.2 (Bathula Aruna @ Dabbeti Aruna) approached

Accused No.1 and asked him to stop the work, then Accused No.1 and 2 abused PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) in his caste name referring as “ NA

PAI COMPLAINT CHESTHAVA LANJAKODAKA ME MALA MADIGA

NAKODUKULU YEMICHEYALERU ” and beat him with hands. Accused

No.2 beat PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) on the face and in that process, the bangles of Accused No.2 were broken and pierced on the face of

PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna). In the said incident, the mobile phone of

PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna) was also damaged.

3.On a complaint given by PW.1 (Dabbeti Venkanna), a case in

Crime No.173 of 2018 was registered and investigated. During the course of investigation, witnesses were examined, scene of offence panchanama was conducted, caste certificates of the accused and victim were obtained. Notices were served under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., to accused. After completion of investigation and collection of documents, charge sheet was filed.

4.The case was taken on file as Sessions Case No.32/2019 under

Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the accused.

4

5.On the appearance of the accused before this court in response to the summons, copies of documents have been supplied to the accused as contemplated under Section 211 Cr.P.C.

6.The accused were examined under Section 228 Cr.P.C. and they have denied the commission of the offences.

7.After hearing the learned Special Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel, charges have been framed for the offences under

Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, read over and explained the same to the accused in Telugu, who pleaded not guilty to the said charges and claimed to be tried.

8.During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined PW.1, the Defacto Complainant and victim (Dabbeti Venkanna) and his wife

PW.2 (Bathula Aruna @ Dabbeti Aruna) besides PWs3 to 5, who are alleged eye witnesses to the incident.

9.As all the material witnesses turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case, the learned Special Public Prosecutor gave up the evidence of the remaining witnesses in view of the hostility of

PWs.1 to 5.

10.As there are no such incriminating circumstances in the evidence of PWs.1 to 5, the examination of the accused under Section 313

Cr.P.C., is dispensed with and the accused are not called upon to enter upon their defence.

5

11.Heard the learned Special Public Prosecutor and the Counsel for the accused. Perused the record.

12.Now the points for determination are:

1. Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offences under Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, beyond all reasonable doubt ?

2. To what result ?

13.POINT No. 1:- As stated already, the accused stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989, alleging that they have assaulted and beat PW.1 (Dabbeti

Venkanna) causing simple injuries and committed criminal intimidation, they being scheduled caste, in furtherance of their common intention.

14.The plea of the accused is one of total denial and false implication.

15.The prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 5 to substantiate the said charges. PW.1, who is the Defacto complainant and victim (Dabbeti

Venkanna), did not support the prosecution case. He turned hostile.

PW.2 (Bathula Aruna @ Dabbeti Aruna), who is none other than the wife of PW.1 also did not support the prosecution case.

16.Pws.3 to 5 are projected to be eye witnesses to the incident. They also pleaded ignorance about the incident. They were declared hostile by the learned Special Public Prosecutor and they were cross-examined.

Nothing could be elicited from them in their cross-examination by the 6 learned Special Public Prosecutor after declaring them hostile. Thus, there is absolutely no legal and acceptable evidence connecting the accused with the crime.

17.I, therefore, hold that the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused, beyond all reasonable doubt for the charges leveled against them. Consequently, I find the accused not guilty of the offences with which they stood charged. The point is answered accordingly against the prosecution.

18.POINT No. 2:-

In the result, the accused are acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C., for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 427 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 and their bail bonds shall stand canceled.

Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by me in the open court, on this the 12 th day of August, 2021.

JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-

VI ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, KHAMMAM.

FAC.SPL.SESSIONS JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF CASES

UNDER S.Cs AND S.Ts (P.O.A.) ACT-CUM-VII

ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, KHAMMAM.

- APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution:

P.W.1. Dabbeti Venkanna,

P.W.2. Bathula Aruna @ Dabbeti Aruna,

P.W.3. Thalluri Venkateswarlu,

P.W.4. Enagandla Thirumala Rao,

P.W.5. Alasyam Basavaiah, 7

For Defence:- - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution:

Ex.P.1. Signature on Complaint (Report), dated 01-5-2018 given by PW.1,

Ex.P.2. Complaint (Report), dated 01-05-2018 given by PW.1,

Ex.P.3. Statement of PW.1 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.,

Ex.P.4 Statement of PW.2 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.,

Ex.P.5. Statement of PW.3 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.,

For Defence:- - nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

- nil -

JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-

VI ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, KHAMMAM.

FAC.SPL.SESSIONS JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF CASES

UNDER S.Cs AND S.Ts (P.O.A.) ACT-CUM-VII

ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, KHAMMAM.

Corrections carried out by:

TSKH000002452020

Presented on : 27-01-2020 Registered on : 30-01-2020 Decided on : 12-08-2021 Duration : 1 years, 6 months, 16 days

IN THE COURT OF

Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs and STs (POA) Act 1989 -

cum- III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Khammam

AT ,KHAMMAM

EP/23/2020

Exhibit No.:

CHINNI MADHUSUDHAN RAO

Age: 54 Occupation : Address: OCC BUSINESS R/O. MOHAN ROAD KHAMMAM.

KHAJA JYOTHI

R/O.NEHRU NAGAR,KHAMMAM

PULLAMKHANDAM SRIDEVI

R/O. KAMAN BAZAR KHAMMAM GURRAM GUNAKAR R/O. THALLADA VILLAGE AND MANDAL

KAHMMAM DISTRICT

VERSUS :

VEERAVELLI RAMBAYAMMA

Age: 69 Occupation : Address: OCC HOUSE WIFE

VEERAVELLI SHOBHAN BABU

S/O. KOTAIAH VEERAVELLI MANJULA W/O. RAYALA SRINIVAs ALL R/O. KUSUMANCHI VILLAGE AND MANDAL KHAMMAM

DISTRICT

2:Veeravalli Shoban Babu Age: 0

Occupation :

3:veeravalli Manjula Age: 0 Occupation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advocate for : P B SRI RAMULU Advocate for : appearing for VEERAVELLI RAMBAYAMMA: Advocate , appearing for 2, 3 respectively.

ORDER

Petitioners-Decree Holders and Respondents-Judgment Debtors are present. Sri P. Ranga Rao, Advocate filed vakalath for R.1 and R.2. The counsel for the petitioners filed a memo reporting that the petitioners are not pressing the claim in this E.P against the 3rd respondent-judgment-debtor. Hence, the petition is dismissed as against R.3. (Judgment-debtor No.3) The petitioners and R.1 and R.2 have filed compromise petition invoking under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC praying the court to record compromise and pass appropriate orders in terms of the said compromise. The terms of the compromise are read and explained to them in Telugu, who, having understood the same, reported that the said compromise is true, voluntary and free from inducement or coercion. Hence, compromise is recorded. In view of the above terms of compromise, the proceedings in the EP are closed, directing the 1st respondent-judgment-debtor to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the petitioners 1 and 3 in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.01.16 &ampAcirc&ampfrac12 gts comprised in Sy.No.592/EE situated at Kusumanchi Village more vividly described in the schedule annexed to the compromise petition, copy of which shall be annexed to this order within a month from the date of this order towards full and final settlement of the claim in this E.P. proceedings and further directing the 1st respondent-judgment-debtor to repay the loan amount of Rs.1 lakhs availed from Co-operative credit society and execute deed of release of mortgage within a month in favour of the plaintiffs No.1 and 3 in respect of the said property. If the 1st respondent-judgment-debtor fails to execute the registered sale deed within the stipulated time, the petitioners 1 and 3 are entitled to enforce this order, by due process of law. In view of the above orders in terms of the compromise, the order of attachment passed by this court in IA No.697/2011 in OS No.73/2011, dated 05.11.20211 in respect of the execution petition schedule property shall be raised forthwith without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners 1 and 3. In view of the above amicable settlement both parties shall bear their own costs.

Date : 12-08-2021 Special Judge for Trial of Cases

under SCs and STs (POA) Act 1989 -cum- III Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Khammam

,KHAMMAM

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

{JUDGE_DESIGNATION_NAME}

,KHAMMAM

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

TSKH000010222021

Presented on : 28-04-2021 Registered on : 28-04-2021 Decided on : 17-08-2021 Duration : 0 years, 3 months, 19 days

IN THE COURT OF

Judge, Family Court -cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Khammam AT ,KHAMMAM

OP/21/2021

The District Welfare Officer, WCD and SC Welfare, Khammam. Age: 1 Occupation : Address: Khammam. VERSUS Towhom so ever it may concern Age: 1 Occupation : Address: Khammam. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advocate for : SRILAKSHMI SARIKONDA Advocate for : appearing for Towhom so ever it may concern: Advocate appearing for respectively.

ORDER

(Delivered on 17-08-2021 ) Orders pronounced (VSO) In the result, the petition is allowed, declaring the petitioners 2 and 3 as adoptive parents of Ms. Srividhya @ Srividhya Shope , who was born on 30.03.2019 and entitled to take custody of the child in adoption for bringing up the child as their own child with the following terms and conditions: i) The petitioners 2 and 3 shall treat the child Srividhya @ Srividhya Shope as if she is their biological daughter, for all purposes and shall grant all legal rights including the right of inheritance and succession over the movable and immovable assets of the petitioners 2 and 3 as their natural daughter in accordance with the law applicable to them. ii) The petitioners 2 and 3 shall not ill-treat or harass or exploit the child for any unlawful activities or for any commercial purposes including begging or treating as maid-servant and the welfare and best interests of the child shall be the concern of the petitioners 2 and 3. iii) The petitioners 2 and 3 shall submit report regarding the welfare and well-being including her education and academic performance and health conditions, once in a year positively on or before 31st January of every year. iv) The petitioners 2 and 3 are informed that if they fail to comply with the aforesaid conditions, they are liable for legal action including cancellation of orders of adoption and custody of the said child.

v) The petitioners 2 and 3 shall execute a bond for Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs only) in favour of the 1st petitioner and the same shall be submitted to this court within a month to ensure due compliance of the conditions. vi) The Registrar of Births and Deaths, Municipal Corporation, Khammam, is directed to issue birth certificate to the minor child, Srividhya @ Srividhya Shope, who was born on 30.03.2019 incorporating the names of the petitioners 2 and 3 as adoptive parents as per rules. vii) The Regional Passport Authority, Hyderabad shall issue Indian Passport in favour of the minor child as per rules showing the petitioners 2 and 3 as her adoptive parents, on proper application.

Date : 17-08-2021

Judge, Family Court -cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Khammam

TSKH000022262019

Presented on : 21-08-2019 Registered on : 12-09-2019 Decided on : 07-12-2020 Duration : 1 years, 3 months, 17 days

IN THE COURT OF

Prl.District and Sessions Judge AT ,KHAMMAM Presided Over by C.H.K.BHUPATHI

EP/382/2019

Exhibit No.:

Shriram City Union Finance Co. Ltd., rep by its GPA K srinivasulu Age: 0 Occupation : Address: Shriram City Union Finance Co. Ltd., rep by its GPA K srinivasulu

VERSUS : Dharavath phani Age: 32 Occupation : Address: R/o.H.No. 1-200, Madhira, vnagaveedu, khammam 2:Palagani chalapathi Age: 0 Occupation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advocate for : K.Kranthi kumar Advocate for : appearing for Dharavath phani: Advocate appearing for 2 respectively.

ORDER

EA.No.3 of 2020 is allowed and accordingly, this EP is advanced to this day. EA.No.4 of 2020 is allowed and the exparte order dated 23.10.2019 passed against the J.Dr.No.2 is set aside. Full satisfaction memo filed by the D.Hr, and the same is recorded. EP terminated. EA.No.5 of 2020 is allowed and the attachment of the salary of J.Dr.No.2 earlier ordered shall be raised. Intimate the drawing officer on payment of process by J.Dr.No.2.

Date : 07-12-2020 (C.H.K.BHUPATHI)

Prl.District and Sessions Judge

,KHAMMAM

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

(C.H.K.BHUPATHI)

{JUDGE_DESIGNATION_NAME}

,KHAMMAM

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

TSKH000017082017

Presented on : 23-02-2017 Registered on : 21-09-2017 Decided on : 16-08-2021 Duration : 4 years, 5 months, 21 days

IN THE COURT OF

Judge, Family Court -cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Khammam AT ,KHAMMAM

EP/100146/2017

Exhibit No.:

: Shriram City Union Finance ltd., Khammam II Branch Age: 0 Occupation : Address: Shriram City Union Finance ltd., Khammam II Branch

VERSUS : Tumma Narsaiah Age: 0 Occupation : Address: H.No. 1-9-35/5/13/1, Bokkala gadda, khammam ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advocate for : KANDALA KRANTHI KUMAR Advocate for : Exparte appearing for Tumma Narsaiah: Advocate appearing for respectively.

Claim :

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 16-08-2021 )

ORDER

The counsel for the petitioner-decree-holder filed a memo not pressing the petition on the ground that the whereabouts of the respondent-judgment-debtor are not traced out and seeking liberty to file fresh petition. Recording the said memo, proceedings are closed and the petition is dismissed as not pressed granting leave and liberty to file fresh petition, as and when the whereabouts of the respondent-judgment-debtor are traced out, as per law.

Date : 16-08-2021 Judge, Family

Court -cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Khammam

,KHAMMAM

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

{JUDGE_DESIGNATION_NAME}

,KHAMMAM

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS