Sri S H R Teja Chakravarthy Malla

1

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I

CLASS :MIRYALAGUDA.

PRESENT: Sri M.S.H.R. Teja Chakravarthi, I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class, Miryalaguda.

Dated this the 02nd day of February, 2021.

M.C. No. 01 of 2020.

Between:- Shaik Farzana, W/o. Shaik Jahangir, Age: 25 years, Occ: House hold, R/o. Muthireddykunta colony, Miryalaguda town and Mandal, Nalgonda District.

..Petitioner.

AND

Shaik Jahangir, S/o. Janimiya, Age: 30 years, Occ: Fish Merchant & Welder, R/o. Thallagadda locality, Miryalaguda town and Mandal, Nalgonda District.

..Respondent.

This petition coming up before me for final hearing and disposal in the presence of Sri. Md. Eqbal Ahmad, counsel for petitioner and Respondent was set ex-parte and after having stood over for consideration, today the court delivery the following:-

:: O R D E R ::

1.This is a maintenance petition filed under section 125 of Criminal Procedure

Code by the petitioner against the Respondent seeking maintenance of

Rs. 25,000/- per month.

2.The brief contents of the petition are as follows: -

The petitioner is legal wedded wife of respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 04-03-2016 as per the Muslim customs and rites prevailed in their community. At the time of the marriage the parents of the petitioner gave an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, house hold articles worth of Rs.1,50,000/-, Honda shine motor cycle work of Rs. 80,000/-, 3 ½ tulas of gold ornaments, 30 tulas of silver to the Respondent towards dowry. The parents of the petitioner spent Rs. 2,00,00/- 2 for marriage expenses. The petitioner and Respondent led happy marital life for eight days only under one roof. There are no issues out of wed lock.

The petitioner contended that the respondent addicted to bad habits including illegal affairs with other ladies besides demand of additional dowry of

Rs. 5,00,000/-. The petitioner was physically and mentally harassed by the respondent alongwith his family members for additional dowry of Rs. 5,00,000/-, specifically harassed her by stating that respondent would got Rs. 5,00,000/- as dowry, if he marries some other person. The petitioner averred in her petition that the respondent alongwith his family members threatened that in default of payment of additional dowry by the petitioner, the respondent will be performed with second marriage.

The petitioner contended that as she and her parents were poor could not met the demands of additional dowry and so kept the matter before the elders, but the elders words are not listened by the respondent having no other go petitioner registered a case vide Cr. No. 138 of 2019 for the offence U/sec., 498-A of IPC and 3 & 4 DP Act against the respondent and his family members and same is pending

before this Court. On 18-05-2019 the respondent and his family members necked

out the petitioner from her in-laws house and now she is residing at her parents house.

Petitioner further submitted that Respondent having movable and immovable properties i.e., two residential houses worth of Rs. 50,00,000/- at

Miryalaguda alongwith Rs. 20,00,000/- worth of open sites besides welding shop of Rs. 10,00,000/- at Miryalaguda. It is further alleged that the respondent is earning an amount of Rs. 50,000/- per month, Rs. 5,000/- per month as rent from his house alongwith Rs. 5,00,000/- per annum from fish contract business. Thus, the petitioner submits that the respondent is earning Rs. 15,00,000/- per annum.

It is further submitted that the parents of the petitioner are old aged persons suffering with ailments, they are unable to provide food, shelter, clothes, medicines etc., to the petitioner, the petitioner having no income source is under starvation and averred that she has no properties on her name and on the other side the respondent has sufficient means of income, but intentionally neglecting the 3 petitioner and refused to maintain the petitioner, as such the Respondent is liable to maintain the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

3.The Respondent refused to receive the notice on 08-02-2020 as per endorsement from postal envelope and same was recorded in the docket on 16-03- 2020. Respondent was set ex-parte for remaining absent.

4. During the enquiry, the petitioner herself examined as PW1 and no documents were marked.

5. Heard.

6.Now the point for consideration is, “whether the petitioner is entitled to paid maintenance from the respondent as prayed for?”

7. POINT:

The petitioner reiterated the contents of the petition in her chief evidence.

The unchallenged testimony of PW1, proved that the petitioner and Respondent are legally wedded wife and husband and that Respondent is having sufficient means to provide maintenance to the petitioner, even after that, he neglected the petitioner. But the petitioner except her evidence did not produce any oral or documentary evidence to prove that the Respondent is having two residential houses worth of Rs. 50,00,000/- at Miryalaguda alongwith Rs. 20,00,000/- worth of open sites besides welding shop of Rs. 10,00,000/- at Miryalaguda and earning an amount of Rs. 50,000/- per month, Rs. 5,000/- per month as rent from his house alongwith Rs. 5,00,000/- per annum from fish contract business. Thus, the petitioner submitted that the respondent is earning Rs. 15,00,000/- per annum in her pleading and in her evidence, but did not bring on record a piece of paper in support of her contention to prove that the respondent has sufficient means of earnings. However, it is the lawful duty of the husband to maintain his wife and not to neglect her.

8.By considering the facts and circumstances and in view of the present cost of living the petition is allowed partly by granting maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per 4 month to the petitioner from the date of petition, payable by the Respondent. The petitioner is directed to open a saving account in any nationalized bank and furnish the account number to the Respondent, there by the Respondent is directed to deposit the maintenance amount in the furnished account on or before 10th of every month.

Dictated to the Stenographer, directly typed by her corrected and pronounced by me in

open court, this the 02nd day of February, 2021.

I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class, Miryalaguda.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE.

WITNESS EXAMINED

ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

Pw1: Shaik Farzana (Petitioner)

ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT:

-NONE-

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:

-NONE-

I Addl. Judl. Magistrate of I Class, Miryalaguda.

5 6

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W.5 examined as P.W.5

C.C. No. 40 Of 2020

Name: Ch.SadaNagaraju S/o: Laxman R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Inspector of Police Miryalaguda I town Age: 40 years Date: 03.02.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri S.H.R. Teja Chakravarthi Malla , I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Inspector of police, Zahirabad Town

Police station from 2016 to June, 2018.

Presently I am working as Inspector of Police Miryalaguda I town polie station.

On 04.01.2020 at 5.00 PM, I received a report from Ganji venateshwarlu(PW1). Basing on the contents of the written report register a case Cr.No.02/2020 for the offence U/sec., 457, 380 of

IPC and issued F.I.R. and took up investigation. During course of investigation, I examined the Pw-1 statement in the police station . Thereafter i visited the scene of offence, which is situated at back side of the Jyothi Hospital, Miryalaguda, which is a store of the Jyothi Hosptial. Secured the presence of panchas i.e., Pw-3/K. Nagaraju and Lw-4/Apuri Ragu, in their presence I conducted the scene of offence panchanama and drafted the rough sketch. Later, i examined Lw-2/R. Shiva Shankar and recorded his statement. On 10-01-2020, I received credible information from the known sources about the presence of the accused alongwith the stolen property present at Bolligutta thanda. On that i secured two mediators namely Pw-3 7 /Vallapudasu Venu and Pw-4/Indrapalli Akhil and visited the house of accused no. 1 /Thangellapalli Gangadhara Chari.

Apprehended the accused no. 1 at his house and on interrogation he voluntarly confessed that he and accused no.

2/Indhrapally Sudheer Kumar committed this crime pertaining to this case. He further confessed that he alongwith other accused persons who are namely Papa Naik, Pathakoti Buchi Babu,

Kampasati Srinu and Indrapally Sudheer Kumar at various places i.e., Suryapet, Dhamarcherla, Nereducherla, Mellachervu,

Hyderabad and Nalgonda.

In persuance of the above confessional statement I have seized two L.G. company A.C.s bearing nos. 711NACHO19603 and 711NADLO19658 from the house of accused no. 1 under cover of panchanama before the mediators. After completion of the panchanama i brought the accused no. 1 to the P.S. and affected his arrest and produced him before the Hon’ble Court for remand on 10-01-2020.

On 17-01-2020 I obtained P.T. warrant from the Hon’ble Court against the accused no. 2 /Indrapally Sudheer Kumar and produced before the Hon’ble Court for judl. remand in this case.

After completion of investigation, I deposited the case property i.e., two L.G. company A.C.s bearing nos.

711NACHO19603 and 711NADLO19658 vide CP No. 19 of 2020,

Dt. 24.01.2020 and after that I filed charge sheet against

accused no. 1 and 2 for the offences U/sec., 457, 380 of IPC.

Ex. P6: is the F.I.R.

Ex. P7: is the marked portion of the seizure cum confession panchanama of accused no. 1.

M.O. 1 is the L.G. company A.C. bearing no. 711NACHO19603

M.O. 2 is the L.G. company A.C. bearing no. 711NADLO19658 8

Since the photographs of the case property are not taken at the time of return of case property to the petitioner /owner of the property vide Crl. M.P. No. 82/2020, they are not available before this Court on this day.

Cross Examination by learned counsel /Sri. P. Paramesh for

accused 1 :

I did not examine any of the managers of the said banks which are mentioned in my charge sheet.

I did not mention any details about the cable operator under whom the accused no. 1 worked at Miryalaguda.

I did not examine any of the alleged relatives of the accused no. 1 pertaining to Alagadapa village that are mentioned in Ex. P7.

I did not seize any lock or key at the scene of offence.

I did not state in my charge sheet the mode of committing the crime by the accused no. 1.

It is true that Jyothi hospital is a multispecality hospital. It is true that there are houses in and around Jyothi Hospital. It is true that

Jyothi Hospital is with CC camera, but i do not know whether any

CC Camers are present in and around the houses nearby Jyothi

Hospital. I cannot say the weight of the alleged stolen property i.e., Two A.Cs.

Ex. P7 is drafted by the writer in our police station.

I did not seize any auto as no details are mentioned in the Ex.P7.

I did not take any finger prints at the scene of offence.

It is not true to suggest that i falsely implicated accused no. 1 in this crime.

It is not true to suggest that no scene of offence panchanama is conducted.

9

It is not true to suggest that all the LWs in the charge sheet are employees of Jyothi Hospital.

I do not know the demographic figure of Bolligutta Thanda.

It is true to suggest that panch witnesses shall be available in

Bolligutta thanda.

I interrogated the accused in the Police station during his custody in the presence of PW5 and PW6. PW5 and PW6 are local inhabitants.

It is not true to suggest that, PW5 and 6 are the stock punchas and by using third degree methods against the A3 with regard to theft.

It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this case. It is not true to suggest that A1 and A2 are also no way concerned with this case. It is not true to suggest that, accused never confessed before us , he given theft property to one Ashok and sampath, who are the friends of Gandhi.

Re-Examination: Nil 10 11 12

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 13 examined as P.W. 9

C.C. No. 877 Of 2019

Name: R. Nagaraju S/o: Thirupathaiah R/o: Chityala Occu: S.I. of police Age:33 years

Date: 12.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as S.I of police, Madgulapally Police station from 2018 to June, 2020

Presently I am working as Sub Inspector of Police, Chityala Police station.

On 24.09.2018, I received a CD file from PW7 and verified the investigation done by him and found it on proper lines. While I making the affords to nab the accused in connection with this crime. I received information from S.I. of police, Donakonda Police station with regard to arrest of A3 in Cr.No. 01/2019 for the offence under sec 392,397 IPC and section 25(IB), 27 of IA Act on the file of Police station Donakonda of Prakasham District.

Immediately after obtaining the orders from the court I produced the accused before the court on execution of P.T. Warrant.

On application of police custody before the JFCM,

Huzurnagar. I received the accused for the one day police custody on 08.08.2018 vide Crl.M.P. 133/2019. During interrogation and investigation A3 confessed about his guilt in the presence of PW6 13 and PW5 and it was reveal that, theft property was handed over to one Ashok, Sampath, who are the friends of Gandhi. After completion of investigation I filed the charge sheet against the A1 to A3 for the offence under sec 457,380 IPC.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused A1 to

A3:

I interrogated the accused in the Police station during his custody in the presence of PW5 and PW6. PW5 and PW6 are local inhabitants.

It is not true to suggest that, PW5 and 6 are the stock punchas and by using third degree methods against the A3 with regard to theft.

It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this case. It is not true to suggest that A1 and A2 are also no way concerned with this case. It is not true to suggest that, accused never confessed before us , he given theft property to one Ashok and sampath, who are the friends of Gandhi.

Re-Examination: Nil 14

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 12 examined as P.W. 8

C.C. No. 877 Of 2019

Name: A. Narsimha Rao S/o: Late Venkanna R/o: Hyderabad Occu: S.I. of police Age:39 years

Date: 12.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Banjara hills, Hyderabad Police station from 2016 to 2018.

15

Presently I am working as Sub Inspector of Police, Bahadurpura,

Hyderabad.

On reliable information, on 30.01.2018 I arrested A1 and A2 in

Cr.No. 13/2018 for the offence under section 379 IPC on the file of

Banjara hills Police station. On interrogation accused ready to confess about their guilt. Immediately I recorded the confession panchanama of A1 and A2 in the presence of LW7/N. Jagan Mohan

Rao and LW8/K. Karunakar.

Thereafter I given information to PW7.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused A1 and

A2:

During the confession A1 and A2 stated that, they involved in the theft case on the file of Madgulapally Police station. It is true, in general the SHO of local jurisdiction will enquire the cases in his jurisdiction.

It is not true to suggest that, I arrested the accused only for the purpose of statistical. It is true, I did not recover anything from A1 and A2. It is not true to suggest that, accused never committed any offence pertaining to Madgulapally jurisdiction.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused A3:

Reported: NIL

Re-Examination: Nil 16

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CLASS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 12 examined as P.W. 10

C.C. No. 1273 Of

2015 . Name: M. Srinivas Reddy S/o: Satyanarayana Reddy R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Ortho specialist Age: 46 years Date: 12.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Since 2016 I am working as Ortho specialist, Sri Satya Parameshwari

Hospital, Miryalaguda.

On 21.05.2015 PW3 came to hospital for treatment on account of

RTA. On the same day I examined PW3 and found following injuries

PW3 is treated as outpatient.

1. Abrasion 2*1 Cm right metacaripo phalangel ( Right base of index finger)

The above injuries are simple in nature and may cause due to RTA, witness again says that, due to assault injury. The age of injury are less than 6 hours prior to my examination.

Accordingly I issued wound certificate.

Ex.P3 is the wound certificate.

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Ravindra Reddy for

accused:

We maintain outpatient and inpatient registers. I did not carry any outpatient register with me. In outpatient register we maintain serial numbers. I did not mention serial number on the wound certificate of the outpatient register serial number.

17

When patient is treated as inpatient will inform to the police concerned, but not for the outpatients. It is true, according to medical counsel for India guidelines we have to inform to the police with regard to medico legal cases in respective of treatment as outpatient or inpatient.

I do not have any acquaintance with PW3. Wound certificate is silent with regard to identification marks of PW3.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not given any treatment to

PW3. It is not true to suggest that, I issued the above wound certificate at the instance of police and prosecution party.

It is not true to suggest that, PW3 never had any injuries as stated by me.

Re-Examination: NIL 18

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 791 Of 2014 . Name: K. Balaswamy S/o: Venkataiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Business Age:36 years Date: 11.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW5. I do not know A1.

In my presence police did not conducted any panchanama and no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

On confrontation the signature of witness on confession cum seizure panchanama , witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P6 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

I do not remember when I attested my signatures.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

19

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 25.06.2012 at 0615AM police recorded confession of accused No.1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 20

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 791 Of 2014 . Name: K. Chinna Maraiah S/o: Gangaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Coolie Age:52 years Date: 11.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW8/ K. Balaswamy. I do not know A1.

In my presence police did not conducted any panchanama and no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

On confrontation the signature of witness on confession cum seizure panchanama , witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P5 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

I do not remember when I attested my signatures.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 25.06.2012 at 0615AM police recorded confession of accused No.1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 21 22

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 791 Of 2014 . Name: R. Parushuramulu S/o: Chinna Ramulu R/o: Molkapatnam Occu: Agriculture Age:45 years

Date: 11.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know LW6/R. Karunakar. I do not know A1 and A2.

In my presence police did not conducted any panchanama and no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

On confrontation the signature of witness on confession cum seizure panchanama , witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

I do not remember when I attested my signatures.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 25.06.2012 at 0615AM police recorded confession of accused No.2 and seized one waist silver chain , one pair of leg chain and one pair of gold ear studs under cover of panchanama and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

23

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

About 7 years ago, myself and PW1 went to my in laws house after locking the doors of house. On the same day, we re- turned to our house at evening hours and found our house lock was broke opened and committed theft of silver leg chains of my daughter weighing about 7 tulas and gold ear studs weighing about 0.25 thulas from the almara. I do not know who committed the theft. Due to paucity of seven years time, I cannot identify the lost articles. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Re-

ported :Nil

Re-Examination:NIL 24

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 791 Of 2014 . Name:Md. Anthiya Sulthana W/o: Md. Umar R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Cycle taxi Age:30 years

Date: 11.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

PW1 is my husband. I am resident of Bangarigadda. Since 10 years I am residing at Bangarigadda.

About 7 years ago, myself and PW1 went to my in laws house after locking the doors of house. On the same day, we re- turned to our house at evening hours and found our house lock was broke opened and committed theft of silver leg chains of my daughter weighing about 7 tulas and gold ear studs weighing about 0.25 thulas from the almara. I do not know who committed the theft. Due to paucity of seven years time, I cannot identify the lost articles. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Re-

ported :Nil

Re-Examination:NIL 25

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: Md. Ahmed Pasha S/o: Late Mohd.Jafar R/o: Hyderabad Occu: S.I. of police Age:57 years

Date: 07.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as S.I. of police, Miryalaguda II Town Police station from 25.03.2012 to 15.02.2013.

Presently I am working as S.I. of police, Chanda Nagar Police

Station, Cyberabad commissionerate.

On 01.10.2012 at 02.00 pm , I received Ex. P1 from Pw-1. Basing on said report/Ex.P1, I registered a case in Cr. No. 155/2012 for the offence U/sec., 498-A IPC and issued printed FIR which is marked EX. P3.

During course of investigation I examined Pw-1 and PW2 at police station and on the same day I visited seethrampuram village and recorded the statements of PW3 to PW5.

26

PW4 stated before me as in Ex.P2( 161 Cr.P.C statement)

Thereafter I handed over the CD file to LW7/Y. Mogalayya, C.I of police, Miryalaguda II Town

Cross Examination by learned counsel Mainam Mahesh for

accused:

Commenced at 03.23 PM

It took 30 minutes to record the statement of PW1 and same as PW2. After recording the statement of PW2 I immediately visited Seethrampuram locality of Miryalguda town. It took 30 minutes each to record the statement of PW3, PW4 and PW5. It took more than 3 hours after registering FIR to record the statement of PW1 to PW5.

Apart recording the statement of PW1 and 2 at Police Station other witness were examined by me out side of the Police Station.

It is true, PW1 never stated before me that, she was abused in filthy language.

It is true, PW1 never stated before me that, after demise of his husband no one seen her in humiliation.

It is true, I issued FIR NO. 154/2012. It is true, in the said case I examined the all 6 witnesses. I did not investigate the case fully in the said crime. It is true I conducted panchanama at 03.00PM. Initially I examined the complainant and conducted panchanama thereafter as per my schedule I recorded the statements of other witnesses.

As per the charge sheet in Cr.No. 154/2012, U/s 448,506 IPC

PW1,PW2 and others accused trespassed into the house of A1 and

A2 on 26.09.2012 at 11.00AM and threaten them.

It is true, PW1 never stated before me that, when her husband is alive, A1 and A2 use to beat her.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not investigate this case in proper way. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation to help the PW1 I registered false case against 27 accused. It is not true to suggest that, as per this charge sheet I did not record the statements of PW2 to PW5. It is not true to suggest that, I am deposing false hood.

Concluded at 03.43 PM

Re-Examination: Nil 28

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 11 examined as P.W.9

C.C. No. 1273 Of 2015 . Name: A. Sambi Reddy S/o: Bhooshi Reddy R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Tractor Driver Age:60 years

Date: 07.01.2021

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW10/T. Venkateshwarlu.

In my presence panchanama was conducted.

In the year 2015 at about 1.30 PM, S.I. of police, Miryalaguda

II town namely Seenaiah conducted the panchanama at the house of PW3 situated at Shanthi Nagar. At that time, I was present at my house. S. I. Of police summoned me. At the time of conducting panchanama myself and LW10 were present.

Panchanama is conducted as A1 to A3 pelted stones on house of PW3 and on my house. After completion of panchanama

I attested my signatures on panchanama.

EX.P2 is the scene of offence panchanama. Apart from this I do not remember anything more.

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Ravindra Reddy

for accused:

Commenced at 12.21 PM 29

I am an illiterate. By occupation I am a tractor driver.

Panchanama is drafted at the house of PW3 by S.I. of police namely Seenaiah. Panchanama is prepared by typing. After read over the contents by the police I attested my signature.

I did not heard with regard to A1 to A3 pelting stones on the house of PW3 and on his house. It is not true to suggest that, A1 to A3 never pelted stones on the house of PW3 and on his house and only I am deposing false on the fear of PW3 and her family members as I am residing adjacent house of them.

Since 20 years I am staying near the house of PW3. Total 20 to 30 members gathered at the scene. I cannot say their names. Among said members some persons are locally inhabits and some persons are other Bazaar.

It is not true to suggest that, the alleged incident never happened at the scene and police never conducted scene of offence panchanama.

It is not true to suggest that, on the influence of PW3 and their family members I went to Police station and attested my signatures on some white blank paper and now I am saying falsely the panchanama was conducted by police.

Concluded at 12.30PM

Re-Examination: Nil 30

C.C. NO. 1408/2015

PW1 ( B. Padma) Date : 28.12.2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel M. Uma Shankar

Reddy for accused:

I studied up to 7th standard. On my narration one police drafted the Ex.P1. Ex.P1 is drafted on the date of alleged inci- dent. I presented Ex.P1 at 4.00PM. I do not know the designation of police person who drafted Ex.P1. I do not remember the desig- nation of police to who I presented the Ex.P1.

Along with me LW2 and one Saidamma accompanied with me to the Police station. Saidamma is the wife of my brothers.

Police examined me and recorded my statement at my village on the next day of alleged incident. They came at 07.00AM.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, when I am going to Padma house for preparation of Lemon rice,

A1 to A4 followed me and bet me indiscriminately.

I did not state before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, two persons i.e.., A1 and A2 followed me and requested for sexual desire. Which is marked as EX.D1. Witness volunteers that, I stated before the police that, A1 to A3 followed me and re- quested for sexual desires.

I did not state before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, two persons i.e., A1 and A2 following since two years and harassing me. Which is marked as EX.D2. Witness volunteers that, I stated before the police that, A1 to A3 following me since two years and harassing me.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, when I informed to my husband i.e., LW2 he admonished me.

I did not lodge any report to the police, when they are ha- rassing me since two years. My husband is also did not lodge any report to the police. When accused harassing me we placed the matter before panchayath elders in the village.

31

It is not true to suggest that, since two years no one is ha- rassing me and we never placed any panchayath before elders in the village.

I stated to the police in my Ex.P1 and also to the police that, accused pulled my tuft and made me undress in the village. It is not true to suggest that, I did not mention in my Ex.P1 and also did not state to the police that, accused pulled my tuft and made me undress in the village.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement and also mentioned in Ex.P1 that, Lw3 to 5 witnessed the alleged inci- dent.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement and also mentioned in Ex.P1 that, A1 to A3 indiscriminately beat me.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not stated before the po- lice and did not mentioned in Ex.P1 that, A1 to A3 indiscrimi- nately beat me and for the first time I am deposing before this court.

I did not summon the accused to the panchayath.

LW4, Lw5, one Sathi Reddy ,Padma, Baireddy Narsamma and

Dharma Reddy houses were situated at the alleged scene of of- fence.

In my Bazaar total 15 houses were situated. It is true, at that time lemon rice and Laddu were distributing to the people near the Lord Vinayaka idle on eve of Vinayaka Festival.

The alleged incident took place in the house of LW4. I men- tioned in Ex.P1 that, incident took place in the house of LW4. I did not sustain any injuries at that time. Witness volunteers house gates was closed and some persons came over through com- pound wall.

Myself and A2 and A3 are agnates. It is true, the house of

LW4 , my house and house of accused are situated in the same bazzar. LW3 is mother in law of my brother. LW3 is the mother of

Malgireddy Saidamma who is accused in STC No.706/2015.

32

It is not true to suggest that, on 26.09.2015 I made a Galata in respect of distributing of lemon rice and Laddu, to the person, who given donation of Rs. 1000/- only. It is not true to suggest that, A2 stated that, it is not proper and we have to distribute to all others.

It is not true to suggest that, I used un-parliamentary lan- guage against the A2. It is not true to suggest that, at that time

A3 questioned me to that effect. I slaped A3 on his cheeks when he abused me as Lanjadhana. It is not true to suggest that, A3 never abused me. It is not true to suggest that, myself, LW2 and my sister in law beat A2,A3 and wife of A2.

It is not true to suggest that, myself, LW2 and my sister in law abused them in utmost filthy language and threatened them with dire consequences. I do not whether wife of A2 lodged a re- port against us.

It is true, the same case was pending against us and we at- tending to the court.

It is not true to suggest that, myself, Lw2 and my sister bet them, abused and threaten them with dire consequences, in an- ticipation and to counter blast we lodged this false case against the accused after 3 days. Witness volunteers that, on the date of alleged incident we went to the Police station, but due to absence of SI of police, I lodged report belated.

It is not true to suggest that, I use to fight with the accused on petty issues with regard to boundary land. It is true, our self and accused have lands aborting to each other.

It is not true to suggest that, I foisted a false case against the accused without happening of any incident only to counter blast the case with filed by the A2. It is not true to suggest that, I am deposing false hood against the accused.

It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this case.

RE-Examination : NIL 33 34

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CLASS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 1031 Of 2014

. Name: M. Lakshma Reddy S/o: Sheshi Reddy R/o: Ramachandargudem Occu: Agriculture Age: 75 years Date: 23.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not Pw1 to 3. I know Pw4. I do not know A1 to A3.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P5 (161 Cr.P.C statement) and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 35

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CLASS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W.11 examined as P.W. 11

C.C. No. 787 Of 2014

. Name: Dr. G. Veeranjaneyulu S/o: Late Hanumantha Rao R/o: Janagam Occu: C.S.S Age: 56 years Date: 23.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as CAS at Govt. Area hospital, Miryalaguda from 1999 to 2017.

Presently I am working as CSS at Janagam District Hospital.

On 06.08.2013 I received requisition from SHO Vemulapally to examined PW1. On his requisition I examined PW1 on the same day and found following injuries

1. Neck pains and pain abdominal.

I taken X ray of neck and found no abnormality.

The above injuries are simple in nature and caused by blunt object.

The age of injury are within 24 hours prior to my examination.

Accordingly I issued wound certificate.

Ex.P9 is the wound certificate.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

The above injuries may also cause if a person fall on the ground. I do not remember the number of requisition given by the SHO

Vemulapally.

We maintain record in respect of Medico legal cases. We do not maintain any number with regard to medico legal cases. I did not mention any requisition number on wound certificate. I handed over the wound certificate to the SHO Vemulapally.

36

It is not true to suggest that, I did not examine PW1 and only at the instance of police I issued false wound certificate. It is not true to suggest that, I did not taken X ray of PW1.

Re-Examination: NIL 37

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CLASS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 998 Of 2014

. Name: M. Lakshma Reddy S/o: Sheshi Reddy R/o: Ramachandargudem Occu: Agriculture Age: 75 years Date: 23.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not Pw1 to 3. I know Pw4. I do not know A1 to A3.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P5 (161 Cr.P.C statement) and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 38

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CLASS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 998 Of 2014

. Name: M. Lakshma Reddy S/o: Sheshi Reddy R/o: Ramachandargudem Occu: Agriculture Age: 75 years Date: 23.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not Pw1 to 3. I know Pw4. I do not know A1 to A3.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P5 (161 Cr.P.C statement) and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 39

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 997 Of 2014

. Name: M. Lakshma Reddy S/o: Sheshi Reddy R/o: Ramachandargudem Occu: Agriculture Age: 75 years Date: 23.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know LW1/G. Indramma and LW2/G. Sunil Reddy. I know

PW4 and PW3. I do not know PW1 and PW2. I do not know accused.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P7 (161 Cr.P.C statement) and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 40

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 8

C.C. No. 1273 Of 2014

. Name: V. Niranjan Reddy S/o: Malla Reddy R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Correspondent of Abyas techno school Age: 50 years Date: 23.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to Pw7. I know A1 and A3.

In the year 2015 a dispute is going at the house of PW1. I saw A1 pelting stones against the house of PW1. Myself and PW6 were present at that time and rescued them from the clutches of the accused. Thereafter A1 and others left this scene. Thereafter we left the place. Except this I don't know anything more about this case. police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Ravindra Reddy

for accused:

Cross examination commenced at 12.02 PM

The house of PW1 is located at Shanthi Nagar. My house is situated at Santhosh Nagar. Police examined me at the house of

PW1 on next morning day of incident. Along with me police examined one Lakshamma and Radhamma. I did not state before police that, I am resident of Shanthi Nagar.

41

EX.D1 is marked as first line of the 161 Cr.p.C statement of witness.

I know A1 on the date of alleged incident. A3 is the wife of

A1. When I was present at my school I got call from PW1. On receipt of phone call I went to house of PW1. Pw6 and one

Radhamma are also present at the scene prior to my visit.

It is not true to suggest that, I do not have any acquaintance with A1 and A3 as I am ward counsellor to that area to help PW1 I am deposing false hood.

Concluded at 12.10 PM

RE-Examination :NIL 42

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 76 Of 2020

. Name: Thurka Srinu S/o: Chinna Venkateshwelu R/o: Veerabandrapuram Occu: worker in Rasi Cement factory Age: 33 years Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda, FAC: I Addl. J.F.C.M. Miryalaguda in

accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw-2/G. Pichaiah.

I know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding in front of accused’s house , on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 12-12-2017 at 5.25 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search at the house of 43 accused and Subsequently at 05.30 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 5 ID liquor from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W.11 Examined as P.W. 7 C.C. No. 877 Of 2019 Name: C. Suresh Goud S/o: Naganna goud R/o: Mahabhubnagar, Occu: SI of police, Age: 37 years Date: 22.12.2020. Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

Previously I worked as sub inspector of police at Madgulaplly

Police station from 02.04.2017 to 18-04-2018.

Presently I working as Sub-Inspector of police, Koilakonda P.S.

On 17-01-2018 at 5.30 pm , I received Ex. P1 from Pw-1. Basing on said report/Ex.P1, I registered case in Cr. No. 12/2018 for the offence U/sec., 457, 380 IPC and issued printed FIR which is marked Ex. P5.

During course of investigation I examined Pw-1 at police station and on the same day I visited Kannekal village and recorded the statements of Lw-2 to Lw-4.

Thereafter, I secured the presence of Pw-3 and Pw-4 in their presence I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch.

Ex.P2 is the scene of offence panchanama 44

Ex. P3 is the rough sketch.

While the efforts made by me to nab the accused, I received information from Lw-12 stating that the A1 and A2 apprehended by him in a case in cr. No. 13/2018 for the offence U/sec., 379 IPC on the file of Banjarahills P.S.

During their confession in the said crime, A1 and A2 confessed that they alongwith A3 committed this offence in this case. On receipt of such information I obtained P.T. Warrant from the court and produced them for judicial remand.

Later, on my transfer I handed over the CD file to SI of police by name Vijay Kumar.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for A1 and A2 and

learned counsel for A3 :

It is not true to suggest that I never examined any witness in this case and only I have done table investigation in the police station.

It is not true to suggest that without catching real culprits I foisted this case against innocent persons.

It is true I did not seize any property in this case.

It is not true to suggest that I never conducted scene of offence panchanama and never prepared rough sketch in the presence

Pw-3 and Pw-4.

It is not true to suggest thattheaccused are no concerned to this case.

Re-Examination: Nil.

45

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 76 Of 2020 . Name: Pichaiah. G S/o: Innaiah R/o: VeerabandrapuramOccu: Coolie, 46

Age: 57 years

Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I don’t know Pw-1.

I know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding in front of accused’s house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 12-12-2017 at 5.25 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search at the house of accused and Subsequently at 05.30 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 5 ID liquor from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil.

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS AT MIRYALGUDA

47

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 81 Of 2020

. Name: Azmeera Kishor S/o: Mathru R/o: G.A. Thanda Occu: Coolie, Age: 40 years

Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I don’t know Pw-2/D. Papaiah.

I don’t know A1 and A2.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from Anganiwadi centre at Ragavapur thanda , on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 03.11.2017 at 01.25 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused at

Angawadi centre and Subsequently at 01.30 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at Anganiwadi centre and seized 10 kgs of black jaggery and two kgs of Alam from each accused, 48 besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil.

Re-Examination: Nil.

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS, AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 83 Of 2020

. Name: Saida Lavuri S/o: Ganya R/o: Wachuathanda Occu: Agriculture., Age: 55 years

Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda, FAC: I Addl. J.F.C.M., Miryalaguda in

accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw-1/L. Srinu.

I know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding in front of house of accused at Wachyathanda, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

49

It is not true to suggest that on 13.11.2017 at 10.55 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search at the house of accused at Wachyathanda and Subsequently at 11.00 AM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 5 lts., of ID Liquor, besides drawing samples of ID liquor.

Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil.

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I

CALSS AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2 C.C. No. 322 Of 2014 . Name: S. Madhu Sudhan Reddy, S/o: Krishna Reddy R/o:H/o.Ganapathivarigudem, Occu: Agril., Age: 50 years

Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I don’t know Pw-1 and Lw-2/D. Seetharamulu,

I know Lw-3 /R. Venkanna and Lw-5/G. Venkanna.

I know A1 and A2.

I don’t know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

50

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I stated as in 161 Cr.P.C. statement, which is marked as Ex. P2.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil.

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

51

L.W. 6 Examined as P.W. 5 C.C. No. 322 Of 2014 . Name: Yadhagiri S/o: Late Krishnaiah R/o: Mahabhubnagar, Occu: Retired SI of police, Age: 59 years Date: 21.12.2020. Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as sub inspector of police at Vemulapally

Police station from 14.07.2013 to 24.01.2014.

Presently I retired from service.

On 13.08.2013 at 15.00 hours, I received Ex. P1 from the court through vide dis. No. 442/2013. Basing on said complaint, I registered case in Cr. No. 155/2013 for the offence U/sec., 447, 452, 384, 504 and 506 IPC and issued FIR which is marked Ex. P5.

During course of investigation I examined Pw-1 to Pw-4 and Lw-2 at Seetharamnagar colony, Miryalaguda.

On 29.11.2013 I arrested A1 and A2 and produced them before the court for judicial remand.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence U/sec., 447, 504, 506 IPC.

During investigation I did not find any substance ingredients u/sec., 452, 384 IPC, as such I deleted the said offences.

Cross Examination by learned counsel /Guduri Srinivas for

accused:

Prior to filing this private complaint before the court, Pw-1 never came to police station and did not lodge any report. It is not true to suggest that without conducting any investigation I filed false charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that for the purpose of numerical and at the instance of the court I registered this case. It 52 is not true to suggest that accused are nowhere concerned with this case and they did not committed any offences.

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

53

L.W. 13 Examined as P.W. 10 C.C. No. 787 Of 2014 . Name: Y. Yadhagiri S/o: Late Krishnaiah R/o: Mahabhubnagar, Occu: Retired SI of police, Age: 59 years Date: 21.12.2020. Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as sub inspector of police at Vemulapally

Police station from 14.07.2013 to 24.01.2014.

Presently I retired from service.

On 06.08.2013 at 1200 hours, I received Ex. P1 from Pw-1, basing on said report I registered a case in cr. No. 150/2013 for the offence u/sec., 324 IPC and issued printed FIR. FIR is marked as

EX. P5.

During course of investigation I examined Pw-1 And Pw-2 at police station, thereafter I referred Pw-1 and Pw-2 to Govt. Area

Hospital, Miryalaguda for treatment. Later, I visited scene of offence situation at Thopucherla village and examined Pw-3 to

Pw- 5 and Lw-5 /B. Kaveri, beside I secured the presence of mediators i.e., Lw-7 /V. Narayana and Pw-6 in their presence I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough

Sketch. The scene of offence panchanama is marked as Ex. P6 and rough sketch is marked as Ex. P7.

On reliable information I apprehended A1 and A2 and recorded confession cum seizure and seized one stick. Ex. P8 is the relevant portion of disclosure statement.

M.O.1 is the stick.

Thereafter I collected medical certificate from medical officer i.e.,

Lw-11.

54

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence u/sec., 325, 324 r/w 34 IPC.

Cross Examination by learned counsel / Karunakar for

accused:

I don’t know whether A1, A2 and Pw-1 are having civil disputes.

Ex.P1 does not disclose any civil dispute between accused and

Pw-1. It is not true to suggest that the charge sheet also discloses about the civil disputes between accused and Pw-1. It is not true to suggest that on the date of alleged incident, A1 lodged a report against Pw-2, Pw-4 and Lw-5. It is not true to suggest that basing on the report given by A1 I registered a case against them. It is not true to suggest that in the said case I remanded them and also filed charge sheet in the court. It is not true to suggest that I registered a case in counter against accused party and Pw-1 party.

It is true I have not obtained signature of the Pw-1 in the Colum no. 14 of FIR. It is true in the confession cum seizure panchanama from the last second line there is a correction with regard to description of stick.

I did not examine on Edhamma in this case who was shown in the rough sketch. I did not examine one Kesani Peddhulu in this case who was shown in the rough sketch. I did not examine one Manga

Laxmaiah and Narayana who was shown in the rough sketch.

It is not true to suggest that on 06.08.2013 when A1 requested

Lw-2 to register the land on that Pw-2 summoned Pw-3 and Pw-4 and Lw-5 and instigated them to beat us.

It is not true to suggest that I have not investigated anything in this case and done only table investigation.

55

It is not true to suggest that on political pressure I registered a case against the accused and they were no concerned to this case.

It is not true to suggest that I did not examine any witness and never visited scene offence panchanama and never conducted scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch.

It is true M.O. 1 is easily available at the house of every farmer.

It is true M.O. 1 dose not attested with any panch slip.

Re-examination : Nil.

CC. NO: 1463/2015

PW-1( N. Shivaramulu) Date : 21.12.2020.

Present and re sworn for cross examination.

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Paramesh for accused:

The alleged incident happened in between 7.00 PM to 7.30 PM. It is true the incident took place at night and it is dark. Due to injury near my eye, as such I feel unconscious so I unable to identify the said person. It is true on instigation of police I stated the names of the accused.

RE-Examination: NIL.

56

CC. NO: /20

PW-1( N. Shivaramulu) Date : 21.12.2020.

Present and re sworn for cross examination.

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Paramesh for accused:

The alleged incident happened in between 7.00 PM to 7.30 PM. It is true the incident took place at night and it is dark. Due to injury near my eye, as such I feel unconscious so I unable to identify the said person. It is true on instigation of police I stated the names of the accused.

RE-Examination: NIL.

57

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 322 Of 2014 . Name: R. Venkanna, S/o: Swamy R/o: Puchakayalagudem, Occu: Agril., Age: 38 years

Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw-1 and Pw-2.

I don’t know Lw-2/D. Seetharamulu and Lw-5/G. Venkanna.

I know A1 and A2.

Since 20 years, there was disputes doing with regard to land between accused and Pw-1. Except this I don’t know anything about the facts of this case.

58

I did not witness any incident.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I stated as in 161 Cr.P.C. statement, which is marked as Ex. P3.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil.

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 322 Of 2014 . Name: Ganapathi Venkanna S/o: Kistaiah R/o: Ganapathivarigudem, Occu: Agril., Age: 34 years

Date: 21.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw-2 And Pw-3 59

I don’t know Lw-2/D. Seetharamulu and Pw-1.

I know A1 and A2.

I don’t know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I stated as in 161 Cr.P.C. statement, which is marked as Ex. P4.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil.

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 1463 Of 2015 . Name: Nalla S/o: Swamy R/o: Puchakayalagudem, Occu: Agril., Age: 38 years

Date: 21.12.2020

60

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw-1 and Pw-2.

I don’t know Lw-2/D. Seetharamulu and Lw-5/G. Venkanna.

I know A1 and A2.

Since 20 years, there was disputes doing with regard to land between accused and Pw-1. Except this I don’t know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I stated as in 161 Cr.P.C. statement, which is marked as Ex. P3.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil.

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 80 Of 2020 . Name:R.V. Rajya Laxmi W/o: Srinivas Prakash R/o:Kodad Occu: Excise C.I 61

Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Thripuraram Police station from 15-11-2011 to 17-11-2013.

Presently I am working as Inspector of Police, DTRB, Nalgonda.

On 17-05-2013 at 0900 hours, I received Ex.P1 from PW1, basing on the said report, I registered a case in crime no. 50/2013, U/S 506,504,427 IPC and issued printed FIR, FIR is marked as Ex.P6 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation I examined PW1, Pw3 and

PW4 at Police station. Thereafter, I visited scene of offence situated at Citrus garden of one Madirala Satti Reddy outskirts of

Abangapuram village and secured the presence of PW2 and Pw5 in their presence, I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P7 rough sketch is marked as Ex. P8.

On 18-05-2013 I affected the arrest of accused and produced

before court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation

I filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under sec 506,504,427 IPC.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused 62

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 63

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 80 Of 2020 . Name:R.V. Rajya Laxmi W/o: Srinivas Prakash R/o:Kodad Occu: Excise C.I Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Thripuraram Police station from 15-11-2011 to 17-11-2013.

Presently I am working as Inspector of Police, DTRB, Nalgonda.

On 17-05-2013 at 0900 hours, I received Ex.P1 from PW1, basing on the said report, I registered a case in crime no. 50/2013, U/S 506,504,427 IPC and issued printed FIR, FIR is marked as Ex.P6 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation I examined PW1, Pw3 and

PW4 at Police station. Thereafter, I visited scene of offence situated at Citrus garden of one Madirala Satti Reddy outskirts of

Abangapuram village and secured the presence of PW2 and Pw5 in their presence, I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P7 rough sketch is marked as Ex. P8.

On 18-05-2013 I affected the arrest of accused and produced

before court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation

I filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under sec 506,504,427 IPC.

64

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 65

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 80 Of 2020 . Name:R.V. Rajya Laxmi W/o: Srinivas Prakash R/o:Kodad Occu: Excise C.I Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise Inspector of Police, District Task force, Nalgonda.

Presently I am working as Excise Inspector of police, Kodad.

On 03.11.2017 on reliable information with regard to illegal sales of ID liquor at the house of accuse located at Bettethanda, I along with staff by securing two mediators i.e,. PW1 and 2 went to the house of accused and issued search memo. During our search we found one plastic Can which is concealed at the corner of room with 10 litters of ID liquor. I opened the cap of the Can and found it to be a ID liquor and also I further found 100 litters of

Fermentation jangrey wash in a drum. Immediately I recorded the confession of accused and seized above material besides drawn sample under the cover of panchanama. Thereafter I destroyed FJ wash. Later, I brought the said material along with accused to the

Miryalaguda Excise station and handed over to the LW4/K.

Sanjeev Reddy.

Search memo is marked as Ex.P6.

Confession cum seizure is marked as Ex.P7 66

MO1 is drawn sample which is ID liquor.

MO2 is the FJ Wash.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately after issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 67

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W.4 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 89 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

On receipt of chemical analysis report I filed charge sheet.

Chemical analysis report is marked as Ex.P9. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet by depositing drawn sample

before the court.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I filed this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 68

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 84 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

On receipt of chemical analysis report I filed charge sheet.

Chemical analysis report is marked as Ex.P9. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet by depositing drawn sample

before the court.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I filed this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 69

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 80 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

On receipt of chemical analysis report I filed charge sheet.

Chemical analysis report is marked as Ex.P5. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet by depositing drawn sample

before the court.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I filed this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 70

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 89 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 01.11.2017 at about 09.00AM , on reliable information I along with staff went near Government primary school, kuttakinda thanda by securing two mediators i.e., Pw1 and PW2. On suspicious I issued search memo to the accused persons in the presence of mediators and conducted search. During search we found 2 litters of ID liquor in ploy thene cover from the possession of each accused. on their confession I recorded the same in the panchanama and seized 2 litters of ID liquor from the possession of each accused besides drawing sample under cover of panchanama.

Search memo is marked as Ex.P5.

confession cum seizure panchanama is marked as Ex.P6.

Later, I brought the accused persons along with samples to the station on the strength of panchanama I registered this case as COR No. 47/2017 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Excise Act. Which is 71 marked as Ex.P7. Thereafter I issued 41-A to the accused but they fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand. The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. Thereafter I obtained permission from the

Deputy commissioner of excise, Nalgonda for destruction of remaining ID liquor and same was destroyed by me. The permission of letter of Deputy commissioner Nalgonda is marked as Ex.P8. On my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 to MO3 are the drawn samples which contain ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately after issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 72

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 5 C.C. No. 88 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 31.10.2017 on credible information PW1 rided the house of accused and found 10 litters of ID liquor in a plastic can and same was seized under cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators. Later, PW1 brought the accused along with panchanama and ID liquor to the prohibition Excise Miryalaguda.

Basing on the said panchanama I registered COR No. 46/2017 under section 7(A) R/w 8(c) of AP prohibition Act 1995 and issued crime occurrence report which is marked as Ex.P8.

Later, I issued 41-A to the accused but she fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand.

The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. on my transfer I handed over the CD file to

PW2 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

73

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, PW1 never handed over the panchanama to the prohibition and Excise Police Station

Miryalaguda

I never issued 41-A notice to the accused. It is not true to suggest that, I did not forward the alleged samples to the chemical examiner for analysis and report.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 74

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 87 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 26.10.2017 at about 09.00AM , on reliable information I along with staff went near Gram panchayath Ilapuram by securing two mediators i.e., Pw1 and PW2. On suspicious I issued search memo to the accused persons in the presence of mediators and conducted search. During search we found 3 litters of ID liquor in ploythee cover from the possession of each accused. on their confession I recorded the same in the panchanama and seized 3 litters of ID liquor from the possession of each accused besides drawing sample under cover of panchanama.

Search memo is marked as Ex.P4.

confession cum seizure panchanama is marked as Ex.P5.

Later, I brought the accused persons along with samples to the station on the strength of panchanama I registered this case as COR No. 45/2017 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Excise Act. Which is marked as Ex.P6. Thereafter I issued 41-A to the accused but 75 they fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand. The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. Thereafter I obtained permission from the

Deputy commissioner of excise, Nalgonda for destruction of remaining ID liquor and same was destroyed by me. The permission of letter of Deputy commissioner Nalgonda is marked as Ex.P7. On my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 and MO2 are the drawn samples which contain

ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately after issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 76

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 85 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 31.07.2017 at about 09.30AM , on reliable information I along with staff Nandipadu cross road of Miryalaguda Mandal by securing two mediators i.e., Pw1 and PW2. While accused coming in oppositie direction on TVS Excel vehicle I found him in suspicious manner immediately I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of mediators and conducted search.

During search we found 4 litters of ID liquor in ploy thee cover from the possession of accused. On their confession I recorded the same in the panchanama and seized 4 litters of ID liquor and

TVS Excel vehicle from the possession of accused besides drawing sample under cover of panchanama.

Search memo is marked as Ex.P4.

confession cum seizure panchanama is marked as Ex.P5.

Later, I brought the accused persons along with samples to the station on the strength of panchanama I registered this case 77 as COR No. 30/2017 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Excise Act. Which is marked as Ex.P6. Thereafter I issued 41-A to the accused but they fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand. The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. Thereafter I obtained permission from the

Deputy commissioner of excise, Nalgonda for destruction of remaining ID liquor and same was destroyed by me. The permission of letter of Deputy commissioner Nalgonda is marked as Ex.P7. On my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately after issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 78

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 84 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 26.07.2017 at about 09.30AM , on reliable information I along with staff Hanumanpet of Miryalaguda Mandal by securing two mediators i.e., Pw1 and PW2. On suspicious I issued search memo to the accused persons in the presence of mediators and conducted search. During search we found 2 litters of ID liquor in ploythee cover from the possession of each accused. on their confession I recorded the same in the panchanama and seized 2 litters of ID liquor from the possession of each accused besides drawing sample under cover of panchanama.

Search memo is marked as Ex.P5.

confession cum seizure panchanama is marked as Ex.P6.

Later, I brought the accused persons along with samples to the station on the strength of panchanama I registered this case as COR No. 29/2017 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Excise Act. Which is marked as Ex.P7. Thereafter I issued 41-A to the accused but 79 they fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand. The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. Thereafter I obtained permission from the

Deputy commissioner of excise, Nalgonda for destruction of remaining ID liquor and same was destroyed by me. The permission of letter of Deputy commissioner Nalgonda is marked as Ex.P8. On my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately after issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 80

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 79 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 02.11.2017 at about 09.00AM , on reliable information I along with staff Grampanchayath office ilapuram village of Miryalaguda

Mandal by securing two mediators i.e., Pw1 and PW2. On suspicious I issued search memo to the accused persons in the presence of mediators and conducted search. During search we found 3 litters of ID liquor in ploythee cover from the possession of each accused. on their confession I recorded the same in the panchanama and seized 3 litters of ID liquor from the possession of each accused besides drawing sample under cover of panchanama.

Search memo is marked as Ex.P5.

confession cum seizure panchanama is marked as Ex.P6.

Later, I brought the accused persons along with samples to the station on the strength of panchanama I registered this case as COR No. 48/2017 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Excise Act. Which is 81 marked as Ex.P7. Thereafter I issued 41-A to the accused but they fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand. The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. Thereafter I obtained permission from the

Deputy commissioner of excise, Nalgonda for destruction of remaining ID liquor and same was destroyed by me. The permission of letter of Deputy commissioner Nalgonda is marked as Ex.P8. On my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately after issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 82

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 78 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

On receipt of chemical analysis report I filed charge sheet.

Chemical analysis report is marked as Ex.P9. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet by depositing drawn sample

before the court.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I filed this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 83

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 78 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 25.05.2017 at about 09.00AM , on credible information I conducted rides at Ilapuram village of Miryalaguda Mandal by securing PW1 and PW2 at about 09.00 AM we found the accused on suspicious and on search by issuing search memo we found 2 litters of ID liquor in plastic Can. On interrogation he confessed about his guilt and recorded the same before the mediators and seized 2 litters of ID liquor. Search memo is marked as Ex.P5.

confession cum seizure panchanama is marked as Ex.P6.

Later, I brought the accused along with samples to the station and on the strength of panchanama I registered this case as COR No. 23/2017 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Excise Act. Which is marked as Ex.P7. Thereafter I issued 41-A to the accused but he fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand.

The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for 84 analyse and report. Thereafter I obtained permission from the

Deputy commissioner of excise, Nalgonda for destruction of remaining ID liquor and same was destroyed by me. The permission of letter of Deputy commissioner Nalgonda is marked as Ex.P8. On my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and never conducted panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately

before issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 85

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 5 C.C. No. 75 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 29.11.2017 on credible information PW1 rided the house of accused and found 4 litters of ID liquor in two plastic bottles and same was seized under cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators. Later, PW1 brought the accused along with panchanama and ID liquor to the prohibition Excise Miryalaguda.

Basing on the said pacnahanama I registered COR No. 57/2017 under section 7(A) R/w 8(c) of AP prohibition Act 1995 and issued crime occurrence report which is marked as Ex.P8.

Later, I issued 41-A to the accused but she fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand.

The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report. on my transfer I handed over the CD file to

PW2 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

86

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, PW1 never handed over the panchanama to the prohibition and Excise Police Station

Miryalaguda

I never issued 41-A notice to the accused. It is not true to suggest that, I did not forward the alleged samples to the chemical examiner for analysis and report.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 87

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 82 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Later, remaining seized property was deposited before

Deputy Commissioner of prohibition of Excise for confiscation.

Subsequently I obtained permission for confiscation vide through proceedings 398/2013/A from deputy commissioner of prohibition of Excise , which is marked as Ex.P8.

On receipt of chemical analysis report the samples 8812 were found is ID liquor. Which is marked as Ex.P9.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge 88 sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I filed this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 89

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 82 Of 2020 . Name: I. Mangtha S/o: Husya R/o: G.S. thanda Occu: Agriculture Age: 32 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding to Police Station , on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 09.11.2017 at 04.50 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 05.00PM police recorded confession statement of accused at grampanchayath of Ilapuram village and 90 seized 2 ID liquor from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 91

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 82 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 15.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 14-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 09.11.2017 , on credible information I along with available staff proceeded to the house of accused at Ilapuram village of

Miryalaguda along with Pw1 and PW2. At about 06.30 PM, went to the accused house at 04.50 PM I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of mediators and conducted search.

During the search we found 2 litters of ID liquor in two polythene covers each containing one litre. Immediately we seized the said

ID liquor besides drawing samples under the cover of panchanama. Thereafter on strength of panchanama this case was registered in COR No. 52/2017 for the offence under section 7(A) R/w 8(c) of AP prohibition Act 1995 and issued crime occurrence report which is marked as Ex.P5.search memo is marked as Ex.P6.

92

Confession cum seizure is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A to the accused but she fail to comply the directions mentioned under 41-A Cr.P.C thus I arrested the accused and produced before the court for remand. The drawn sample was forwarded to chemical examiner for analyse and report.. on my transfer I handed over the CD file to LW4 on 16.06.2018. MO1 is the drawn sample which contain ID liquor.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

It is not true to suggest that, I never proceeded to the alleged scene of offence and never seized any material and panchanama as stated by me. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation only for the purpose of statistical.

I did not submit the 41-A notice to the court, immediately

before issuing the same to accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conduct any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 93

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 16 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 05-07-2018 at 05.00 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to

Wadapally bridge and conducted route watch. On suspicious of two persons i.e., A1 and A2 I issued search memo to the accused no.1 and 2 in the presence of Pw1 and 2, which is marked as

Ex.P5. On my search I found 10 kgs of black jiggery and 3 kgs of

Alum from the possession of accused No.1 and 10 kgs of black jiggery and 2 kgs of Alum from the possession of accused No.2 and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample. On my interrogation, accused No.1 and 2 confessed about their guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

38/2018 , U/s 34(e) of AP excise Act and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice 94 as such, I arrested the accused on 17-07-2018 and produced

before Hon'ble court for judicial remand. Thereafter, I send

samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property

before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda

for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 and A2 together passing through Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 95 96

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

Witness No.2 CF. No. 23 Of 2020

Name: Panga Achamma W/o: Late Kanakaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Coolie Age: 55 years Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement

The learned counsel for the complainant confronted the page

No.9 of the document No.1029/2009 and witness stated that, she is not the person who is in the first photograph and further stated that, the person who is in the second photograph is not her brother in law by name Panga Venkateshwarlu. I do not know who is the claimant purchased under said document Number.

The learned counsel for complainant confronted the photo- graphs of Panga Venkateshwarlu, who is one of the executants of alleged sale deed. Witness further stated that, the person is died about 20 years back. The thumb impression reflecting in the sale deed is not mine

I never executed the sale agreement No. 1029/2009 dated 09.03.2009.

Previously I had Ac.2-00 gts land situated at the surroundings of Miryalaguda. Presently I does not have any land.

97

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

Witness No.1 CF. No. 23 Of 2020

Name: K. Lenin Goud S/o: Guruvaiah R/o: Nandipadu village. Occu: Advocate Age: 45 years Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement

I am the complainant.

I submitted that, I am a lawyer practising at Ranga Reddy court, temporarily I am residing at Hyderabad. My father late kap- pala Guruvaiah, owner of the property Nandipadu revenue village

Sy.NO. 192 and 193 to an extent of Ac.03.30 gts. My father passed away in the year 2018 due to old age.

We applied for the mutation before the Tahasildhar,

Miryalaguda and same was pending before the Tahasildhar,

Miryalaguda.

I submitted that, the boundaries to our land in Sy.NO.193 of

Nandipahadvillageare

East: Miryalaguda town limits

West: Narketpally Bypass road

North: Venkata charys land

South: JSR Function Hall.

Further accused NO.1 to 4 with a common intention to knock away our property had brought into existence the sham register document bearing No. 1029 of 2009 by impersonating, forging and fabricating the document to knock away our land admeasur- 98 ing an extent of 139 Sq. yards without there being any matter of right and title.

The Survey number claimed by the accused No.1 is Sy.NO.

879 of Miryalaguda town as per the sale deed, but the accused herein are attempting to forcibly take possession of our land un- der the pretext of the registered document No. 1029 of 2009. I submit that, the Sy.No. 879 of Miryalaguda town is not abutting to our land on any side of the property, which will come to light on a bare perusal of the town survey map of the Thasildhar

Miryalaguda.

I submit that, on an earlier occasion on dated 13.07.2020.

Panga upendar had raised a report with police, stating that Panga

Venkateshwarluy executed GPA document No. 741993 Book No. IV in favour of Dabbikar Somoji, and Dabbaikar somoji sold away all the plots in the year 1998. In the said complaint to the police II

Town Miryalaguda it was stated that panga venkateshwarlu had passed away on dated 25.01.2004, the said documents was exe- cuted by the general power of attorney holder after the death of the principal and as such the said document registered in favour of the accused no. is forged and fabricated coupled with imper- sonation. I have also raised a report before the police. The police

II Town Miryalaguda, for various reasons had not registered a com- plaint against the accused and failed to investigate into the of- fences alleged against them.

I submit that, the accused here with a malafide intention to knock away our property under the pretext of the forged and fab- ricated documents, all the accused herein the attempting to tres- pass and take possession of the land forcibly from me and my family members which is not permissible under law.

Inspite of myself bringing it to the knowledge of the higher officers in accordance with the criminal procedure code, no action was initiated by the police till date. As such I am before the

Hon’ble court seeking justice and to punish the accused deter-

99 ently for their omissions and commissions in committing the of- fences continuously.

Further submit that, all the accused has deliberately and in- tentionally with an intention to cause wrongful loss to me and my family members, all the accused herein had attempted to enter upon our property and threaten me and my family members and the accused attempted to enter in the open land of ours with criminal force, they could not succeed in their attempts to enter into the land as myself and my brothers have obstructed all the accused. Myself and my family members are living in constant threat and fear, as there is an imminent threat from all the ac- cused as such I am left with no other alternative except to ap- proach this Hon’ble court.

It is therefore prayed that the Hon’ble court may be pleased to take cognizance against the accused.

100

CC. NO: 1041/2012

PW2( A. Latchaiah) Date : 14.12.2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel Mainam Mahesh for accused:

I went along with PW1 to the Police Station. Pw1 and myself lodged the report. I along with PW1 came to Police Station from my house. I am resident of

Yadgarpally village. At the time of panchayath I was present. In the said panchayath, LW3/B. Saidulu, PW3 and other few persons are acted as elders.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not state before police in 161 Cr.P.C statement that, during the life time of husband of Pw1, A1 and A2 use to beat PW1.

It is not true to suggest that, my family necked out A1 and A2 from the house.

It is not true to suggest that, I deposed my chief evidence against the accused only to help my daughter/PW1.

RE-Examinaton:NIL 101

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 9 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 877 Of 2019 . Name: V. Sravan Kumar S/o: Koti Reddy R/o: Madgulapally. Occu: Agrl. Age: 31 years

Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW5. I know A1 to A3.

In my presence police conducted confession panchanama on 08.08.2019 at Police Station.

In our presence accused confessed about their guilt with regard to committing theft. At the time of conducting panchanama PW5 is also present. After completion of panchanama I along with PW5 attested our signatures on confession panchanama.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.3

and Accused NO.1 and 2:

I do agriculture. I came to the court at 11.50 AM today. After coming to the court, court constable briefed me to the contents of case record. It is not true to suggest that, accused never 102 confessed before us and only at the instructions of court constable I am deposing false hood.

It is not true to suggest that, we never attested signatures on panchanama and we only attested our signatures on some white papers.

Re-Examination: NIL 103

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 9 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 877 Of 2019 . Name: V. Sravan Kumar S/o: Koti Reddy R/o: Madgulapally. Occu: Agrl. Age: 31 years

Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW5. I know A1 to A3.

In my presence police conducted confession panchanama on 08.08.2019 at Police Station.

In our presence accused confessed about their guilt with regard to committing theft. At the time of conducting panchanama PW5 is also present. After completion of panchanama I along with PW5 attested our signatures on confession panchanama.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.3

and Accused NO.1 and 2:

I do agriculture. I came to the court at 11.50 AM today. After coming to the court, court constable briefed me to the contents of case record. It is not true to suggest that, accused never confessed before us and only at the instructions of court constable I am deposing false hood.

It is not true to suggest that, we never attested signatures on panchanama and we only attested our signatures on some white papers.

104

Re-Examination: NIL 105

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 998 Of 2014 . Name: Ch. Subbarao S/o: Nagaiah R/o: Ramchadragudem Occu: Mesthri Age: 52 years

Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know A1. I do not know A2 and A3. I know PW2 and LW4/M.

Lakshma Reddy.

I do not know Lw1/G. Indramma and LW2/G. Sunil Reddy. I do not know PW1. I know LW4/M. Lakshma Reddy. I know accused.

I came to know one Chukka Rao purchased a land adjacent to my house. My house is situated at Ramachandragudem village.

About 8 years ago, Chukka Rao purchased the said land. I do not know from whom the said land was purchased by the Chukka Rao.

Apart from this I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P4 (161 Cr.P.C Statement)and deposing false hood to help the accused.

106

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 107

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 997 Of 2014 . Name: Ch. Subbarao S/o: Nagaiah R/o: Ramchadragudem Occu: Mesthri Age: 52 years

Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know Lw1/G. Indramma and LW2/G. Sunil Reddy. I do not know PW1. I know LW4/M. Lakshma Reddy. I know accused.

I came to know one Chukka Rao purchased a land adjacent to my house. My house is situated at Ramachandragudem village.

About 8 years ago, Chukka Rao purchased the said land. I do not know from whom the said land was purchased by the Chukka Rao.

Apart from this I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P4(161 Cr.P.C Statement) and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 108 109

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: B. Saidulu S/o: Yellaiah R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Business Age: 60 years

Date: 14.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to 4. I know A1 and A2.

A1 and A2 are restricting the entry of PW1 to her matrimonial house. I came to know the said fact when I acted as caste elder in the panchayath held between accused and PW1.

About 8 years back, panchayath was conducted. In the said panchayath, we summoned A1 and A2 and suggested them to allot shares to PW1 as she having two daughters. In turn, they agreed to allot 12 guntas to each daughters of PW1. Thereafter they refused to do so and never turn up to settle the matter. We also suggested to allot house to PW1, but accused failed to do so.

Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel Mainam Mahesh for

accused:

I acted as elder in the panchayath which was held between accused and PW1. Along with me Pw3 and PW4 are also acted as caste elders to the said panchayath. In the said panchayth an agreement is written. I do not remember the date of agreement. It 110 is true, I attested my signature in the said agreement as witness.

Witness volunteers that, no terms were implemented by the accused.

I know the contents in the agreement. Learned counsel for accused confronted a photo copy of agreement to the witness.

Witness admitted the agreement is the same agreement which was written in the said panchayath. I studied up to 8th class.

According to the said agreement we are the elders in the said panchayath. According to the agreement an amount of Rs.

4,45,500/- is deposited in the custody of elders. Witness volunteers that, no amount was deposited before elders.

It is not true to suggest that, myself and PW1 colluded with each other and an amount of Rs. 4,45,500/- which were deposited

before us were to grab such amount I am deposing false hood

against the accused.

Re-Examination: Nil 111

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 87 Of 2020 . Name: B. Balaji S/o: Saidulu R/o: Ilapuram Occu: Hamali Age: 45 years

Date: 11.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I know accused NO.1 and 2.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P4 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P5 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 26.10.2017 at 08.55 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.00 AM police recorded confession statement of accused at grampanchayath of Ilapuram village and 112 seized 3 polythene covers of ID liquor from each accused containing one liter besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 113

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 78 Of 2020 . Name: R. Gangadhar S/o: Panthulya R/o: Ilapuram Occu: Agriculture Age: 25 years

Date: 11.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 25.05.2017 at 08.55 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.00 AM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 2 liters of ID liquor 114 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 115

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 78 Of 2020 . Name: B. Linga S/o: Jaithram R/o: Ilapuram Occu: AGriculture Age33 years

Date: 11.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw2/R. Gangadhar. I know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 25.05.2017 at 08.55 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.00 AM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 2 liters of ID liquor 116 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 117

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 75 Of 2020 . Name: K.Venkateshwarlu S/o: Venkaiah R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Toddy tapper Age:55 years Date: 11.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know PW3. I do not know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P6 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P7 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 29.11.2017at 03.25 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 03.30 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at her house and seized 4 liters of ID liquor 118 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 119

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 75 Of 2020 . Name: P. Laxmaiah S/o: Kotaiah R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Toddy tapper Age: 60 years Date: 11.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know LW2/K. Venkateshwarlu. I do not know accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P4 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P5 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 29.11.2017at 03.25 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 03.30 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at her house and seized 4 liters of ID liquor 120 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 121

CC. NO. 1273/2015

PW7( M. Govinda Reddy) Date : 11.12.2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Ravindra Reddy for accused:

I do agriculture and real-estate business by investing and also by doing mediator. I converted the vacant land into venture. I do not know the exact figures but it may be one or two ventures which I have carried out till yet. One of the said venture carried out by me in the year 2017 at Gudur. The said venture is under partnership of 6 to 7 partners. Witness volunteers that, the ven- ture consist of 3 acres and I got half acre in said venture. The ven- ture located in Sy.NO. 396. The real owners of said venture are Pit- tala Shekar and Nagaiah. Witness volunteers that, they taken

G.P.A by them.

Since 2010 I have acquaintance with PW1 to 3. I am native of Verlapalem village. I do not have any relationship with PW1 to

3. I got acquaintance with them during my business course. It is not true to suggest that, I will run chit funds business. It is not true to suggest that, my main business is unregistered chit funds business. It is not true to suggest that, Pw1 to 3 are also one of the subscribers in the chit funds business.

I do not know when Pw1 got married. Since 2010 to till date I have only normal acquaintance with PW1. At present PW1 is resid- ing at Shanthi Nagar by doing business of pipes. PW1 is residing at Shanthi nagar along with his parents and daughter. I do not re- member the house bearing number of PW1.

I am resident of Santhosh Nagar. In the year 2000 I migrated to Miryalaguda. Initially I resided at Ravinder Nagar, thereafter I shifted to Shanthosh nagar in the year 2007 and since then resid- ing at the same place by purchasing own house. It is true, in the 122 locality of Miryalaguda, Shanthosh Nagar and Shanthi Nagar are two different colony’s. My house bearing number is 18-625.

Initially police summoned us to II Town Police station for the purpose of settlement. Police examined me in the year 2015 at the house of PW1. As I went away from the house of PW1, I do not know whom the police examined. The house where I was exam- ined by the police is pertaining to A3.

I came to know A1 to A3 at the time of the alleged incident.

At 2.00PM we went to the Police station for the purpose of settle- ment at that time one Kappala Andalu, one Laxmamma and some other elder persons whose names I do not remember are also present.

The distance between my house to PW1 house is 500 meters away. I stayed at Police station for 30 minutes but nothing has been settled. After 30 minutes we went to our respective houses.

At about 3.30 to 4 P.M I came to know about the alleged incident and upon that, I rushed to there. When I was at the house of one

Purushotham Reddy, I received stones are fallen upon us, as such we came to know about the alleged incident.

I did not state before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement the stones are fallen on us when we were in the house of pu- rushotham Reddy. I deposed evidence in this case. I did not de- pose any evidence prior to this cross examination.

Court question

Q) Have you deposed evidence before this court on 14.02.2020 or not?

Ans: I do not remember.

I know one Narsi Reddy, Nagi Reddy and Jagan Reddy. I do not their surnames. They belongs to Suryapet by name Dayakar

Reddy and I do not know the other person names. PW1 is having one daughter. I have seen her.

123

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, when A1 to A3 came to their house to take back the daughter of

PW1 but daughter of PW1 refused to go with A1 to A3. The said incident occurred on the date of alleged incident.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, A1 to A3 and other 4 persons picked up quarrel with PW1, PW2 and

PW4 and thrown stones on them. It is not true to suggest that, I never stated before the police above said two statements but now

I am deposing before this court for the first time.

I came to know that, the case was filed by the PW1 against the accused. It is not true to suggest that, no such incident oc- curred as stated by me in Chief examination. It is not true to sug- gest that, by keeping business transactions with PW1 despite not knowing the facts I am deposing false hood before court. It is not true to suggest that, what I stated that, I have seen is false. It is not true to suggest that, there is no scope of seeing the incident as no incident was occurred as stated by me.

RE-Examination: NIL 124

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 12 examined as P.W. 9

C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: K. Narsimha Rao S/o: Sathyanarayana R/o:Nalgonda Occu: S.I. of police Age: 37 years

Date: 07.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as S.I. of police at Wadapally Police station during 11.08.2018 to 15.06.2020

Presently I am working as S.I. of police, Nalgonda I Town Police

Station.

On 29.07.2019 at morning 10.00AM, I received Ex.P1 from

PW1, basing on the said report, I registered a case in crime no.

171/2019, U/S 420,379,384 IPC and issued printed FIR, FIR is marked as Ex.P9 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation I examined PW1 at Police station. Thereafter, I visited scene of offence situated at

Kondrapole and examined PW2 to PW5 there I secured the presence of LW6/L. Ramji and PW6 in their presence, I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch.

125

Panchanama is marked as Ex.P4 and rough sketch is marked as Ex. P5.

Thereafter I instructed PW2 to hand over CC footage which is installed at his shop and further instructed PW7 to collect CC footage situated at RTA Boarder check post, Wadapally.

While I made efforts to nab the accused, on 04.08.2019 I received information from Lw11/Inspector of police, Police Station

Hayathanagar with regard to apprehension of accused in

Cr.No.461/2019 on the file of Police Station Hayathnagar.

Subsequently on 07.08.2019 filed PT warrant against accused to remand in this case and produced on 09.08.2019 before this court.

Later, on 22.08.2019 I submitted a requisition letter before

Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalgonda to appoint Magistrate

to conduct T.I.P in this case and same was transmitted to the

Chief metropolitan Magistrate, Cybarabad to depute a local

magistrate to conduct TIP of accused, who is already detained in

central Prison, Cherlapally Hyderabad in Cr.No.461/2019 on the file of Police Station Hayathnagar. The Hon’ble CMM, Cyberabad deputed second Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at LB Nagar to conduct TIP.

After completion of TIP, I collected the copy in this case. I also collected the stolen property from LW11. The stolen property is MO1 is gold Ring, MO2 is another gold ring and MO3 is silver ring and cash of Rs. 47000/- and the same was deposited before this court at the time of filing charge sheet. I am also collected 65(b) certificate from PW2 and PW7.

Ex.P2 is 65(B) Certificate.

Ex.P7 is 65(B) Certificate.

126

After completion of entire investigation I submitted charge sheet against accused for the offence under section 420,379, 384 IPC.

Cross Examination by accused:

I received report /Ex.P1 from PW1 at 10.00AM. Ex.P1 is lodged by PW1. I summoned the mediators. Mediators appeared

before me at 11.00AM on date of report. I received the stolen

property from LW11. I received stolen property from LW11 after producing the accused through PT warrant. I do not remember the exact date when I received the stolen property.

Re-Examination: NIL 127

CC. NO. 1273 /2015

PW6( A. Nagarjuna Chary) Date : 07.12.2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Ravindra Reddy

Advocate for accused:

Cross examination commenced at 12.07 PM

Presently I am residing at Seetharampuram of Miryalaguda in house bearing No.13-95. During the alleged incident I resided at

Shanthi Nagar, Miryalaguda. I enrolled as Advocate in the year 1995. It is true, since more than 10 years I active participant in politics rather than practising advocate. It is true, since more than 10 years I am playing active role in TRS political party. It is not true to suggest that, previously I resided at Takaroad,

Miryalaguda.

It is true, I am having building at Takaroad. It is true, the said building is commercial cum residential. It is not true to suggest that, during alleged incident I was residing in the said building at

Takaroad. It is not true to suggest that, I am possessing my ad- dress for correspondence at Taka road building at Seethrampuram and also Adhar card and Voter ID card is also in the same address.

Witness volunteers that, he possessing voter ID card address of

Shanthi Nagar and Adhar card address of Takaroad. It is true,

Seetharampuram house bearing door NO. 13-95 and Taka road is building is one and the same. It is true, the building situated

Takaroad is my own building. It is not true to suggest that, I never possess voter ID card address of Shanthi Nagar.

Police examined me and recorded my statement on 21.05.2015 at Police Station. Police writer and S.I. of police recorded my statement. Police examined one Vangala Niranjan

Reddy/LW8 along with me. Since past 20 years I have acquain- tance with PW1 and his parents. During the alleged incident, PW1 128 house is situated back side of one Geethanjali school. The parents of PW1 are residing separately. The parents of PW1 are residing near Kanakadurga temple of Shanthi Nagar. The distance between house of PW1 and his parents is 200 meters away. The house of

PW1 is situated in the street No.7 and the house of his parents is situated in the street No.5.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, while I came out from my house I hearing shouts A1 to A3 are beating PW3 with hands and A1 carrying a bag and beating the victim.

It is not true to suggest that, I never stated before police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement stating that, while I came out from my house I hearing shouts A1 to A3 are beating PW3 with hands and

A1 carrying a bag and beating the victim. It is not true to suggest that, I am deposing for the first time in this court.

I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, on that day when Pw1 and PW2 came to the house of PW3 and then

A1 to A3 also went upon them.

It is not true to suggest that, I stated before the police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that on that day when Pw1 and PW2 came to the house of PW3 and then A1 to A3 also went upon them. It is not true to suggest that, I am deposing for the first time in this court.

After the alleged incident police visited the scene in between 2.30PM to 03.00PM on the alleged date of incident.

It is not true to suggest that, PW1 and his parent’s family are my followers political. It is not true to suggest that, in view of said reasons I am deposing false hood against the accused even though not happening of alleged incident.

Concluded at 12.35 PM

RE-Examination: NIL 129 130

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 12 examined as P.W. 9

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: R. Suman S/o: Babu Rao R/o:Ongole Occu: S.I. of police Age: 38 years

Date: 05.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as S.I. of police at Vemulapally Police station during 01.10.2012 to 16.07.2013.

On 01.10.2012 I received CD file from the station and verified the CD file and found investigation on proper lines. As a accused was unavailable, I filed charge sheet with a request to issue non bailable warrant against the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

It is true, I did not mention in the charge sheet about receiv- ing of CD file on 01.10.2012. I only filed Charge sheet. I did not enquire with regard to correctness of description list of witnesses.

It is true, I cited LW2, Lw6 to LW10 are eye witnesses even though they refereed as Cir. Witnesses in Ex.P1. I did not collect any doc- uments with regard to house site as alleged the Ex.P1.

Re-Examination: NIL 131

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 12 examined as P.W. 9

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: R. Suman S/o: Babu Rao R/o:Ongole Occu: S.I. of police Age: 38 years

Date: 05.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as S.I. of police at Vemulapally Police station during 01.10.2012 to 16.07.2013.

On 01.10.2012 I received CD file from the station and verified the CD file and found investigation on proper lines. As a accused was unavailable, I filed charge sheet with a request to issue non bailable warrant against the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

It is true, I did not mention in the charge sheet about receiv- ing of CD file on 01.10.2012. I only filed Charge sheet. I did not enquire with regard to correctness of description list of witnesses.

It is true, I cited LW2, Lw6 to LW10 are eye witnesses even though they refereed as Cir. Witnesses in Ex.P1. I did not collect any doc- uments with regard to house site as alleged the Ex.P1.

Re-Examination: NIL 132

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 11 examined as P.W. 8

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: M. Rama Rao S/o: Late Narayana R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Retired C.I Age: 59 years

Date: 05.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as S.I. of police at Vemulapally Police station during 20.06.2012 to 30.09.2012.

Presently I retired from service.

On 17-07-2012 at about 1400 hours, I received Ex.P1 through court vide proceeding No. 1097/2012 dated 13.07.2012.

Immediately I registered said private complaint as in in crime no.

73/2012, U/S 448,427,506,504 IPC and issued printed FIR, FIR is marked as Ex.P4 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation, I visited

Buggabavigudem village and recorded the statement of PW1,

LW2/Matta Reddy, PW2 to PW7, LW8/G. Janardhan, and LW10/G.

Parvathamma.

Thereafter, on 06.09.2012 I addressed a letter to the superior authority of accused as accused is working in the Military department. Later, I was transferred to Nalgonda and CD file is handed over to LW12/R. Suman.

PW5 and PW6 are stated before me as in Ex.P2 and Ex.P3.

133

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

PW1 did not lodge any report with the Police station prior to initiating filing private complaint Ex.P1 before the court. I did not receive any information with regarding to alleged offence as stated by PW1 prior registering of this case.

On receipt of Ex.P1 from the court, I immediately registered as in FIR and sent to the court without delay. It is true, FIR is dis- patched to the court on 19.07.2012 through PC 1878.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not register Ex.P1 on 17.07.2012. It is true, in FIR the column of occupation of accused is written as Not Available. There is no allegation in the Ex.P1 about previous family disputes between the accused and PW1.

At this juncture the counsel for accused read out the 8th line of the of second page of Ex.P1 to the witness. It is true, the date of examination and place of examination is silent in 161 Cr.P.C statement of LW3 to LW10.

It is true, I did not prepare scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch. It is true, I did not seize anything in this case. Wit- ness volunteers the offence took place in the year 2011, as such I could not recover any material.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not examine any witness in this case.

I do not know whether Pw3 and PW5 are form servants under

PW1 and LW2.

I do not know whether Pw3 and PW4 are niece to the Pw1 and LW2.

It is not true to suggest that, I foisted a false case against ac- cused without regarding statements of witnesses, only on account of receiving private complaint through the court.

It is not true to suggest that, there is no person on the name as LW10 in said village. It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this case.

134

I do not know whether mother of accused initiated a criminal case against LW2, PW2,PW6 and PW4.

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 12 examined as P.W.8

C.C. No. 787 Of 2014 . Name: M. Srinivas Reddy S/o:Sathyanaraya Reddy R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Doctor Age: 46 years

Date: 04.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

Since 2006 I am running one hospital by name and style Sri.

Satya Parameswari, Ortho Hospital, Miryalaguda.

135

On 06-08-2013 in morning hours, patient by name Saidamma came to my hospital with the issue of R.T.A.

Thereafter, on examination I found facture of distal phalge of the right thumb, The above injury is grievous in nature. I treated the patient as O.P. To that effect I issued cause of injury certificate, which is marked as Ex. P3.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

The above injuries also possible if a person fall from motor bike. I did not receive any requisition from the police. Police examined the Pw-2. I treated the Pw-2 as O.P. I also obtained the x- ray of Pw-2. It is not true to suggest that I did not examine Pw-2 as O.P. It is not true to suggest that the injury certificate is written on letter pad of Satya Pameswari Ortho Hospital and does not fall under injury certificate. It is not true to suggest that, I issued the above false certificate on the request of police and I never examine Pw-2.

Re-Examination :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 9 examined as P.W.9

C.C. No. 787 Of 2014 . Name: P. Babaiah S/o: Laxminarayana R/o:iskabaigudem, Occu: Kiranam business, Age: 50 years Date: 04.12.2020 136

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I don’t know Pw-7.

I don’t know A1 and A2.

In my presence no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

I can identify my signature, if shown to me.

On confrontation of confession cum seizure, the witness identified is signature.

Ex.P4 is the signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

About four or five year ago, when I went to police station with regard to matrimonial case, on request of police I made my signature on some white papers.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 20-08-2013 at 09-00 AM police recorded the confession statement of accused no. 2 and it his instance police recovered on stick under cover of panchanama at his house. Now I am deposing false to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil.

137 138

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from Government school, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 01.11.2017 at 08.55 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at09.00 AM police recorded confession statement of accused at government primary school and seized 2 liters ID liquor from each accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

139

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 140

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 89 Of 2020 . Name: B. Raghu S/o: Babby Naik R/o: Ilapuram Occu: Centring Age:31 years

Date: 02.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/D. Balaji. I know Accused No.1 to 3.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from Government school, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 01.11.2017 at 08.55 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at09.00 AM police recorded confession statement of accused at government primary school and seized 2 141 liters ID liquor from each accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 142

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 88 Of 2020 . Name: T. Kiran Kumar S/o: Bhav singh R/o: Ilapuram Occu: Centring Age:30 years

Date: 02.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding in front of accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 31.10.2017 at 06.40 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 06.45 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 10 liters ID liquor 143 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 144

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 88 Of 2020 . Name: B. Bharath S/o: Badru R/o: Ilapuram Occu: Coolie Age:25 years

Date: 02.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/ T. Kiran Kumar. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding in front of accused house, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 31.10.2017 at 06.40 PM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 06.45 PM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 10 liters ID liquor 145 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 146

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 85 Of 2020 . Name: D. Jogya S/o: Wachya R/o: Nandipadu Occu: Agriculture Age:50 years

Date: 02.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from Nandi padu X road, on request of police I appended my thumb impression on some white papers,

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 31.07.2017 at 09.25 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.30PM police recorded confession statement of accused at Nandipadu X road and seized 4 liters ID liquor, and 1 TVS Xcel bearing No. TS 05 EF 6418 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

147

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 148

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 85 Of 2020 . Name: N. Bala S/o: Bhadru R/o: Kuriya thanda Occu: Agriculture Age:45 years

Date: 02.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/ D. Jogya. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, while I am proceeding from Nandi padu X road, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers,

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 31.07.2017 at 09.25 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.30PM police recorded confession statement of accused at Nandipadu X road and seized 4 liters ID 149 liquor, and 1 TVS Xcel bearing No. TS 05 EF 6418 from accused besides drawing samples of ID liquor. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 150

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 80 Of 2020 . Name: L. Jayaram S/o: Champla R/o: Bettethanda Occu: Agriculture Age:42 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 03.11.2017 at 06.25 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 06.30PM police recorded confession statement of accused in the house of accused and seized 10 151 liters ID liquor from accused besides drawing samples. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 152

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 80 Of 2020 . Name: L. Seva S/o: kotya R/o: Bettethanda Occu: Agriculture Age:37 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/L. Jayaram. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 03.11.2017 at 06.25 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 06.30PM police recorded confession statement of accused in the house of accused and seized 10 153 liters ID liquor from accused besides drawing samples. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 84 Of 2020 . Name: K. Venkataiah S/o: Narsimha R/o: Venkatadripalem Occu: Coolie Age:50 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know PW1. I do not know Accused No.1 and 2.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

154

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 26.07.2017 at 09.25 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.30PM police recorded confession statement of accused at Hanmanpet X road and seized 2 liters ID liquor from each accused besides drawing samples. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 155

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 84 Of 2020 . Name: D. Devendar S/o: Muthiram R/o:Raghavapuramthanda Occu: X ray Technician Age:32 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/ K. Venkataiah. I know Accused No.1 and 2.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 26.07.2017 at 09.25 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.30PM police recorded confession statement of accused at Hanmanpet X road and seized 2 liters ID 156 liquor from each accused besides drawing samples. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 157

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 82 Of 2020 . Name: D. Nagesh S/o: Jagana R/o:Ilapuram Occu: AGriculture Age:40 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/ I. Mangtha. I know Accused.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 09.11.2017 at 04.50 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 05.00PM police recorded confession statement at Gram panchayath office, Ilapuram village and seized 158 2 liters ID liquor from accused besides drawing samples. Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 159

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 79 Of 2020 . Name: B. Balu Naik S/o: Deepla R/o:Ilapuram Occu: Driver Age:30 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I know A1 and A2.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P3 is my signature on search report.

Ex.P4 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 02.11.2017 at 08.50 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.00AM police recorded confession statement at Gram panchayath office, Ilapuram village and seized 160 3 liters ID liquor from each accused besides drawing samples.

Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 79 Of 2020 . Name:T. Venkateshwarlu S/o: Jani R/o:Ilapuram Occu: Coolie Age:37 years

Date: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW2/B. Balu. I know A1 and A2.

In my presence no search and panchanama was conducted and nothing was seized.

About 3 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on search and confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 is my signature on search report.

161

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 02.11.2017 at 08.50 AM police issued search warrant to conduct the search upon the accused and Subsequently at 09.00AM police recorded confession statement at Gram panchayath office, Ilapuram village and seized 3 liters ID liquor from each accused besides drawing samples.

Now I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 162

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: K. Saidulu S/o: Lachaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu:Government Employee in Irrigation Dept. Age 55 yearsDate: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to PW3 and LW3. I know A1 and A2.

I do not know anything about the facts of this case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Reported:

Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 163

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: K. Saidulu S/o: Lachaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu:Government Employee in Irrigation Dept. Age 55 yearsDate: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to PW3 and LW3. I know A1 and A2.

I do not know anything about the facts of this case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

It is true, CC No.1426/2014 is pending, which was filed by the accused. In the said case I am one of the accused. I know only few facts with regard dispute between accused and PW1. I acted as elder in the panchayth between accused and PW1.

Accused filed case against me with regard to helding a panchayath between them and also for acting as elder. It is not true to suggest that, accused filed case against us with regard to possessing an amount of Rs. 4,48,500/- by us without giving to him. It is not true to suggest that, bearing same in the mind, we made PW1 to foist this false case against accused.

Re-Examination: NIL 164 165

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: B. Srinivas S/o: Yellaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Agriculture Age 52 yearsDate: 01.12.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 and PW2. I know LW3 /B.Saidulu and LW5/K. Saidulu. I know A1 and A2.

Deceased Saidulu is my distant relative. During his life time he got married with PW1. Saidulu died about 10 years back.

About 8 years ago, PW1 placed a panchayath before elders with regard to family property distribution. The elders are LW3 and LW5. I am also one of the elder in Panchayath. In the said panchayath we advised the both the parties to distribute the properties among themselves equally. Thereafter PW1 told that, the property has not distributed to her. I suggested to PW1 to approach police and initiate legal action against them. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel Mainam Mahesh for

accused:

In my presence A1, A2 and PW1 entered into consent Agreement.

At this juncture learned counsel for accused confronted a document to the witness. Witness after going through the document stated it is a consent agreement.

According to me I attested my signature as witness in the said consent agreement. I do not know whether LW3 also attested his signature on the said agreement. During the life time of deceased /

Saidulu i.e., Husband of PW1, We did not receive any amount from him with regarding to landed property sold by the family of Saidiulu in favour of Maruthi Rao.

166

As per the agreement dated 09.03.2011 we did not taken amount of Rs. 4,48,500/-. It is true, A2 filed a private complaint against me,

PW1, PW4, PW3, Bantu Ramaiah ,LW3 and Appanaboina Venkanna. The case filed by the A2 against us is a false. I do not know remember basing on the agreement dated 09.03.2011 myself, Lw3,PW5 given complaint against advocate Rapolu Bhaskar in Bar council of A.P. We do not have any amount pertaining to the family of accused at the time of conducting panchayath.

Re-Examination :NIL 167

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 9 examined as P.W. 8 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: P. Gopi S/o: Bhagaiah R/o: Miryalguda. Occu: VRO, Miryalaguda Town Age 39 years Date: 25.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW7. I do not know A1 to A6.

In my presence police did not recorded the confession of any per- sons and nothing was seized. I can identify the signatures if shown to me.

Ex.P17 is my signature on confession cum recovery panchanama of A1 to A3.

Ex.P18 is my signature on confession cum recovery panchanama of A4 to A6.

About 2 years ago, I made my signatures on written papers at Police station.

The above panchanama is conducted with regard to mass copying in the examination hall. Expect this I don't know anything about this case.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is true, the above confession is recorded by the police with regard writing of examination by other persons instead of original candidates.

It is true, police conducted panchanama with regard to mall practise of examinations by A4 to A6 writing exams instead of A1 to A3. It is true, on the same day, police seized Hall ticket of Sathish. It is not true to suggest that, after completion of panchanama I appended my signatures and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

168

It is true, when I visited the Police station, no one is present expect police men. It is true, my signatures obtained on written papers without reading over the content to me.

It is true, I do not know who drafted the panchanama. It is true, nothing was seized in my presence and police obtained only my signatures.

Re-Examination: NIL 169

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 7 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: D. Ramesh S/o: Jaya Ramaiah R/o: Miryalguda. Occu: VRO, Miryalaguda Town Age 46 years Date: 25.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW9/P.Gopi. I do not know A1 to A6.

Police summoned me in the year 2018 to the Police station with regard to mall practise of degree examinations at Nagarjuna

Degree College at Miryalaguda.

In my presence no one confessed about their guilt and noth- ing was seized.

Ex.P15 is my signature on confession cum recovery panchanama of A1 to A3.

Ex.P16 is my signature on confession cum recovery panchanama of A4 to A6.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 31.10.2018 at 11.00AM police recorded the confession statement of A1 to A3 and seized one

Hall ticket belongs to Mamidi Sathish in front house of 1-123 situated seetharam puram village. It is not true to suggest that on the same day police recorded the confession statement of A4 to

A6 at Miryalgdua Police station. It is not true to suggest that, after completion of panchanama I appended my signatures and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

170

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

I do not know A1 to A6.

Since 7 years I am working as computer operator in the Na- garjuna college at Miryalaguda.

In the year 2018, I heard that, a mall practise incident was happened in Nagarjuna college. I heard the same through college of staff while they chitchatting.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

.It is not true to suggest that, on 27.10.2018 A4 to A6 wrote the exams of A1 to A3, as such this case was registered against them.

It is not true to suggest that, I know the case and wilfully I am deposing the false hood to help the accused. It is not true to suggest that, I was examined by the police.

161 Cr.P.C Statement is marked as Ex.P14.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 171

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 6 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: P. Ramana S/o: Yadaiah R/o: Kothagudem. Occu: computer operator Age 30 years Date: 25.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to Pw5 and LW5. I do not know A1 to A6.

Since 7 years I am working as computer operator in the Na- garjuna college at Miryalaguda.

In the year 2018, I heard that, a mall practise incident was happened in Nagarjuna college. I heard the same through college of staff while they chitchatting.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

.It is not true to suggest that, on 27.10.2018 A4 to A6 wrote the exams of A1 to A3, as such this case was registered against them.

It is not true to suggest that, I know the case and wilfully I am deposing the false hood to help the accused. It is not true to suggest that, I was examined by the police.

161 Cr.P.C Statement is marked as Ex.P14.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 172

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 5 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: N. Ravi Kumar S/o: Lingaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Lecturer Age 40 years Date: 25.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to Pw4.

I know LW5 and LW7. I do not know A1 to A6.

Since 4 years I am working in teaching field in the same col- lege at Miryalaguda.

I know about the Mall practice took place in the college but I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

In the year 2018 the mall practice took place in the college.

Usually I use to stay in the office room ,as such I do not know anything about the case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is true, in my college the exams centres will be allotted by

Mahathma Gandhi University. It is true, I was on duty in the year 2018. It is not true to suggest that, police examined me. It is not true to suggest that, A4 to A6 wrote the exams of A1 to A3, as such this case was registered against them. It is not true to suggest that, I know the case and wilfully I am deposing the false hood to help the accused.

161 Cr.P.C Statement is marked as Ex.P13.

173

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 174

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: S. Ramesh S/o: Rangaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Lecturer Age 48 years Date: 25.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to Pw3.

I know LW5 to LW7. I do not know A1 to A6.

Since 13 years I am working in teaching field in the same college at Miryalaguda.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is true, in my college the exams centres will be allotted by

Mahathma Gandhi University. It is true, on 27.10.2018 I was appointed as Invigilator in the room No.9. At this juncture, APP showed the signature of PW1 to witness. Witness did not identify the signature of PW1. It is not true to suggest that, instead of A1,

A4 wrote the exams of A1. 161 Cr.P.C Statement is marked as

Ex.P12.

It is not true to suggest that to help A1 and A4 from the case I am deposing false hood.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil 175

Re-Examination: NIL 176

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: I. Upender S/o: Lingaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Lecturer Age 44 years Date: 25.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 and PW2. Pw1 is working as Principal at Nagar- juna Degree college.

I know LW4 to LW7. I do not know A1 to A6.

Since 25 years I am working in teaching field in the same college at Miryalaguda.

I do not remember the date of examination.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is true, in my college the exams centres will be allotted by

Mahathma Gandhi University. It is true, on 27.10.2018 I was appointed as Invigilator in the room of 6. I do not know whether

A5 wrote the exam of A3. At this juncture learned APP showed

Mall practice document to the witness and witness identified his signature. 161 Cr.P.C Statement is marked as Ex.P11.

EX.P10 is my signature.

I do not know the contents of the document which bear my signature.

177

It is not true to suggest that to help A5 and A3 from the case I am deposing false hood.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: B. Venkanna S/o: Yadaiah R/o: Miryalaguda. Occu: Private Lecturer Age 39 years Date: 23.11.2020 178

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1. I do not know LW3 to LW7. I do not know A1 to

A6.

On 27.10.2018 I was deputed as a sitting squad through Ma- hatma Gandhi University to inspect N. G. College at Miryalguda during the period of exams. I alone was deputed as sitting squad.

I attended the duties at N.G. College for the purpose of inspec- tion. During my inspection I visited every exam Hall and conduct- ing checking during checking it was found that, other persons were writing the exams in place of real participants. Immediately I took the persons and informed to the police concerned. Then, po- lice took them into their custody. I do not know the names of per- sons, who caught during checking. I cannot identify the accused persons if shown to me. Apart from this I do not know anything about this case. Police did not examine me and recorded my statement.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that, A4 to A6 were caught by me during checking. It is not true to suggest that, A4 to A6 are writing exams in place of A1 to A3. It is not my duty to seize the Hall tickets and answer sheets from A4 to A6. It is not true to suggest that, to help A1 to A6 I am deposing false hood. It is not true to suggest that on 27.10.2018 police examined me and recorded my statement.

Ex.P9 is the 161 Cr.P.C. Statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 179

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1 C.C. No. 445 Of 2020 . Name: N. Venkat Reddy S/o: Ayodhya Ramulu R/o: G. Annaram. Occu: Principal in Nagarjuna Degree and P.G College Age 52 years Date: 23.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW1 to LW7. I do not know A1 to A6.

Since 2006 I am working as Principal in Nagarjuna Degree and P.G. college at Miryalaguda.

On 27.10.2018 in view of supplementary exams, the Princi- pal of every college is nominated as Chief Superintendent of ex- ams. Besides that, the superior authority is also nominated as sit- ting squads of every college for the purpose of inspection during the exams. During the October and November the exams will be commenced.

Generally chief superintendent of exams, sitting squads and staff of the college will check the Identity of the participants every day. On that day, my staff told me that, instead of participants of exams other person were appeared for exams. Immediately I in- formed to the Police station and lodged a report at evening hours.

Ex.P1 is my report.

Apart from this I do not know anything about this case. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

180

It is not true to suggest that I can identify the A4 to A6. It is not true to suggest that, A4 to A6 appeared in the place of A1 to A3.

Witness volunteers that, I do not know the names of accused but some persons are appeared for the exams instead of in the place of real participants. It is not true to suggest that, A4 to A6 confessed before me about their guilt. It is true, I secured the hall ticket and answer sheet of Prem Kumar/A1.in the same way I also secured the hall ticket and answer sheets of A2 and A3. I also secured the hall tickets of A1 to A3 and answer sheets from A4 to

A6. It is not true to suggest that, I know the case facts despite I am deposing false hood. I also secure I.D card of Prem Kumar.

Ex.P2 is the Hall ticket of A1.

Ex.P3 is the Hall ticket of A2.

Ex.P4 is the Hall ticket of A3.

Ex.P5 is the Answer sheet of A1

Ex.P6 is the Answer sheet of A2

Ex.P7 is the Answer sheet of A3

Ex.P8 is the I.D. card of Prem Kumar.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 181

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 10 examined as P.W. 8 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: D. Raju Kumar S/o: Late D. Jangaiah R/o: Saheb Nagar, Vansthalipuram. Occu: VRA, Hayathnagar Mandal. Age 35 years Date: 23.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

182

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW9/S. Madhusudan. We are working in the same rev- enue Mandal.

Since 5 years, I am working as VRA.

I can identify the accused. On 03.08.2019 I saw the accused at Hayathnagar Police station.

On that day I was discharging my duties at MRO office.

Tahasildhar orally instructed me and LW9 to act as a mediators.

On instructions of Tahasildhar myself and LW9 went to Hayath na- gar Police station.

On 03.08.2019 we reached the Police station at 03.00PM and

C.I. of police summoned to enquire the accused. We both en- quired the accused and he confessed that, he committed offences of rape and theft at different places and also in Miryalaguda.

Police seized 2 gold rings, one silver ring, Rs. 47,000/- cash and also number plates relating to the motor car and one I10 car.

I can identify the rings if shown to me.

MO1 is gold ring.

MO2 is other gold ring.

MO3 is silver ring.

After marking the above said rings the same was handed over to PW1 through court constable. On our enquiry accused re- veal his name as Ravi Shankar. Police recorded the confession panchanama of the accused. After completion of panchanama myself and LW9 attested our signatures.

EX.P8 is the relevant portion of disclosure statement.

Cross Examination by Accused:

Tahasildar instructed me at 02.45 PM. We reached the Police station at 03.00PM. when I reached the Police station Inspector of police and other police men are present at Police station. Tahasildhar did not given any requisition to me.

183

Q) Have you seen that a person is taking amount from the counter at Wadapally?

Ans: you have stated before me to that affect.

Prior to this I deposed evidence in lower court and Hon’ble Sessions courts.

The court is situated at L. B. Nagar.

RE-Examination :NIL 184

CC. NO. 974/2019

PW6( P. Vijay) Date : 23.11.2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by Accused.

Since 2 years I know PW1. S.I. of Police did not call me through phone.

When I was present near the shop the S.I. of police requested me to act as mediator to the scene of offence panchanama. I did not witness while taking amount from the cash counter. Prior to this, I never deposed evidence before this court.

RE-Examination :NIL 185

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 7 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: N. Santhosh Reddy S/o:Late Narsimha Reddy R/o:Wadapally. Occu: Home Guard- 643 Age 32 years Date: 23.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I am working as Home guard at Wadapally Police station since 2018.

As part of my duty, I operate C.C. TV footage and it’s Mainte- nance. According to me the C.C. cameras are installed at Damar- charla, RTA boarder check post and Rallavagu thanda village. As per my knowledge C.C cameras are installed in the year 2018.

On 29.07.2019 S. I. Of police instructed me to fetch the C.C.

footage at RTA check post with regard to commission of offence in

Cr.No.171/2019. As per his instructions I extracted the footage of moving of I20 vehicle from Damarcharla to Dachepally.

186

C.D. played in the open court in available Laptop which shows that, a white colour car crossing the bar gates.

Ex.P6 is the C.D.

I issued 65(B) certificate which is marked as Ex.P7.

Cross Examination by Accused:

I fetch the above C.C. footage in C.C. camera installed at RTA check post.No person is visible in the car. I can say car bearing number, which is AP 16 AQ 1686.

187

RE-Examination :NILDEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 7 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: N. Santhosh Reddy S/o:Late Narsimha Reddy R/o:Wadapally. Occu: Home Guard- 643 Age 32 years Date: 19.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I am working as Home guard at Wadapally Police station since 2018.

As part of my duty, I operate C.C. TV footage and it’s Mainte- nance. According to me the C.C. cameras are installed at Damar- charla, RTA boarder check post and Rallavagu thanda village. As per my knowledge C.C cameras are installed in the year 2018.

On 29.07.2019 S. I. Of police instructed me to fetch the C.C.

footage at RTA check post with regard to commission of offence in

Cr.No.171/2019. As per his instructions I extracted the footage of moving of I20 vehicle from Damarcharla to Dachepally.

C.D. played in the open court in available Laptop which shows that, a white colour car crossing the bar gates.

Ex.P6 is the C.D.

I issued 65(B) certificate which is marked as Ex.P7.

Cross Examination by Accused:

188

I fetch the above C.C. footage in C.C. camera installed at RTA check post.No person is visible in the car. I can say car bearing number, which is AP 16 AQ 1686.

RE-Examination :NIL 189

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 6 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: P. Vijay S/o:Nageshwar Rao R/o:Kondrapole Occu: Agriculture Age 29 years Date: 19.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW6/L. Ramji. I know PW1.

In my presence police conducted scene of offence panchanama.

On 29-07-2019 at about 11.30 AM, police conducted scene of offence panchanama at Raithu mithra seeds shop situated at

Kondrapole village. PW2 is the owner of said shop.

Police conduced panchanama with regard to as one person came and introduced as a vigilance officer to PW2 and taken an amount of Rs. 82,000/- cash from the shop, 2 gold rings and one silver ring from PW1. S.I. of police drafted the panchanama. I also noticed that the shop was installed with C.C. cameras. At the time of conducting panchanama Lw6 is also present with me.

I can say the boundaries of scene of offence.

On the western side : Addanki- Narketpally High way

On the eastern side : Srinivasa Naik vacant land

On the southern side: Srinivasa Naik vacant land

On the northern side: Nagaraju vacant land.

Myself and LW6/L. Ramji attested the signatures on panchanama.

Police also prepared rough sketch.

Ex.P4 is the scene of offence panchanama.

190

Ex.P5 is the rough sketch.

Cross Examination by Accused: Deferred at Request.

191

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 5 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: S. Saidulu S/o: Rangaiah R/o:Kondrapole Occu: Coolie Age:50 years Date: 19.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to PW4. I do not know the person (accused),who is standing at the dock of the court.

About one year ago, in between 07.00 AM to 07.30 AM, while

I am standing beside the road at Kondrapole village, one car sta- tioned near the fertiliser shop and one person board down from the car and asking me about the selling of fertiliser and pesti- cides. The person who asked me about selling of fertiliser and pesticides is the accused. As per his request I given information about the fertiliser and showed the shop of PW2. Thereafter what happened I do not know. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by Accused:

I do not know who are in the said car. I do not know the colour of the car and bearing registration number of car. The per- son who asked me about the selling of fertilisers and pesticide wore box type checks shirt.

Re-Examination :NIL 192 193

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: B. Saida S/o: Gobla R/o:Kondrapole Occu: Agriculture Age:45 years Date: 19.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 to PW3. I know LW5/S. Saidulu.

On 29.07-2019 at 07.00AM I went to the shop of PW2 to pur- chase pesticides. At that time, PW1 is present in the shop. I asked for pesticides, then accused stated that, checking is going on in the shop and asked him to leave the shop till the completion of in- spection. Then, I left the shop.

After 10 minutes again I visited the shop and I noticed PW1 is weeping by stating that, his gold and cash was taken away by person by introducing as vigilance officer. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

I can identify the person who asked me to leave the shop.

Accused is the same person who asked me to leave the shop on the above date.

Cross Examination by Accused:

I visited the shop in between 07.00 AM to 07.30 AM.

Q) Whether the person who is standing near the PW1 as stated anything to you?

194

Ans: you the person stated me to leave the shop.

Again I visited the shop after 10 minutes and on enquiry

PW1 stated that, he was cheated by the person by inducing to de- livery cash and gold. I did not see while PW1 hand overing the cash and gold to the person.

Re-Examination :NIL 195

CC. NO. 974/2019

PW2( K. Janardhan Reddy) Date : 19-11-2020

Present and re sworn for further chief examination

Further Chief Examination by learned APP:

C.D played in the open court in available Laptop. The C.D con- tains of 13 Images of accused and some images of accused along with P.W.1. The images are pertaining to occurrence of offence oc- curred at shop situated at Kondrapole village. While I hand over- ing the C.D I given certificate under 65(B) concerned police. The

C.D. is marked as Ex.P3. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by Accused

I dropped PW1 at shop at 7.00AM. After dropping PW1 at shop, I left to other place on my personal work. PW3 informed me alleged occurrence of offence through phone at that time, I was at

Piduguralla. I stated to the police about the C.C footage located at my shop. I was not there at shop at the time of visiting of vigi- lance officer.

RE-Examination: NIL 196

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: J.Gopi S/o: Bikshamaiah R/o:Wadapally Occu: Gumastha Age:22 years Date: 17.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalaguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 and PW2. I also know LW4/B. Saida and LW5/S.

Saidulu. I am working as Gumastha in Raithu Mithra Seeds and

Fertilizes shop at kondrapole village. Pw2 is the owner of the said shop. Since 1 ½ year I am working as Gumastha in the shop.

On 29.07-2019 in between 07.30 AM to 08.00 AM, as usual I came to shop of PW2 in routine work and sat down in the shop. I heard knocking the door sounds. I found that, the sounds are coming from the adjacent room. Immediately I went and opened the latches of the doors and noticed PW1 is inside in the room.

On my enquiry, PW1 narrated me that, one person intro- duced him as a vigilance officer and asked him to check the stock and files in the shop and took him to Godham for further enquiry.

Subsequently, accused took him in to the room and bolted the doors from the outside. He further informed me that, the said per- son took away cash of Rs. 80,000/- , Rs.2000/- from the shirt pocket and took away the gold rings from him. Thereafter I di- 197 alled 100 and informed to the police. Later, I informed about the incident to PW2 through phone. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by Accused:

My salary of Rs. 6000/- per month. I do not have any I.D.

with regard to working as Gumastha in the said shop. PW1 was not tied with ropes. I did not saw the amount, while taking from

PW1. I did not saw the vigilance officer while he checking the shop.

Re-Examination :NIL 198

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: K. Janardhan Reddy S/o: Krishna Reddy R/o:Veerlapalem Occu: Business Age:30 years Date: 17.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

PW1 is my father. LW3/J. Gopi is working as clerk under me.

Since, December 2016 onwards I am running a shop in the name and styale as Raithu Mithra Seeds and Fertilizes shop at kon- drapole village.

On 29.07-2019 at 7.00AM, I dropped PW1 in my shop and I went outside on my personal work.

Later, LW3 made a phone call to me and informed me that, some unknown person came to the shop and confined PW1 in a room by locking the doors and also took some amount and Gold from him. Immediately I informed to my brother Saidi Reddy and contacted PW1 through phone. Then, he confirmed the statement of LW3 and stated that, one person introduced himself as a Vigi- lance officer and took away cash and gold from him.

At about 12.00PM, I reached to my shop. The entire shop and

Godham is under surveillance of CC Cameras. The password and

I.D of CC camera’s is with me. I handed over the CC footage of the 199 occurrence to Wadapally police in form of CD. I can identify the certificate and CC footage, which given to the wadapally police.

Ex.P2 is 65(B) certificate which was issued by me.

Further chief examination is deferred at the request of Learned

APP.

Cross Examination by accused.

I did not asked I.D. card with regard to identification of Vigi- lance officer. The distance between my initial place and shop is 15 steps far. The distance between the shop and Godham is 20 steps. The Godham is stored with pesticides and fertilizers. I do not know in what way the vigilance officer came to the shop. No one tied my hands and legs with rope while I am searching under the Neath of the mattress. I cannot say the exact time, when ac- cused came to the shop. Accused did not count the money. The denomination of the amount contains Rs. 500/-,100/- and 2000/-. I cannot say exact number of Rs.2000/- notes, Rs. 100/ notes and

Rs.500/- notes. I obtained the rings through court.

RE-Examination :NIL 200

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 974 Of 2019 . Name: K. Krishna Reddy S/o: Venkatappa Reddy R/o:Veerlapalem Occu: Business Age:50 years Date: 17.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

LW2/K. Janardhan Reddy is my son. LW3/J. Gopi is Clerk at Raithu mithra seeds and fertilizes shop, which is running by LW2. Since 3 years LW2 is running said shop. I know Lw4/B. Saida and Lw5/S.

Saidulu. I know the accused. On 29.07-2019 I saw the accused, who came to my shop situated at kondrapole village.

On 29.07.2019 in between 07.30AM to 08.00 AM, while I am taking tablets due to fever at my shop. Accused came to the shop and introduced himself as a Vigilance officer and ordered for checking the fertilizer stock, stored at shop. I requested short time on account for arrival of my son/LW2, but accused refused my request and came along with me near to the cash counter of shop. Then, he demanded for keys of cash counter, initially I re- fused to give keys, but due to repeated demands of accused I given keys to him, then accused immediately open the cash counter and took Rs. 80,000 cash which is kept in cover.

201

Thereafter accused took me to Godham situated adjacent to the shop and asked to give 3 gold rings which were wore by me.

Accused stated that, if the superior officer would seen the rings, they would impose huge fine. On said aspect he again demanded to give my 3 gold rings. I immediately given the 3 gold rings to the accused. I also gave Rs. 2000/- and one mobile phone to the accused on his demand.

Thereafter accused took me to my house, and asked me to search under beneath of mattress. While I am searching under the beneath of the mattress, accused immediately locked the house doors from outside and fled away.

I can identify the accused who introduced himself as a vigi- lance officer if shown to me. Accused is the same person, who stood at the dock of the court. While I am knocking the doors from inside, my Gumastha i.e., Lw3 came and opened the latches of the house doors.

Thereafter, I lodged a report before police. Ex.P1 is my re- port, through court I received 2 gold rings, one silver ring and Rs.

47,000/- cash for interim custody.

MO1 is gold ring,

MO2 is another gold ring.

MO3 is silver ring.

Accused dropped Cell phone at the counter table. At the time of incident no one is present. Police examined me and recorded my statement. After marking MO1 to MO3, the same was handed over to PW1.

Cross Examination by accused.

I did not asked I.D. card with regard to identification of Vigi- lance officer. The distance between my initial place to shop is 15 202 steps far. The distance between the shop to Godham is 20 steps far. The Godham is stored with pesticides and fertilizers. I do not know in which mode, the vigilance officer came to the shop. No one tied my hands and legs with rope while I am searching under the beneath of the mattress. I cannot say the exact time, when accused came to the shop. Accused did not count the money. The denomination of the amount contains Rs. 500/-,100/- and 2000/-. I cannot say exact number of Rs.2000/- notes, Rs. 100/- notes and

Rs.500/- notes. I obtained the rings through court.

RE-Examination :NIL 203

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

Witness No.1

CF. No. 17 Of 2020 . Name: Punnel emelia W/o: Sudhakar R/o: Chervupally Occu: Private Job Age: 48 years Date: 09.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement 204

On 03.08.2018 I given complaint to the Madgulapally M.R.O with regard illegal digging of bore in my agriculture field. Subse- quently on 09.01.2020 I filed a case before Thipparthy Police sta- tion against T. Kondaiah/A3. Again on 10.01.2020 I given com- plaint to R.D.O , Miryalaguda on account of bore issue. But none of them, reacted to my issue. As no alternative I approached this court with private complaint for justice.

205

The above said incident occurred on 02-04-2017 at 10.30 AM.

206

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W.

C.C. No. Of 201 . Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Age: years Date: 17.11.2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP 207

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 532 Of 2017 . Name: M. Shailaja W/o: Nagaraju R/o:Narayanapuram Occu: Coolie Age: 26 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

A1 is my husband. A2 is my mother in law. Lw2/T. Lingamma is my mother. Lw3/G. Ramaswamy is my maternal uncle. I know Lw4/T.

Rama Narsaiah. Lw5/T. Saidulu is my elder brother.

In the year 2013 my marriage was solemnized with A1 at

Shivalayam temple , Erragudem village, Nidamanoor Mandal. At the time of marriage my parents gave an amount of Rs. 50,000/- cash to A1 and A2 towards dowry. After marriage I joined the com- pany of accused at Erragudem village for some period. Out of our wedlock we blessed with one baby boy. After 3 years, A1 started harassing me both physically and mentally with regard to demand of additional dowry of Rs. 50,000/-. Accused use to come in drunken condition in wee hours and not made me to sleep.

I informed the above said harassment to village elders and parents. As such , my parents held panchayath in the presence of elders. In the said panchayath, A1,A2 myself and my parents at- tended, but accused refused to hear the words of elders and con- 208 tinued the same harassment. I joined the company of accused with the fond of hope that, A1 may change his attitude, but he did not change his attitude and continued his harassment. Thereafter,

I approached a lawyer and filed a private complaint before the court. Ex.P1 is my private complaint. Thereafter Ex.P1 is referred to concerned police. Police examined me and recorded my state- ment.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Accused did not choose to cross examine. Hence, cross examina- tion is treated as NIL.

RE-Examination :NIL

CC. NO. 1041 /2012

PW1( Bantu Padma) Date : 10-03-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel M. Mahesh for accused:

I studied up to 9th standard. On my instruction Ex.P1 is drafted by a baby namely Kusuma , who is studying 3rd standard at that time.

After completion of Ex.P1, I gone through its contents and found correct. On the date of lodging Ex.P1 in the Police station, I came from my matrimonial house i.e., house bearing no. 11-54. Since 3 months I was staying in my matrimonial house till the lodging of

Ex.P1. It is true, after death of my husband I was staying at my parent’s house at Yadgarpally village. Witness volunteers as my in laws refused my entry in matrimonial house as such I was staying at parents house.

It is true, during life time of my husband, we stayed at

Seetharampuram locality house No. 8-57. It is true, till death of my husband we stayed at Seetharampuram locality of house no.

8-57.

After one month of my husband demises I went to my matri- monial house. It is my first report/Ex.P1 lodged against the ac- cused after death of my husband.

209

Q) Whether the amount of Rs. 4,48,500/- is lying in the hands of

Lw3 to Lw5, which belongs to our family?

Ans: witness initially stated there is no money pending, but later she stated she do not know the said amount whether lying in the hands of LW3 to Lw5 or not.

I do not know whether A1 sold away her land to one Maruthi

Rao for the consideration of Rs. 9,48,500/-. I do not know whether there was a dispute taken place between our family members in sharing the said amount among us.

I do not know whether Lw3 to Lw5 without knowledge of ac- cused the amount of Rs. 4,48,500/- which was lying in their hands given to me for my domestic necessities. It is true, on 26-09-2012 a case was lodged against me by A1 and others namely A.

Venkataiah, B. Pullaiah. A. Edaiah, A. Narsamma and S. Mattamma on the allegation that, I trespassed into the house of A1 i.e., door no. 11-54.

It is true, I filed partition suit against A1, A2 and others. It is true, since on date of filing partition suit against A1, the all im- movable properties are on the name of A1 and her husband namely B. Edaiaah.

The house bearing no. 11-54 situated at Seethram puram lo- cality belongs to my father in law i.e., father of my husband.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not mention in Ex.P1 and did not state before the police that, A1 abused me in filthy lan- guage. It is true, I did not stated before the police that, during life time of my husband we stayed jointly.

It is not true to suggest that, after death of my husband I never went to my matrimonial house and accused never refused my entry. It is not true to suggest that, I did not mentioned in

Ex.P1 and did not stated before police that, because of me, my husband was died and treated me with un human nature.

It is true, since 26-09-2012 I has been staying along with my children in the house bearing no. 11-54 situated at Seetharampu- 210 ram locality till today. It is not true to suggest that, on 26-09- 2012 I along with others evicted the accused forcefully and occu- pied their house. Witness volunteers that, accused voluntarily va- cated the said house.

It is not true to suggest that, to escape from the liability, a case filed against me I foisted this case against the accused with- out happening any incident as stated in my evidence.

It is true, a case was pending against me with regard to of- fence Under sec 403,406,417,420 IPC in crime no. 140/2012.

It is not true to suggest that, without happening of any inci- dent by keeping property disputes I foisted this false case against accused.

RE-Examination:NIL 211

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 1031 Of 2015 . Name: M. Ram Chandra Reddy S/o: Narayana Reddy R/o:Kukkadam Occu: Agriculture Age: 49 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know Lw6/E. Naresh.

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn rough sketch.

About 4 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

212

Ex.P3 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P4 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 16-05-2015 at 11.00AM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch at agriculture field of Pw1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 213

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 1031 Of 2015 . Name: B. Ranga Reddy S/o: Malla Reddy R/o:Kukkadam Occu: Agriculture Age: 62 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

PW1 is my elder brother. PW2 is my brother son. I do not know Lw2. I know A1 to A4.

About 5 years ago, Pw1 and A1 and others quarrelled with each other. Except this I do not know anything. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 214

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 1031 Of 2015 . Name: B. Saidi Reddy S/o: Malla Reddy R/o:Chinthalagudem Occu: Agriculture Age: 52 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Pw1 is my paternal uncle. I do not know Lw2/K. Bixam. I know

Lw4/B. Ranga Reddy. I know A1 to A4. They are my near relatives.

A1 is my paternal uncle.

About 5 years ago, at evening 5 or 5.30PM I was present at my agriculture field situated at Chinthalagudem. The agriculture field of PW1, Lw4 and A1 are situated at adjacent to each other.

Pw1 is ploughing his agriculture field by engaging the tractor. PW1 is having Ac.02.30 gts agriculture field at Chinthalagudem village.

A1 to A4 trespassed into the agriculture field of Pw1 and quarrelled with him and bet him with the stick and also they necked him out from his agriculture field. At that time, Lw2, myself and Lw4 witnessed the incident. I cannot say the bearing number of tractor, which was used in ploughing the PW1 land.

Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross examination by learned counsel for accused.Deferred at Request.

215

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: A. Lachaiah S/o: Maisaiah R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: idle Age: 81 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Pw1 is my daughter. I know Lw3 to Lw5. A1 is mother in law of Pw1. A2 is son of A1.

In the year 1998 I performed the marriage of Pw1 with Bantu

Saidulu. Out of their wedlock they blessed with two female chil- drens. About 10 years ago, husband of Pw1 is died due to heart attack. After death of husband of PW1, Pw1 stayed in my house for period of one month. Thereafter she went to her matrimonial house, but A1 and A2 refused her entry into the house by stated that, PW1 has no right in the said house and stated to stay with parents house. Pw1 informed me about the said incident. As such 216

I went Police Station. Due to above said issue, I conducted pan- chayath before Lw3 to Lw5. In the said panchayath Pw1 and ac- cused were attended, but accused did not heard the words of el- ders. I am suffering with financial crises to maintain the children of Pw1. During the life time of husband of Pw1, A1 and A2 use to beat Pw1, but I do not know the reason such beatings. Police ex- amined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: De- ferred at Request.

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 1041 Of 2012 . Name: B. Padma W/o: Late Saidulu R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Housewife Age: 35 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Lw2/A. Lachaiah is my father. I know LW3/B. Saidulu, Lw4/B. Srini- vas and Lw5/K. Saidulu, who are village elders. A1 is my mother in law. A2 is brother of my husband and son of A1.

217

In the year 1998, my marriage was solemnized with the

Saidulu at Seetharam puram. Out of our wedlock we blessed with two female children’s. On 16-04-2010 , my husband died. During life time of husband we resided at Seetharam puram village. At that time, A1 and A2 also use to reside under one roof at

Seethrampuram village. After death of my husband , I went to my parents house for staying 4 days. After return to my in laws house , A1 refuse to my entry into the house and necked me out from my matrimonial life by stating that, your husband is not there and you have no right to enter into the house.

After several affers I forcibly stayed in my matrimonial house during the said stay A1 abused me in most filthy language and stated that, because me my husband was died and treated me un-human nature. Due to unbearable harassment by accused I in- formed the same to my father/Lw2. As such, my father held a panchayath before elders i.e., Lw4 to 5. In the said panchayath, myself and accused were attended, panchayath elders advised A1 but she fail to hear the words of elders and necked me out from my matrimonial house. As there is no option I lodged report to the police. Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: De- ferred at Request.

218

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 233 Of 2018 . Name: M. Padma W/o: Saidulu R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Hosewife Age: 45 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

LW2/M. Shiva is my son. I know Lw3/M. Mahesh , he is friend of my son. I know A1 and A2. In the year 2002, my husband namely M. Saidulu died living behind us his only legal heirs. During the life time of my husband he purchased agriculture field in Sy.No. 896 situated at Nandipadu bypass road to an extend of Ac.01.12 gts. Out of which, the got registration Ac. 01.01 gts on the name of My husband. After demise of my husband, the said land was mutated on my name in the year 2008. Since 1996 we are in the possession of the said land till today.

From 2016 to 2017 A1 and A2 trespassed into our land by erecting boundary stones, in turn we removed the said stones. In the year 2017, we planted Paddy crops in the above said land. But accused trespassed and damaged the said planted crops during the night hours with the help of tractor. Due to such act of ac- cused, I sustained nearly Rs. 15,000/-. At the time of happening incident I was present at my home. I came to know about the acts of accused through my son Shiva /Lw2 and Lw3. On this record, I 219 lodged a report to the police. Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: De- ferred at Request.

220

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 190 Of 2018 . Name: B. Munesh S/o: Yadagiri R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Coolie Age: 31 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw4.

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn rough sketch and nothing was seized from the scene.

About 2 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P7 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P8 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 22-09-2017 at 05.30PM police conducted scene of offence panchanama at bricks company and seized one stick besides drawing rough sketch and after 221 completion of panchanama I made my signature and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 222

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 190 Of 2018 . Name: K. Shiva Shankar S/o: Yadagiri R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Student Age: 22 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw5/B. Munesh.

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn rough sketch and nothing was seized from the scene.

About 2 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P5 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P6 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 22-09-2017 at 05.30PM police conducted scene of offence panchanama at bricks company and seized one stick besides drawing rough sketch and after 223 completion of panchanama I made my signature and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

224

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 190 Of 2018 . Name: K. Bharath Kumar S/o: Ayodya R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Prvt Employee Age: 23 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 and Pw2. I know accused.

I do not know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P4 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 225 226

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 366 Of 2018 . Name: Md. Haseena W/o: Arfuddin R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Housewife Age: 30 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 and Lw3. They are living near my parents house. I know A1 and A2.

I do not know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examine me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 227

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 366 Of 2018 . Name: Gousia Begum W/o: Musthaffa R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Housewife Age: 45 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw2/Md. Haseena and LW3/Md. Safia , they are my neighbours. I know A1 and A2.

About 2 years ago at 07.00PM, when I was present in my house situated at Bangarigadda village. A1 and A2 trespassed into my house and caught my hands and dragged me outside of the house and pushed me to the current pole. As a result I sustained bleeding injury to my head. At the time of occurrence of incident Lw2 and others witness the incident, but they refuse to come to court to depose evidence. Immediately I along with my brother namely Kaasim went to the Area hospital, Miryalaguda and taken treatment. After that, I went to Police Station and 228 lodged report. Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel Ibrahim for

accused:

I am an illiterate. I do not remember the time and date, when I went to Police Station. On my instruction Ex.P1 is drafted by known person. I do not know the contents in Ex.P1. It is not true to suggest that, police briefed the contents of Ex.P1.

It is not true to suggest that, accused never dragged me and pushed me to the current pole. It is not true to suggest that, myself and accused have dispute with regard to water. It is not true to suggest that, keeping the previous disputes a lodged this false report against accused. It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this case and I am deposing false hood.

Re-Examination : NIL 229

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1 C.C. No. 18 Of 2018 . Name: Dr. K. Sandeep Reddy S/o: Ravinder Reddy R/o:Nalgonda Occu: Doctor Age: 33 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Veternity Asst Surgeon in Kanagal village from 01-02-2017 to 25-06-2018.

Presently I am working on deputation at Appajipeta, Nalgonda.

I know Lw2/Dr. Vishweshwar Rao. I do not know Lw3 and 4. I know

A2. I do not know A1, A3 and A4.

In the year 2017-2018 government of Telangana implemented a programme sheep distribution to Yadav community. As per the

Collector directions, who ever violates with regard to selling of subsidized Sheeps to Yadav community amount will be recovered.

Transportation department, police department and animal husbandry department constructed a temporary check post at

Wadapally.

On 28-09-2017 at evening hours I received information from

Lw2 with regard to catching of illegal selling of subsidized sheep’s 230 and transporting. On receipt of said information I immediately in- formed to SI of police, Madgulapally and same time I received phone call from Madgulapally Police Station with regard to same information.

On 29-09-2017 at morning hours, SI of police produced the above said sheep’s before me at Madgulapally Police Station and requested me to identify the subsidized sheep’s. I verified the ear holes, which were actually for insurance purpose and identified the said sheeps as given under subsidized sheep’s. Basing on the tags of the sheeps which were attached to the ears I came to know that, the said sheep’s given to A1. On the same day, District collector, DV and AHO, DSP Miryalaguda along with Madgulapally

MRO visited the Madgulapally Police Station.

In the subsidized sheeps there are 20 female and one male sheep. Which consist of one unit. The Total value of the sheeps is 1,11,000/-, out of which 75% contribution is government of Telan- gana and 25 % is borned by beneficiary by A1. I view of said inci- dent I lodged a report before SI of police, Madgulapally. Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsels Uma Shankar

Reddy and Vijayasaradhi for accused A1 to A4:

Total 8 villages comes under limits of Kannekal veternity hospital.

It is true, in the said 8 villages, 4000 people are doing breeding.

It is true, I cannot identify the all the farmers. It is true, I do not have any idea with regard to details of how many sheep units were distributed to farmers under the scheme.

At present, I cannot say how many units of sheep’s were dis- tributed to said villages. Witness volunteers by seeing the office records I can say. I did not mention tag numbers of sheep’s in

Ex.P1. I stated before the police about the tag number of sheep’s orally. It is not true to suggest that, I did not stated before the po- lice, about the tag number of sheep’s orally.

LW2 did not given any written information with regard to catching of illegal transportation and selling of subsidized 231 sheep’s. On 29-09-2017 I given Ex.P1 to the police at about 10 or 10.30AM.

It is not true to suggest that, there is no catching of subsi- dized sheep’s by Lw2. It is not true to suggest that, I lodged the report only for the purpose of statistical.

On 28-09-2017 Lw2 informed me about the alleged incident during night hours. At that time, I was present in Nalgonda. I did not stated before the police, that at 8.00 PM, one Amaraiah brought the sheep’s in the Bolero vehicle near me when I was present at Chervupally village. Which is marked as Ex.D1.

I did not stated before the police that, on enquiry with the villages I came to know that, the said sheep’s given to A1. Which is marked as Ex.D2.

On verification of record only I given report to the police.

Learned counsel confronted Ex.P1 to the witness with regard to striking of Gosula Nagaraju and re written as Gosula Venkanna i.e., A1. Witness admitted as true.

It is not true to suggest that, accused never transported his subsidized sheep’s. It is not true to suggest that, in view of differ- ences between with yadav community among them, some of the persons in the said community given me a false information as such, I filed this false case against the accused.

Re-Examination :NIL 232

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 7

C.C. No. 514 Of 2017 . Name: M. A. Latheef Baba S/o: Fakeer Mohammad R/o:Nalgonda Occu: SI of Police Age: 57 years

Date: 06-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as ASI of police, Nidamanoor Police station from 2010 to 2015

Presently I am working as Sub Inspector of Police at DTC

Nalgonda.

On 25-06-2014 at 03.00 PM, while I discharging SHO duties, I received Ex.P1 from PW1, basing on the report, I registered a case in crime no. 112/2014, U/S 354,506 IPC and issued printed FIR,

FIR is marked as Ex.P4 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation I examined PW1, PW2 at

Police station. Thereafter, I handed over the CD file to Lw8/SI of police.

Cross Examination by learned counsel P. Ravinder Reddy

for accused:

I do not know who drafted the Ex.P1, witness volunteers Pw1 came to the Police Station along with written report i.e., Ex.P1.

Pw1 did not stated before me that, accused caught her tuft and dragged her to behind of the one tree.

233

PW2 did not stated before me that, on seeing him accused fled away from the scene. Pw1 and 2 only came to the Police

Station and no one accompanied with them to the Police Station.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not examine PW1 and Pw2 and done only table investigation.

Re-Examination :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 10 examined as P.W. 7

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: P. Kashaiah S/o: Akkulaiah R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Sheep grazer Age:60 years

Date: 03-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to Pw5. I know Lw2, Lw7, Lw8 and Lw10. I know ac- cused.

About 7 or 8 years ago, I came to know about the dispute with regard to demolish of compound wall through villagers but I personally did not witness the incident. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

234

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P3 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 235

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 9 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: P. Kashaiah S/o: Akkulaiah R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Sheep grazer Age:60 years

Date: 03-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to Pw5. I know Lw2, Lw7, Lw8 and Lw10. I know ac- cused.

About 7 or 8 years ago, I came to know about the dispute with regard to demolish of compound wall through villagers but I personally did not witness the incident. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P3 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 236

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: R. Narsimha S/o: Saidulu R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Agriculture Age:50 years

Date: 03-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to Pw4. I know Lw2, LW7 to LW10. I know accused.

About 8 or 9 years ago, in afternoon hours while I am return- ing from my agriculture field for having lunch, when I reached near the house of Lw2, in turn LW2 informed me that, accused came to the house and demolished the compound wall, but I did not see the accused. Except this, I don't know anything about the facts of this case. police examined me and recorded my state- ment.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported NIL

Re-Examination: NIL 237 238

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: K. Ravinder Reddy S/o: Chandra Reddy R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Agriculture Age:48 years

Date: 03-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to Pw3. I know LW2, Lw6 to Lw10. I know accused.

About 7 ½ or 8 years ago, accused demolished the wall of my paternal uncle/ LW2 with the help of crow bar. At the time of occurrence Pw2, Pw3 and others are present along with me.

Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused.

It is true, there are previous disputes between accused family and

Pw1 family. It is true, I am one of the defendant in civil suit filed by the mother of accused. It is true, I am the accused in a criminal case filed by the accused prior to filing of this case. it is true, accused is not the resident of Buggabavigudem village. It is true,

Pw1 is resident of Miryalguda.

It is true, Pw2 and Pw6 work as agriculture labour under

PW1. It is true, normally agriculture farmers will spend their day at fields. It is not true to suggest that, on hearing the hues of Pw1,

I did not went to the scene. Initially Pw2 visited the scene. It is not true to suggest that, on the occurrence day I was not in the 239 village and I am in the my agriculture. It is not true to suggest that, accused never demolished the compound wall of Pw1 to escape from liability of criminal case I am deposing false hood. It is not true to suggest that accused is no way concerned with this case.

RE-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: K. Shankar Reddy S/o: Chandra Reddy R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Agriculture Age:43 years

Date: 03-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1, Lw2 and Pw2. I know Lw5 to Lw10. I know accused.

In the year 2011, I went to my maternal uncle house, there I heard hues of PW1. On hearing the hues, myself and Lw5 went near the scene and noticed accused and Pw1 are quarrelling with each other. Prior to my visit to the scene Pw2 is already present at scene. Accused demolishing the compound wall with the help of crow bar. On questioning the same, accused stated what you know and moved from there. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

240

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused.

It is true, a case was filed against me and Lw2 by Mother of the accused on the file of Vemulpally Police station in vide CC NO.

676/2012. It is true, there are civil disputes between accused and

Pw1 family. It is true, I stand as a witness in the civil suit filed by the accused against Pw1 and others. I do not know whether, the suit is decreed in favour of accused. It is true, accused filed a civil suit against Pw1 and others. I also included as defendant No. 3.

Initially, Pw2 went to the scene after the hearing hues of

Pw1. It is not true to suggest that, to escape from the case liabil- ity which was filed by accused, I made to register a false com- plaint by Pw1 against accused.

It is true, I stated before the police that, myself and PW4 ini- tially came to scene thereafter PW2 visited the scene. It is not true to suggest that, I did not went to the scene on hearing of the hues of Pw1. It is not true to suggest that, accused never abused and demolished the compound wall of Pw1 with the help of crow bar.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not question the accused with regard to demolish of compound wall issue. Police examined me at the house of Pw1 in afternoon hours. I stayed for one hour at the scene of offence.

It is not true to suggest that, police did not examine me. At the time of recording my statement Pw4, Pw2 and PW6 were also present with me. Police examined us separately. I do not know the seriatom of examination of police.

It is not true to suggest that, to escape from the liability of the case, I am deposing false hood against the accused. It is not true to suggest that, no incident happened as alleged by PW1.

241

RE-Examination:NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: P. Saidulu S/o: Kashaiah R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Agriculture Age:40 years

Date: 03-03-2020

242

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 as I am tenant to her agriculture land. I know Lw4 to

Lw10. I know accused.

About 7 or 8 years ago, while I am coming from agriculture field towards my home. At that time, I saw accused near the com- pound wall of PW1. There was a dispute going between Pw1 and accused with regard to compound wall issue and accused using abused language against Pw1. Later, I left the scene. Police ex- amined me and recorded my statement.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

I stated before the police that, accused demolishing the compound wall of Pw1 with help of crow bar.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

I know the accused as the resident of my village. It is true, I work under Pw1 and Lw2 and I have great respect towards them. It is true, I seen the accused on that day. It is true, accused as per his job, he work in Military force. It is true, there are previous civil dispute accused and Pw1 and Lw2.

It is true, Pw6 deposed as witness in favour of Pw1 in Civil suit filed by accused and Parijathamma. I do not know whether, the said civil suit is decreed in favour of accused.

It is true, on whole day I was at my agriculture field. Police examined me on evening of alleged incident. Along with me police examined PW3 ,Pw4 and LW8.

It is not true to suggest that, I do not know anything about the case only on instance of Pw1 I am deposing false hood. It is 243 not true to suggest that accused is no way concerned with this case.

Re-Examination: NIL 244

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 1203 Of 2013 . Name: A. Sujatha W/o: Matta Reddy R/o:Buggabavigudem Occu: Housewife Age:66 years

Date: 03-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Lw2/A. Matta reddy is my husband. I know Lw3 to Lw10. Accused is my son in law.

About 15 years ago, I purchased house plot from the father of the accused and constructed a house and compound wall also.

About 11 years ago( witness stated she cannot remember the year), accused came upon the house by abusing and demolished the compound wall with the help of crow bar. On seeing the same, I made hues. On hearing the hues, Lw3 to LW5 came to the scene and questioned the accused. On seeing them, accused fled away. I sustained Rs. 30,000-40,000/- loss with regard to demolish of compound wall. The whole incident is happened in the year 2012, but I do not know the exact date.

Thereafter I came to the court and lodged a private com- plaint. Ex.P1 is private complaint and same was referred to the police. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross examination by learned counsel for accused:

245

I filed this case, at the time of presentation of Ex.P1, Pw2 to PW6 were also present with me. Police examined me at vemulapally village. Due to pasity of time I cannot remember the place where police examined me. Police also examined all other witness along with me. I do not remember the exact time of recording my state- ment. Pw3 and Pw4 are my niece.

I mentioned in Ex.P1 that, I purchased house plot from the father of accused about 15 years ago. I also mentioned in Ex.P1 that, I constructed a house along with compound wall in the said house plot. It is not true to suggest that, I did not mention above said things in the Ex.P1.

Myself and accused do not have any previous disputes. It is not true to suggest that, I did not mention in Ex.P1 that, I made hues at the time of the occurrence of alleged incident.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not mention in Ex.P1 that,

Pw2 to PW4 came to the scene on hearing the hues. It is not true to suggest that, prior to filing of this case, there are previous dis- putes between myself and accused.

It is true, on the east side of my house one Parijathamma land is situated. I do not whether , accused and Parijathamma do- nated their land to the temple. Witness volunteers that, the said donated land belongs to Parijathamma.

It is true, on 17-07-2012 accused and Parijathamma filed a suit for recovery of possession and declaration of title against me on the filing of Hon’ble senior civil Judge court, Miryalaguda. It is true, in the said suit, Pw2 to PW6, Lw2, Lw7 and Lw8 are defen- dants along with me. It is true, in the said suit, the Hon’ble court decreed in the favour of accused and Parijathamma against us.

Prior to filing of said suit, a case was filed against Pw3,Pw4 and

LW2.

It is true, prior to 10 months before filing of this private com- plaint/Ex.P1 a case was filed against Pw3 and PW4 by Pari- jathamma, who is mother of accused in vide Cr.No. 44 of 2012,

U/S 435 IPC on the file of Vemulapally Police station.

246

It is not true to suggest that, by keeping previous grudges with regard filing a case against my husband and nieces I filed this false complaint before the court against the accused.

It is true, Pw3, Pw5 , Pw6 and Lw8 worked in construction of my house. It is true, Pw5 work as a Driver under the Pw4. It is true, Pw6 stand as witness in civil suit which was filed by accused vide OS No. 52/2012. It is not true to suggest that, Pw2 to Pw6,

Lw7 and Lw8 are works under whims and fancies of Lw2.

It is true, Pw2 and Pw6 are tenants to our agriculture fields.

Pw2 is the son of Pw6. It is not true to suggest that, to make the accused to listen us and to drop cases against us I filed this false complaint.

I do not remember the date when police examined me. On hearing my hues, initially Pw2 visit the scene and later Pw3 and

Pw4 came to the scene. I do not remember the time when Pw3 and 4 came to the scene.

It is not true to suggest that, accused never abused and never demolished my compound wall with the help of crow bar. It is true, I am resident of Miryalaguda. It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this case. It is not true to sug- gest that, no incident happened as alleged by me.

Re-Examination :NIL 247

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W.

C.C. No. Of 201 . Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Age: years Date: 03-03-2020 248

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP 249

CC. NO. 1220/2016

PW1(V. Shankar) Date : 02-03-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

On 12-07-2014 we went to enquiry chirumarthi Branch Post office under Madgulapally sub post office. On 24-05-2016 I lodged report against the accused. It is not true to suggest that, when I went to enquiry, in the said post office there is no misappropriation funds committed by the accused as such I did not lodge report against the accused immediately. Due to departmental enquiry and for completion of past work verification

I did not lodge complaint immediately and also as per directions of the my superior authority.

It took 1year 6 months to complete departmental enquiry against accused and to proceed complete against him in Police station. It is true, I did not mention with regard 1 year 6 months delay in Ex.P1. Witness volunteers I stated before police about the delay orally.

Police examined me on date of lodging report/Ex.P1. I stayed in Police station entire day i.e., day time. I did not produce my attendance sheet along with Ex.P1 to the police. Witness volunteers I am being a postal sub divisional officer, there is no need of attendance sheet.

Chirumarthi villagers did not lodge any report against the accused to me. Witness volunteers they given report to Suryapet superintendent of post office. It is true, the workers of post office daily shows the accounts to the sub post office. It is not true to suggest that, since 13-07-2014 accused rejoined his duty at

Chirumarthi post office.

It is not true to suggest that, as there is no misappropriation committed by the accused during my inspection and enquiry as such I did not lodge report immediately. Witness volunteers 250 accused was absconding from his duties till 22-12-2014. It is not true to suggest that, since 22-12-2014 accused was not suspended by the department still he is continue his service in post department. Witness volunteers accused joined on 22-12- 2014 and he was suspended same day itself.

Police seized broken lock in our presence along with chirumarthi villages. Witness again says I don't idea with regard to handed overing the broken lock to the police. On 24-05-2016 I handed over seized record to the police. I did not inform to the police personally through phone immediately after my visit to

Chirumarthi post office about misappropriation of funds by accused.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not went to enquire to any post office only at the instance of higher authorities I lodged a false report against the accused.

It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with the present case.

RE-Examination :NIL 251

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W.

C.C. No. Of 201 . Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Age: years Date: 02-03-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP 252

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 43 Of 2020 . Name: K. Nagaraju S/o: Ramesh R/o:Nandipadu Occu: Ambulance Driver Age: 38 years Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP 253

I know Lw4/A. Raghu. I know Pw1.

On 04-01-2020 police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at back side of Jyothi hospital i.e.,

Godham with regard to theft of 2 ACs.

At the time of conducting panchanama Lw4, Lw7 and other police men were present. I noticed the gates of Godham were broke opened.

After completion of scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch I along with LW4 attested our signatures on it.

Ex.P2 is the scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P3 is rough sketch.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.1:

Reported : NIL

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.2:

Reported :NIL

Re-Examination :NIL 254

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 40 Of 2020 . Name: G.Venkateshwarlu S/o: Veeraiah R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Supervisor in hospital Age:51 years

Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw2/R. Shiva Shankar.

I am working as Supervisor at Jyothi hospital since 20 years. I am the in charge with regard to maintenance of the hospital.

On the back side of hospital one Godham is located. In the said

Godham we use to store extra articles i.e., beds, chairs and new articles. In the same Godham we kept 2 new AC’s for the purpose of fitting.

On 04-01-2020 at morning hours, I attended my duty at Jyothi

Hospital, I noticed the locks of Godham shutter were broke 255 opened and some unknown persons committed theft of 2 new

Ac’s i.e., LG company 2 ton capacity. The worth of 2 AC’s is Rs.

1,00,000/-immediately I informed to one Muvva Rama Rao , who is head of our hospital. Thereafter I went to Police Station and lodged a report. Ex.P1 is my report. I can identify the Ac’s if shown to me.

MO1 is the LG AC ( Air conditioner).

MO2 is also LG AC.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.1:

Reported : NIL

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.2:

The Godham which is situated back side of hospital. It is true, I did not mentioned that, Godham is situated back side of hospital in the middle road is situated. In the year 1996 jyohi hospital is established. In the year 2001 Jyothi hospital is shifted to Vinobha

Nagar.

Usually I will attend my duty at 9 AM. I do not remember 04- 01-2020 which day falls. My duty is regular timings are 9AM to 5PM. On 04-01-2020 I attended my duty at 08.15AM. apart from me, no one has his of Godham. The total staff of Jyothi hospital is consist of 30 members. It is true, 3 hospitals, temple, 3 schools were situated near by the surroundings of Jyothi hospital. It is true, apart from running hospital, the hospital authorities also running Narsing Home.

It is not true to suggest that, no offence is committed in the

Godham. Mess is situated in the hospital. It is not true to suggest that, as Godham and hospital is under watch of security as such no offence could happen in the Godham.

I have register number for ACs witness volunteers I produced it before the police. It is not true to suggest that, no theft occurred at Godham.

RE-Examination: NIL 256

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 10 examined as P.W. 5 C.C. No. 877 Of 2019 Name: K. Srinu S/o: Veeraiah R/o:Madgulapally Occu: Mechanic Age: 35 years Date: 28-02-2020 257

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw9/V. Sravan Kumar Reddy. I know A3.

I did not enquire any person at any point of time.

In the year 2019, while I am proceeding in front of Madgulapally

Police station, SI of police called me and requested to act as mediator for recording confession of accused. At that time, SI of police, LW9, A1 to A3 were present. In my presence all 3 accused confessed about their guilt with regard to commission of theft in the limits of Kannekal village. Ex.P4 is my signature on confession panchanama. After recording of confession panchanama I attested my signature along with Lw9.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.1

and 2:

I attested my signature on written panchanama.

It is not true to suggest that, police never recorded any confession panchanama of accused, only to help the police I am deposing false hood. It is not true to suggest that, prior to this case, I gave evidence.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused No.3:

It is true I do not know about the number of pages of confession panchanama. It is not true to suggest that, I do not know the contents of confession panchanama. It is not true to suggest that, police briefed me the contents of panchanama prior to deposing chief evidence. It is not true to suggest that, at the instance of police constable I identified the accused. It is not true to suggest that, police did not summoned me. It is not true to suggest that, in my presence police did not recorded any confession panchanama of accused.

Re-Examination:NIL 258

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 524 Of 2017 . Name:K. Srinivas Reddy S/o: Madhava Reddy R/o:Peddapadu Occu: Agriculture Age:27 years

Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw3/T. Sathish Reddy. I know accused.

259

In my presence no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

About one year ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P1 my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 20-08-2015 at 04.00PM police recorded confession statement of accused at his house and seized 13 different company Beer bottles they are 3 Royal challengers, 7 Haywards, 3 KF under cover of panchanama and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 260

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 514 Of 2017 . Name: M. Srinu S/o: Gangaiah R/o:Garekuntapalem Occu: AGriculture Age:23 years

Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to PW5. I know accused.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police not examined me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

261

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P3 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 122 Of 2018 . Name:Soma Saritha W/o: Srinivas R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Housewife Age: 37 years

Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

LW2/A. Ashok is my father. Lw3/A. Padma is my mother. Lw4 to

Lw6 are Panchayath elders. Accused is my husband.

262

On 30-11-2003 my marriage was performed with the accused at

Tudi Function Hall, Mirylaguda in the presence of both family members as per customs and traditions prevail in our community.

At the time of marriage my parents gave 25 tulas gold,

Rs.45,000/- cash towards purchase of bike to accused, Rs.50,000/- cash towards house hold articles towards dowry. After marriage I joined with the accused initially at Suryapet thereafter we put up our family at Miryalaguda. Since 2010 to 2017 we lead our matrimonial life at Miryalaguda.

In the year 2010 my father /Lw2 handed over his running

Nagarjuna Kirana shop to accused. The said shop run nicely for a short period thereafter the owner of the shop, requested to vacate the shop. Since their onwards accused started torturing me. Accused tortured me stating that, my father made owner to vacate the said shop. Since then accused tortured me by way of words, stating that, his life was ruined because of my father.

Accused also made a propaganda stating that, I am refuse to co- habit with him.

In the year 2004 and 2006 we blessed with one baby son and girl. Even after delivery of the birth, accused denied paternity of the child. In the year 2007, 2010 and 2017 my husband /

Accused held a panchayath before elders, in the said panchayath elders advised the accused to change his attitude/ way of life but accused fail to hear the words of elders.

On 06-11-2017 without any reason, accused beat me and necked me out of matrimonial home. On the same day, I taken shelter in my parent’s house on the next day I held a Panchayath

before elders namely Lw6 at Miryalaguda in my matrimonial

house. Lw6 advised to live happy life without any obstacles.

Since 18-11-2017 I am living with my parents. Accused did not allowed me to enter into matrimonial house. Accused confined my gold with him. At present accused is with no work. At present, childrens are with me. On 21-11-2017 I gave a report to the police 263 in Miryalaguda II Town Police station. Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Deferred at Request.

264

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 10 examined as P.W. 7

C.C. No. 403 Of 2019 . Name: D. Srinivas Reddy S/o: RamaNarsi Reddy R/o:Miryalagudda Occu: CI of police Age: 39 years

Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Since 15-09-2018 I am working as Inspector of Police, Miryalaguda

II Town Police station.

On 15-05-2019, I received CD file from PW5 and verified the investigation done by him, found it on proper lines. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet along with property before this court.

Cross Examination by learned counsel J. Yellaiah for

accused.

After 2 months of registration of FIR, I recovered case property. It is not true to suggest that, I done table investigation without doing proper investigation. It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this case.

RE-Examination :NIL 265

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 9

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: R. Sravani W/o:Naga R/o:Veerlapalemvillage Occu: RMP Age:35 years

Date: 28-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Pw1 is my husband. I know Pw2, Pw3, Lw5 and Pw4. I do not know

A1 and A2.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police not examined me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

266

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P18 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 267

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 190 Of 2018 . Name: N. Sharadha W/o: Venkanna R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Bricks Business Age: 38 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Accused is my husband. Lw2/N. Dinesh is my son. I know Lw3/K.

Bharath Kumar.

About 24 years ago, my marriage was solemnized with accused.

Since 24 years we are leading our matrimonial life happily. During our wedlock we blessed with one son and one daughter, but at present our daughter is no more.

I do not remember the date but about 3 years ago, accused threatened me to beat on fear I filed complaint before police.

Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement. Lw2/N. Dinesh is sustained injury to his little finger of hand. While he doing work he sustained the injury.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

268

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused. It is true, I compromised the case with accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 190 Of 2018 . Name:N. Dinesh S/o: Venkanna R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Photographer Age: 20 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

PW1 and accused are my parents. I know Lw3/K. Bharath Kumar.

About 2 years ago, accused came intoxication condition and picked up a minor dispute with Pw1. Meantime, I sustained injury to my hand, while I am doing work. Immediately Pw1 went to

Police station and lodged report against accused. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

269

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P3 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

Witness No.3

CF. No. 1822 Of 2019 In Crime No. 88 of 2017 . Name: Jilla Narendar S/o: Veeraiah R/o: Sundar Nagar Occu: Fruit Business Age: 32 years Date: 26-02- 2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement 270

In the outskirts of Bommakal Village at the agriculture fields of complainant, 4 persons i.e., Ganta Mallaiah, Gaddam Prabhakar

Reddy, Bommakanti Venkanna and Keshaboina Mallesh stolen the water pump motor, pipes and starter from the agriculture field. I witness the incident. Pandiri Janaiah narrated the above said inci- dent to complainant and same was heard by me. As such, I came to know about the incident.

The above said incident occurred on 02-04-2017 at 10.30

AM.

271

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: Nenavath Nagu Naik S/o: Ramoji R/o:Veerlapalemvillage Occu: RMP Age:40 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw2/K. Mallaiah,. Lw4/K. Anji Reddy, Lw5/ T. Guruvamma and Lw6/D. Shanmukha Chary. Lw3/ N. Sravani is my wife. I do not know A1 and A2.

I am by profession RMP practise at Veerlapalem village since 20 years.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

Police not examined me. I did not gave any report to the

Wadapally police. I can identify my signature if shown to me.

On confrontation of my report dated 30-09-2019 witness identified his signature on report. Ex.P1 is my report, but I do not know its contents.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused. It is not true 272 to suggest that, I know the contents which bears my signature on report dated 30-09-2019 and I myself gave report to the police and wilfully deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: Kothapally Mallaiah S/o: Narsaiah R/o:Veerlapalemvillage Occu: Agriculture Age:55 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1. I know Lw4/M. Anji Reddy. I do not know Lw3 / N.

Sravani, Lw4/T. Guruvamma and Lw6/D. Shanmukha Chary. I do not know A1 and A2.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police not examined me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

273

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P3 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: M. Anji Reddy S/o: Koti Reddy R/o:Veerlapalemvillage Occu: Running Medical Shop Age:35 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW1 and 2. I know Lw3 , Lw5 and Lw6. I do not know A1 and A2.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

274

Police not examined me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P4 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W.6 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: D. Shanmukha Chary S/o: Aachary R/o: Adividevulapally. Occu: RMP Age:45 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

275

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know PW1 to 3. I do not know Lw3 and Lw5. I do not know

A1 and A2.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police not examined me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P5 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: Manda Kotaiah S/o: Somaiah R/o:Veeralapalemvillage. Occu: Agriculture Age:55 years

Date: 26-02-2020

276

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw8/N. Hanuma.

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn any rough sketch.

About one year ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P6 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P7 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 01-10-2019 at 09.20AM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at the house of Pw1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 .

277

Name: N. Hanuma S/o: Saida R/o:Veeralapalemvillage. Occu: Agriculture Age:32 years

Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw5.

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn any rough sketch.

About one year ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P8 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P9 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 01-10-2019 at 09.20AM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at the house of Pw1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

278

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 9 examined as P.W. 7

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: D. Ravi S/o: Saida R/o: Veerlapalem. Occu: Agriculture Age:33 years Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW10/G. Hanuma. I do not know A1 and A2.

In my presence no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

About one year ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P10 to Ex.P13 are my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 01-10-2019 at 010.00 AM police recorded confession statement of A1 and A2 at Wadapally Rasi cement factory and seized a shift car TS 07 UE 2331, one ID card pertaining to AP 9 news and Rs.3500/- cash under cover of panchanama and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

279

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 10 examined as P.W. 8

C.C. No. 938 Of 2019 . Name: G. Hanuma S/o: Sakriya R/o: Veerlapalem. Occu: Agriculture Age:33 years Date: 26-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW7. I do not know A1 and A2.

In my presence no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

About one year ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P14 to Ex.P17 are my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

280

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 01-10-2019 at 010.00 AM police recorded confession statement of A1 and A2 at Wadapally Rasi cement factory and seized a shift car TS 07 UE 2331, one ID card pertaining to AP 9 news and Rs.3500/- cash under cover of panchanama and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3

CF. No. 1748 Of 2019 . Name: K. Venu S/o:Mallaiah R/o:Peddadevulapally Occu: Agriculture Age: 28 years

Date: 25-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

281

Sworn Statement

On 14-06-2019 Madgulapally police brought the father of Kondal i.e., G. Krishnaiah to the Police station. On knowing the same thing after one hour we went to Madgulapally Police station. But , police refused our entry into the Police station and we came to know that, police beating one Krishnaiah. We waited till evening at the Police station and thereafter returned to our homes.

On 15-06-2019 police also brought the wife of Krishnaiah i.e.,

Padma to the Madgulapally Police station, from there, SI of police produced them before CI of police at Miryalaguda Rural Police station. Till evening they detained both of them. SI of police,

Madgulapally sent one Naveen and Nagaraju along with one

Saidulu and Akbar constables to Vijayawada. Police also obtained our assurance to produce one Kondal. On the same day at 12.00AM , brought one kondal to the Police station , Madgulapally.

On 16-06-2019 Kondal was brought by SI of police, Madgulapally to Miryalaguda Rural Police station.

We are roaming to Madgulapally Police station and

Miryalaguda Police station for 3 days. On 20-06-2019 police produced one Kondal before the court for judicial remand by SI of police, Madgulapally.

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2

CF. No. 1748 Of 2019 .

282

Name: K. Guruvaiah S/o: Shivaiah R/o:Peddadevulapally Occu: Agriculture Age: 46 years

Date: 25-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement

Krishnaiah is my brother in law.

I am an illiterate. On 14th Madgulapally Police caught one

Krishnaiah and taken to the Madgulapally Police station. On the next day i.e. 15th in the morning hours, police caught Padma who is wife of One Krishnaiah and insisted her son to reveal about his presence. On knowing the said fact myself, Lw4/ Venu and LW5/

G. Venkateshwarlu went to the Madgulapally Police station but police refused our entry in the Police station. Police beat one

Krishnaiah in the Police station.

Later I came to know that SI of police brought Padma and

Krishnaiah to Miryalaguda Rural Police station and produced

before CI of police, Miryalaguda Rural. On knowing the same

myself and other relatives went to the Miryalaguda Rural Police station and SI of police insisted and harassed us to reveal the presence of one Kondal. On the harassment, I assured that, I will produce Kondal before police. On insist of police myself , one

Muthaiah, Venu, Venkanna attested our signatures on written paper.

On the same day, in the night hours myself, Muthaiah, Venu and Venkanna produced Kondal before Sub inspector of police,

Madgulapally Police station. I do not remember the dates. Police detained one Kondal for 3 or 4 days in the Police station. After 3 or 283 4 days police produced Kondal before II Additional Junior Civil

Judge and remanded to Judicial custody.

284

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 665 Of 2015 . Name: Md. Aleem S/o: Azeem R/o:Kandimalla Occu: Private Employee Age:30 years

Date: 24-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination

I know Pw1 and Pw2. I know Lw4/S.Sudarshan Reddy. I do not know Pw3, Lw3/ Pavan Kumar, Lw7/B. Jhansi and Lw8/ C. Naresh. I do not know Lw9 to Lw12. I know accused.

I know the accused through Pw1.

In the month of March, 2014 accused assured me to provide job in

Treasury office, Miryalaguda and demanded Rs. 25,000/- from each victim. On believing the words of accused in the same month I given Rs. 25,000/- to the accused in respect of providing

Job to me. Thereafter, accused given appointment letters to

PW1,Pw2 and LW3/ Pavan Kumar. Later, I requested accused for appointment letter. But he dogged the matter on pre text date.

Later I came to know that, when Pw1, Pw2 and Lw3 when went to the office along with appointment letters, concerned authority stated that, they are not responsible for any appointment letters and declared that, they are fake ones.

On coming to know the said fact, I requested the accused for payment of money but accused got reversed on me and threaten 285 us that, he will file SC/ST atrocity case against us. Till now I did not received Rs.25,000/- from the accused. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

I studied up to Mechanical Engineering Diploma. The said

Diploma is equal ant to Intermediate. Pw1 is my villager as such I know him. In the month of March, 2014 there is no notification released by the government for purpose of employment in

Treasury office, Miryalaguda. I did not personally went to Police

Station to lodge report against the said incident. It is not true to suggest that, as I did not gave any money to the accused as such

I did not went to Police Station to file a report against him.

Police examined me at my village after 10 days of lodging complaint. I do not know whether police examined any other person along with me.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not stated before police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, I given an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the accused in the month of March, 2014. It is not true to suggest that, I did not stated before police in my 161 Cr.P.C statement that, I did not reveal about the employment assured by the accused in Treasury office.

It is not true to suggest that, I do not know the accused and I never given any amount to the accused. It is not true to suggest that, accused never threaten us that, he file a SC/ST atrocity case against us. It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this present case and I am deposing false hood.

RE-Examination: NIL 286

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 10 examined as P.W. 7

C.C. No. 787 Of 2014 . Name: P. Suresh S/o: Anjaiah R/o:Thopucharla Occu: Auto Driver Age: 28 years Date: 18-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

287

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw9/P. Babayya. I know A1 and A2.

In my presence no one confessed about their guilt and nothing was seized.

About 4 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on confession cum seizure panchanama witness identified his signature.

Ex.P2 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 20-08-2013 at 09.00AM police recorded confession panchanama of accused and seized one stick at the house of A2 under cover of panchanama and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 288

CC.No.622 of 2017 Dated 17.02.2020.

PW6 present and Re-sworn for cross examination:

Cross Examination By learned counsel for accused:

Pw1 came to police stain along with written report. PW1 came along with PW3 and PW4. It is true that PW1, PW3 and PW4 are friends the distance between scene of offence to police station is 15 km. I did not obtained any document with regard to ownership of citrus garden which belongs to one M. Sathi Reddy. It is not true to suggest that scene of offence is gathered with public. I don’t remember whether accused gave complaint accused PW1 prayer to filing of this case. It is not true to suggest that without visiting the scene of offence, by doing table investigation I file this charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that scene of offence is a busy route. It is not true to suggest that at the instance of PW1 I filed false charge sheet.

Re-Examination: NIL 289

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3

Crl M P. No. 09 Of 2019 . Name: Ch. Venkateshwar Rao S/o: Ramaiah R/o:Poosalapadu Occu: Agriculture Age: 65 years Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement:

Lw1 is my relative.

On invitation of Lw1 I went to the house site of LW1 while he per- forming Land Pooja at 10.30 AM. At that time, A1 and A2 along with others came to the house site and damaged the tent and threaten the priest and abused LW1 and their family members in most filthy language. A1 and A2 removed the boundary poles.

When I interfered with acts of the accused they threaten and abused me in most filthy language. The whole incident happens in my presence. Thereafter Lw1 went to Police station to lodge the report. Later police did not examine me.

290

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2

Crl M P. No. 09 Of 2019 . Name:T. Sathyanarayana S/o: Raghavulu R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Rtrd Employee Age: 74 years Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement:

Lw1 is my brother in law. He has land situated at Ramchandra gu- dem while we performing land Pooja in his land on 03-09-2018.

Lw1 invited me to participate in the Pooja. As such, I went to his land and participated in Pooja, at that time A1 and A2 along with 5 members came to the site and made Galata removed the tent and thrown the chairs. His followers disturbed the boundary poles in the site. On such incident I requested A1 and A2 to sought out the matter amicably but A1 and A2 abused me in most filthy lan- guage. A1 and A2 also abused LW1 and their family members at his site. Even I requested A1 and A2 to sought the matter but they ad mentally refused and spoken utter words with me. I witnessed the whole incident.

On such incident Lw1 went to Police station and lodged report.

291

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1

Crl M P. No. 09 Of 2019 . Name: B. Anjaiah S/o: Ashalu R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Rtrd Employee Age: 67 years Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement:

On 03-09-2018 at 10.30 AM, A1 and A2 came to my land. At that time, I am performing Pooja for construction in said land.

Meantime A1 and A2 damaged the tent and disturbed the boundary poles. A1 and A2 threatening to kill me and my wife. A1 and A2 also abused us in most filthy language. A1 and A2 threaten the priest who performing Pooja. A1 and A2 brought 5 to 6 Rowdies to the land and made Galata. On such incident I went to Police station and lodged a report. But police refuse to register the report. As such, I approached the court and filed Private complaint.

The private complaint was referred to Police station and registered as FIR. Later, I went to Police station, but CI of police instructed me not to visit the Police station. Later, police issued a receipt and instructed we will refer the matter to the court. On going through the contents of the receipt it reveal as false report.

AS such I filed this protect petition to try the accused for the offence committed by them.

292

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 877 Of 2018 . Name: K. Chennayya S/o: Bal Narsaiah R/o:Kannekal Occu: Agriculture Age: 40 years Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875. Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw6/Md. Mazid.

On 17-01-2018 at 06.30AM, In my presence police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at the house of

Pw1 with regard to commission of theft in his house.

Madgulapally SI summoned me to act as mediator. I noticed the articles in the house of PW1 were in Pell - Mell condition.

Scene of offence bonded with, south side one Garekuntapalem road is located. On east side one Kondeti Gopal house is situated. On north side one A.Yellaiah house is situated. On west side Thipparthi road is situated.

At the time of conducting panchanama LW6/Md. Mazid is present with me. After completion of panchanama and rough sketch myself 293 and Lw6 attested our signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch.

Ex.P2 is scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P3 is rough sketch.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

I studied up to 10th standard. I am an agriculturist. When I was present near the house of PW1, Police summoned me to act as mediator. It is not true to suggest that, I act as elder in conducting panchayath in village and frequently visits Police station.

At the time of conducting panchanama myself and Lw6 were present. It is not true to suggest that, police never conducted scene of offence panchanama and not prepared rough sketch at the house of Pw1 only to help the police I am deposing false hood.

Re-Examination: NIL 294

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 877 Of 2018 . Name: A. Kalamma W/o: Yellaiah R/o:Kannekal Occu: Coolie Age: 60 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Pw1 is my son. Lw2/A. Padma is my daughter in law. Lw3/ A.

Yellaiah is my husband. I do not know A1 to A3. My house is situated opposite to the house of Pw1.

About 2 years ago, about 05.00 or 05.30 AM I noticed the house gates of PW1 is opened, on seeing the same I entered into the gates to the way of PW1 house, their I observed the doors were broke opened. Immediately I made a phone call to Pw1 and informed the same to him. On receipt of said information Pw1 along with his family reached his house. Later, I came to know that, Rs. 30,000/- cash and gold and silver ornaments were committed theft in the house of PW1 by some unknown offenders.

Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

The distance between my house and PW1 house is 5 sq yards. I do not know the time when Pw1 visited his house. I did not entered into the house of Pw1 I stayed outside of the house.

295

Along with me all neighbours who present their witness the incident.

It is not true to suggest that, Pw1 does not have any articles in his house.

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 877 Of 2018 . Name: A. Nagaiah S/o: Yellaiah 296

R/o: Kannekal Occu: Kirana Business & Agriculture Age: 33 years Date: 14-02- 2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

LW2/A. Padma is my wife. LW3/ Yellaiah is my father.

LW4/Kalamma is my mother. I do not know A1 to A3.

I am a resident of Kannekal village.

On 15-01-2018, I along with Lw2 and my children went to my in laws house situated at Lachigudem village, Kanagal Mandal. on occasion of Sankranthi festival.

On 17-01-2018 when I was present in my in laws house I received a phone call my mother / Lw4 informing that, my house doors were broke opened. On receipt of said information I along with

Lw2 reached my house and found that, my house doors were broke opened and entered into the house noticed all the articles were pell-mell condition and found Almarah locks were broke opened and committed theft of Rs.30,000/- cash , one gold ring weighing about 5 gms, 2 pairs of ear studs weighing about 10 gms, 2 ear rings of my child weighing about 2.5 gms and 15 tulas of silver chain by some unknown offenders. The total worth of property is Rs. 50,000/-. On the same day I lodged a report in the

Police station. Ex.P1 is my report. Police examined me and recorded my statement. Till now the property was not traced by the police.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported : NIL

Re-Examination: NIL 297 298

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 514 Of 2017 . Name: U. Anasuya W/o: Rama Chandru R/o:Erkatipalem Occu: Taddy tapper Age: 60 years Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I do not know Pw1 to 4 and LW5/M. Srinu. I know accused.

I don't know anything about the facts of this case.

I did not witness any incident.

Police did not examined me.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated before police as in

Ex.P2 and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL 299

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 7

C.C. No. 1273 Of 2015 . Name:M. Govinda Reddy S/o: Koti Reddy R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Business Age: 48 years

Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw1 to 6. I know Lw5/M. Vimala and LW8/ B. Niranjan

Reddy. I know A1 to A3.

Pw1 and A3 are husband and wife. In 2014, they got dispute and living separately. The daughter of PW1 and A1 living under the custody of PW1. I am the neigbourer of the PW1. At the time of incident I was present near the house of Pw1.

In the year 2015, A1 to A3, one Narsi Reddy, One Nagi Reddy and Jagan Reddy came to the house of Pw1 situated at Shanthi

Nagar, Miryalaguda Town. At the time, PW1 to Pw4 are present in their house. A1 to A3 came to their house to take back the daugh- ter of Pw1, but daughter of PW1 refuse to go with A1 to A3. A1 to

A3 and other 4 members picked up quarrel with Pw1, Pw2 and

PW4 and thrown stones on them. On such incident Pw1 filed 300

Ex.P1 in Miryalaguda II town Police station. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: De- ferred at Request on cost of Rs.100/- 301

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W.2 examined as P.W. 1

STC. No. 2108 Of 2017 . Name:B. Saidi Reddy S/o: Anji Reddy R/o:Thopucherla Occu: Agriculture Age: 34 years

Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Lw1/B. Chaithanya is my wife. Lw3/ B. Pedda Anji reddy is my father. I know LW4/ P. Sathi Reddy. I know A1 to A3.

In the year 2015 at about 11.00AM, I was present near God

Vinayaka Idol placed at Thopucherla. Along with me, many persons were present. while some persons distributing Prasadham to the villagers. A1 and A2 objected to distribute Prasadham to the persons who paid less contribution. In turn, I stated to distribute Prasadham equally to all persons irrespective of paying less or more.

In meantime, A1 slapped LW3 on his cheeks. On seeing the same, myself and Lw1 tried to rescue Lw3. At that time, A1 to A3 bet me and LW3 with hands. On the next day LW1 lodged a report

before police. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

302

Cross Examination by learned Counsel for accused:

Deferred at Request on cost of Rs.150/-

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W.3 examined as P.W. 2

CC. No. 791 Of 2014

. Name: Md. Matheen S/o: Abood Bin Jalal R/o:Seetharampuram Occu: Transport Business Age: 45 years

Date: 14-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW4/ Yousuf.

About 5 or 6 years ago, in my presence police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at Bangarigadda near my brother in law namely Md. Umar/PW1 house with regard to theft committed in the house of PW1.

Pw1 requested me to act as mediator. At the time of conducting panchanama Lw4 is present with me. After completion of 303 panchanama myself and Lw4 attested our signatures on panchanama and rough sketch.

Ex.P2 is my signature on panchanama.

Ex.P3 is rough sketch.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel for accused A1 and

A2:

It is not true to suggest that, as PW1 is my brother in law to help him I am deposing false hood. It is not true to suggest that police never conducted scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch.

RE-Examination:NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 622 Of 2017 . Name: P. Anjaiah S/o: Lingaiah R/o:Nalgonda Occu: Inspector of Police Age:57 years

Date: 13-02-2020

304

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination :

Previously I worked as SI of police, Thripuraram Police station from 15-11-2011 to 17-11-2013.

Presently I am working as Inspector of Police, DTRB, Nalgonda.

On 17-05-2013 at 0900 hours, I received Ex.P1 from PW1, basing on the said report, I registered a case in crime no. 50/2013, U/S 506,504,427 IPC and issued printed FIR, FIR is marked as Ex.P6 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation I examined PW1, Pw3 and

PW4 at Police station. Thereafter, I visited scene of offence situated at Citrus garden of one Madirala Satti Reddy outskirts of

Abangapuram village and secured the presence of PW2 and Pw5 in their presence, I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P7 and rough sketch is marked as Ex. P8.

On 18-05-2013 I affected the arrest of accused and produced

before court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation

I filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under sec 506,504,427 IPC.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Deferred at Request 305

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 625 Of 2017 . Name:N. Krishnaiah S/o: Narsaiah R/o:Pusalapahad Occu: Agriculture Age: 41 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw6/ B. Giri 306

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn rough sketch.

About 5 or 6 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P3 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P4 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 17-04-2014 at 03.00PM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at pusalapadu village outskirts in Sy.No. 77 in the agriculture fields of LW2 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 625 Of 2017 . Name: B. Giri S/o: Lingaiah R/o:Pusalapahad Occu: Agriculture Age: 38 years Date: 04-02-2020 307

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Pw2.

In my presence police did not conducted any scene of offence panchanama and not drawn rough sketch.

About 5 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch witness identified his signatures.

Ex.P5 is my signature on scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P6 is my signature on rough sketch.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 17-04-2014 at 03.00PM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at pusalapadu village outskirts in Sy.No. 77 in the agriculture fields of LW2 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 625 Of 2017 .

308

Name: M.Karunakar Reddy S/o: Prathap Reddy R/o:Pusalapahad Occu: Agriculture Age: 35 years Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW8/M. Venkanna. I know A1 to A5.

In my presence no one confessed and nothing was seized by the police.

About 5 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on confession cum seizure panchanama, witness identified his signature.

Ex.P7 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 23-04-2014 at 10.45AM accused confessed about his guilt and police seized one stick from the possession of accused at house of A1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 309

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 625 Of 2017 . Name: M. Venkanna S/o: Mangaiah R/o:Pusalapahad Occu: Agriculture Age: 40 years Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know PW4. I know A1 to A5.

In my presence no one confessed and nothing was seized by the police.

About 5 years ago, when I went to Police station, on request of police I made my signatures on some white papers.

On confrontation the signatures on confession cum seizure panchanama, witness identified his signature.

Ex.P8 is my signature on confession cum seizure panchanama.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 23-04-2014 at 10.45AM accused confessed about his guilt and police seized one stick from the possession of accused at house of A1 and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and I am deposing false hood to help the accused.

310

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3 C.C. No. 641 Of 2017 . Name: S. Janaiah S/o: Lingaiah R/o:Pusalapahad Occu: Agriculture Age: 35 years Date: 13-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know LW5/B. Yadagiri.

About 4 years ago, In my presence police conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch at agriculture field of PW1 and also seized damaged pipes.

Ex.P2 is scene of offence panchanama.

Ex.P3 is rough sketch. MO1 is the plastic pipe. MO2 is the Drip

Pipe ( Black in colour). MO3 is the Patta( Black cover)

At the time of conducting panchanama along with me Lw5 is present and we attested our signatures on panchanama and rough sketch.

Cross Examination by learned counsel K. Suresh for

accused.

311

PW1 summoned me to act as mediator. It is true, police did not give any written notice to me to act as mediator. It is not true to suggest that, I am the helper of the PW1.

It is not true to suggest that, in the recent election I distributed

Rs.50,000/- to the voters on the direction of Pw1. Ex.P2 is prepared by police. SI of police drafted the panchanama and rough sketch/Ex.P3. S scene of offence panchanama conducted at 11.00AM and concluded at 2.00PM. I do not know which day fall on date of panchanama. I cannot say the year also. I do not know whether

SI of police attested his signature or not.

It is not true to suggest that, I do not know the contents of panchanama and rough sketch. I do not know the extent land possessed by PW1.

I do not know whether police read over the contents of panchanama or not, because I was not present till that time. It is not true to suggest that, by taking amount from Pw1 and deposing false hood. It is not true to suggest that MO1 to 3 are no way concerned with the agriculture field of Pw1.

RE- Examination: NIL 312 313

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 3

STC. No. 2019 Of 2017 . Name: K. Ravali D/o: Narasimha Rao R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Student Age:25 years

Date: 13-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Pw1 and Pw2 are my parents. I know Lw4/ R. Anitha, LW5/R. Laxmi and Lw6/ M.A. Latheef. I know R1 to R4.

In the year 2015 in between 04.00 to 4.30 PM, R1 to R4 came to our house and abused me and Pw1 in most filthy language. Mean- time, LW4 to Lw6 present and admonished R1 to R4, as such they left our house. Thereafter, myself and PW1 went to Police station and Pw1 lodged Ex.P1 / Report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel G. Srinivas Advo-

cate for R1 to R4

I prosecuted my B.Tech in TKR college situated at Hyderabad by living in Hostel. Police examined me at my home on next day of filing of Ex.P1. Police examined in afternoon hours. It is true, the present living house is belongs to my senior paternal uncle namely one Venkateshwarlu.

It is not true to suggest that, after passing away my senior paternal uncle , we forcibly necked out our senior paternal aunt from her house. It is not true to suggest that, on the date of al- 314 leged occurrence I was present in my college, witness volunteers that, my B.Tech is completed in the year 2015 May, but the inci- dent occurred in the month of October 2015.

It is not true to suggest that, no offence was occurred and I am deposing false hood against the R1 to R4 . It is not true to suggest that, to grab the properties of R1 and I am deposing false hood against the R1 to R4.

RE- Examination :NIL 315

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

STC. No. 2109 Of 2017 . Name:R. Anitha W/o: Lakka Naik R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Tailor Age:39 years

Date: 13-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination

I know Pw1 to Pw3. They are my neighbours. I know Lw5/ R.

Laxmi and Lw6/Latheef. I know R1 to R4.

About 5 years ago, in between 04.00 to 04.30 PM, when i was present in my house, R1 to R4 came to the house of Pw3 and picked up quarrel with our family members and dragged PW2 out- side of the house and R2 and R3 beat Pw2 at that time I wit- nessed the incident. Thereafter, myself and others who present at the scene of offence released Pw2 from the clutches of the R2 and R3 and disbursed all of them. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel G. Srinivas Advo-

cate for R1 to R4

I do not know the time and date when police examined me but police recorded my statement at my house. According to me the house belongs to one Kotha venkateshwarlu and his brother/ PW2.

I do not know when Venkateshwarlu passed away.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not stated before police that,

R2 and R3 bet Pw2 at the in front of the house gate. It is not true 316 to suggest that, to help the Pw1 to 3 and I am deposing false against R1 to R4. It is not true to suggest that, as Pw1 to 3 try to grab the house of R1 to help them and I am deposing false hood.

It is not true to suggest that, no incident happened as alleged by

Pw1 to 3.

RE- Examination :NIL 317

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 5

STC. No. 2109 Of 2017 . Name: R. Laxmi W/o: Raju R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Tailor Age:32 years

Date: 13-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination

I know Pw1 to 4. They are my neighbours. I know Lw6/MA Latheef.

I know R1 to R4.

In the year 2015 at about 04.30Pm, when I was present in my house, R1 to R3 came to the house of PW3 and quarrelled with one uncle I do not know his name. On seeing the incident I re- turned to my house. Police examined me and recorded my state- ment.

Cross Examination by learned counsel G. Srinivas Advo-

cate for R1 to R4

Police examined me at evening hours at my home. Pw3 house is situated adjacent to my house. The house is belongs to R1. Wit- ness again says the house belongs to one Venkateshwarlu and

PW2.

It is not true to suggest that, as I neighbour to Pw1 to 3 to help them I am deposing false hood. It is not true to suggest that, there is no incident happened as alleged by Pw1 to 3. It is not true to suggest that, to grab the house by Pw1 to 3 to favour them I am deposing false hood.

318

RE- Examination :NIL 319

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 6

STC. No. 2109 Of 2017 . Name: M.A. Latheef S/o: Salar Mohammad R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Agriculture Age:60 years

Date: 13-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination

I know Pw1 to 5. They are my neighbours. I know R1 to R4.

In the year 2015, when I was passing through the house of Pw3.

There was a dispute taken between R1 to R4 and Pw2. R1 to R4 stated to PW2 to vacant the house doing galata. On seeing the in- cident, I admonished R1 to R4 to settled the matter before elders.

Thereafter I left the scene of offence. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel G. Srinivas Advo-

cate for R1 to R4

I have Ac.1.20 gts agriculture land. Police examined and recorded my statement at my house in between 05.30 to 6.00 PM. I do not know the day on which police examined. I am the neighbour of

Pw1 to 3. I do not know to whom the house belongs.

It is not true to suggest that to help the Pw1 to 3 I am de- posing false hood against R1 to R4. It is not true to suggest that there is no incident happened as alleged by PW1 to 3. It is not true to suggest that, police never examined me.

320

It is not true to suggest that, to grab the house by Pw1 to 3 to favour them I am deposing false hood.

RE- Examination :NIL 321

CC. NO. 641 /2017

PW2(S. Saidulu) Date : 13-02-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel K. Suresh for accused:

Commenced at 1.06 PM

I am tenant to the agriculture field of PW1. It is true, I do not know about the immovable properties of Pw1 and also with regard to other cases. I know the boundaries of the agriculture land of

PW1. In the same Survey numbers one Gyara Sailu, Gyara Srini- vas/accused ,Gyara Muthaiah and Gyara Yellamma fields are situ- ated.

It is true, there are land disputes between Pw1 and Gyara

Sailu, accused and Gyara Yellamma. I do not know whether, A

SC/ST atrocity case filed against myself, Pw1, B. Chandraiah and 6 others in crime No. 145/2017.

It is not true to suggest that, as I am working under Pw1 to help him and I am deposing false hood against the accused. It is not true to suggest that, accused did not entered into the garden and never damaged any property.

It is not true to suggest that, there is a civil case pending be- tween relatives of accused and PW1, in the said case I stand as one of the witness , as such to help the Pw1 I am deposing false against him. It is not true to suggest that, as paternal uncle of ac- cused filed a case against Pw1, myself and others, by keeping same in the mind we colluded with each other and foisted this false case.

RE- Examination:NIL 322 323 324

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 11 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 05-02-2018 at 09.00 A.m., on credible information I along with available staff proceeded to near Govt school at Ilapuram village, Miryalaguda Mandal, I secured Pw1 and PW2 , in their presence I conducted route watch near govt school 3 persons i.e.

A1 to A3 found in suspicious near government school, then I issued search memo, which is marked as Ex.P7 on search I found 2 litters of ID liquor in two polythene covers from each accused, grand total 6liters from possession of all accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as

Ex.P8. MO1 to MO3 are the sample bottles. In their presence I drawn 6 samples from the seized contraband. On my interrogation, accused confessed about their guilt.

325

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

10/2018 , U/s 7(A) R/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1985 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P5. later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to complain the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 15-02-2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand. Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination, which is marked as

Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscations.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I secured the presence PW1 and 2 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through

Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 326

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 14 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

327

On 15-03-2018 at 05.00 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Lw1 proceeded to

Kiraana shop of accused situated at Seetharampur village,

Miryalaguda town. Then I issued search memo, which is marked as Ex.P3 on my search I found 80 kgs of black jiggery in 4 cartoons and 10 kgs of Alum in plastic bag from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama.

Panchanama is marked as Ex.P4. MO1 and MO2 are the sample bottles. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

15/2018 , U/s 34(e) of AP Excise Act -1968 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P5. Later, I issued 41-

A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 02-04-2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand. Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through

Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 328

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 15 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

329

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 14-05-2018 at 09.30 a.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at Ilapuram village, Miryalaguda

Mandal. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of

Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P5. On my search I found 2 litters of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle.

On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

23/2018 , U/s 7(A) row 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 17-05- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused 330

I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through

Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

331

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 15 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 14-05-2018 at 09.30 a.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at Ilapuram village, Miryalaguda

Mandal. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of

Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P5. On my search I found 2 litters of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle.

On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

23/2018 , U/s 7(A) row 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to 332 comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 17-05- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through

Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 333

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 23 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 13-01-2018 at 09.30 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at Ilapuram village, Miryalaguda

Mandal. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of

Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P3. On my search I found 3 334 litters of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P4. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle.

On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

03/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P5. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 18-01- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P6. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through

Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 335

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 12 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali 336

R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 05-03-2018 at 09.30 a.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at Lavudi thanda , Miryalaguda Mandal.

I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P1. On my search I found 2 litters of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P2. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle. On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

12/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P3. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 20-03- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P4. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

337

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 1

C.C. No. 21 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018 338

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 22-01-2018 at 05.00 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at Prakash Nagar , Miryalaguda Town. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P1. On my search I found 1 litter of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P2. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle. On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

04/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P3. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 20-02- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P4. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

339

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 22 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali 340

R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 15-02-2018 at 09.30 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at Ilapuram village , Miryalaguda

Mandal. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of

Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P5. On my search I found 1 litter of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle.

On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

11/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 20-02- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

341

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 342

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 11 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 343

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 22 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 344

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 21 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 345

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 23 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw2 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 346

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 24 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 347

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 25 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 348

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 12 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from Pw3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 349

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 13 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from LW3 / K.Sanjeev Reddy,

Proh& ESI and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge 350 sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 14 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

351

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from PW2 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 15 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

352

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 16-06-2018 I received CD file from PW3 and took up further investigation. I verified the record and found it on proper lines.

After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet against accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4 353

C.C. No. 16 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 05-07-2018 at 05.00 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to

Wadapally bridge and conducted route watch. On suspicious of two persons i.e., A1 and A2 I issued search memo to the accused no.1 and 2 in the presence of Pw1 and 2, which is marked as

Ex.P5. On my search I found 10 kgs of black jiggery and 3 kgs of

Alum from the possession of accused No.1 and 10 kgs of black jiggery and 2 kgs of Alum from the possession of accused No.2 and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample. On my interrogation, accused No.1 and 2 confessed about their guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

38/2018 , U/s 34(e) of AP excise Act and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 17-07-2018 and produced

before Hon'ble court for judicial remand. Thereafter, I send

samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , 354 which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property

before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda

for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 and A2 together passing through Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 355

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 4 examined as P.W. 4

C.C. No. 17 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 18-07-2018 at 05.45 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused at Kethavath thanda and conducted search. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P5. On my search I found 10 litters of ID liquor on plastic Can and 50 litters of FJ wash kept in a plastic drum from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the 356 presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 and MO2 are the samples. On my interrogation, accused confessed about their guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

42/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 25-07- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I did not enquired the neighbours of accused. I did not recorded surrounding house numbers of the scene. It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 357

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 18 Of 2020 . Name:A. Sridhar S/o: Seetharama Chary R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Excise SI Age: 40 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP 358

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police,

Miryalaguda.

On 19-07-2018 at 10.00 a.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and LW2 proceeded to house of accused at Vasya thanda and conducted search. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P3. On my search I found 2 litters of ID liquor in plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P4. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample. On my interrogation, accused confessed about their guilt.

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

43/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P5. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 25-07- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P6. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I did not enquired the neighbours of accused. I did not recorded surrounding house numbers of the scene. It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

359

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 360

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

After taking the CD file I did not examine any one. It is not true to suggest that, without going through record I filed a bare charge sheet. It is not true to suggest that, only for the statistical purpose

I field this false charge sheet against the accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 361

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 3 examined as P.W. 3

C.C. No. 24 Of 2020 . Name:Sk. Akram Ali S/o: Mahaboob Ali R/o:Hyderabad Occu: Excise SI Age: 41 years

Date: 07-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as Excise SI of police, Miryalaguda Police station from 17-02-2014 to 16-06-2018

Presently I am working as Excise sub Inspector of Police, State task force, Hyderabad.

On 06-01-2018 at 09.30 p.m., on credible information I along with available staff and mediators i.e., Pw1 and Pw2 proceeded to house of accused situated at HATYA THANDA , Miryalaguda

Mandal. I issued search memo to the accused in the presence of

Pw1 and 2, which is marked as Ex.P5. On my search I found 2 litters of ID liquor in a plastic Can from the possession of accused and same was seized under cover of panchanama. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P6. In the presence of mediators, I drawn 2 samples from the seized contraband. MO1 is the sample bottle.

On my interrogation, accused confessed about his guilt.

362

On basing of the panchanama I registered a case in COR NO.

01/2018 , U/s 7(A) r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act -1995 and issued crime occurrence report , which is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I issued 41-A(1) Cr.P.C notice to the accused, but accused fail to comply, the said notice as such, I arrested the accused on 17-01- 2018 and produced before Hon'ble court for judicial remand.

Thereafter, I send samples for chemical examination. Chemical examination report , which is marked as Ex.P8. Later, I deposited remaining property before deputy commissioner and prohibition of Excise, Nalgonda for confiscation.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I did not recorded the house number of accused. I secured the presence PW1 and LW1 at the scene. It taken 30 mins to record panchanama. A1 to A3 together passing through Government college. I registered FIR in the Excise station basing on the panchanama. I drawn samples at the scene of offence. I proceeded to the scene of offence along with empty sample bottles.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not conducted any search and nothing was seized from any person. Only for the statistical purpose I registered a false complaint against accused.

Re-Examinaiton :NIL 363

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 1084 Of 2017 . Name: G. Ramakrishna Reddy S/o:Narsi Reddy R/o:Abangapuram Occu: Agriculture Age: 35 years Date: 06-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP 364

Pw1 is my wife. LW3/G. Anasuyamma is my mother. I know LW4 to

LW8. A1 and A2 are my elder brothers. A3 is son of A1.

On 17-07-2017 at 06.30AM, I left my house for collecting cable TV monthly subscription bills in the village of Abangapuram. I got phone call from PW1 stating that, while she was discussing the land matter with Lw3, A1 to A3 trespassed into the house and A2 caught the hand of Pw1 and pull down and bet with his hands on her back. On receipt of information I reached the house within 10 minutes. There I observed some people were gathered. Out of the gather Lw4 to LW8 were present, whom I know. Immediately I went to Police station along with Pw1 on 09-07-2017 and PW1 lodged report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Deferred at Request on cost of Rs.50/-

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W. 2

C.C. No. 1084 Of 2017 . Name: G. Ramakrishna Reddy S/o:Narsi Reddy R/o:Abangapuram Occu: Agriculture Age: 35 years Date: 06-02-2020 365

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Pw1 is my wife. LW3/G. Anasuyamma is my mother. I know LW4 to

LW8. A1 and A2 are my elder brothers. A3 is son of A1.

On 17-07-2017 at 06.30AM, I left my house for collecting cable TV monthly subscription bills in the village of Abangapuram. I got phone call from PW1 stating that, while she was discussing the land matter with Lw3, A1 to A3 trespassed into the house and A2 caught the hand of Pw1 and pull down and bet with his hands on her back. On receipt of information I reached the house within 10 minutes. There I observed some people were gathered. Out of the gather Lw4 to LW8 were present, whom I know. Immediately I went to Police station along with Pw1 on 09-07-2017 and PW1 lodged report. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Deferred at Request on cost of Rs.50/-

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 4 366

C.C. No. 729 Of 2016 . Name: A.Shishupal Reddy S/o: Ayyapu Reddy R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Rtrd SI of police Age: 62 years

Date: 05-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Miryalaguda II Town Police station from Feb 2016 to Aug 2016.

Presently I am retired from service.

On 15-06-2016 at about 1830 hours, while I discharging SHO du- ties , I received Ex.P1 from PW1, basing on the said report, I regis- tered a case in crime no. 68/2016, U/S 454,380 IPC and issued printed FIR, FIR is marked as Ex.P4 and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation I examined PW1 at Police sta- tion. Thereafter, I Proceeded to scene of offence situated at Shan- thi Nagar and recorded the statements of LW2, I secured presence of PW2 and Pw3 in their presence I conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P5 rough sketch is marked as Ex. P6.

On 16-06-2016 I received credible information with the pres- ence of accused at Bus stand Miryalaguda immediately I pro- ceeded to the bus stand along with staff and apprehended the ac- cused. When, accused is ready to confess about his guilt, in se- cured the presence of Lw5 K. Ananad, Lw6 C. Karunakar in their presence I recorded the confession statement of accused and seized one gold chain weighing about 20.830 gms. After comple- tion of recording panchanama I brought the accused to the Police 367 station along with seized property and arrested the accused. After completion of investigation I filed charge sheet before this court.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused:

I am resident of Miryalaguda Town. It is not true to suggest that,

Shanthi Nagar / Scene of offence is busy locality. Approximately 60,000- 70,000 population would consist in Shanthi Nagar locality.

Pw1 came to Police station along with written report. It taken 40 minutes to record the statement of Pw1. It taken 10 minutes to reach scene of offence from Police station. It taken one hour to record the statements at scene of offence. It is true, PW2 and

PW3 are not the local inhabitants of the scene of offence. It is true, on the northern side house face is situated and road is also situated on northern side. On the west side of the house on CC road is situated. It is true, on the east side one Jayamma house is situated. I did not examine Jayamma.

It is not true to suggest that, on 16-06-2016 at 4.30AM I did not recorded any confession statement of accused. It is true,

Miryalaguda bus stand is busy locality with passengers. In the bus stand ALN parcel service shop is located. It is true, Lw6/ C.

Karunakar is running medical shop. I did not seize the broken lock and accused used the instrument to commit alleged offence in the house of PW1.

It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned with this case, only with acquaintance with Pw1 I registered this false case against the accused. It is not true to suggest that, ac- cused confessed about his guilt and on that confession I seized gold weighing about 2 gms from possession of accused. It is not true to suggest that, accused is innocent on the rival between

Pw1 and between the mediators, this case is foisted against the accused.

Re- Examination: NIL 368

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 729 Of 2016 . Name: Ch. Karunakar S/o: Chandramouli R/o:Miryalaguda Occu: Business Age: 40 years

Date: 05-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

I know Lw5/ K. Anand. I know accused.

On 16-06-2016 at about 04.30AM, SI of police orally summoned me to act as mediator. Along with me Lw5 were also present. On our enquiry accused confessed about his guilt stating that, he committed theft of Gold Chain approximately weigh about 2 tulas 800 milli grams at Shanthi Nagar. After completion of pan- chanama myself and Lw5 signed on the confession panchanama.

One gold chain weighing about 2 tulas 800 grams odd is seized from the possession of the accused. I can identify the chain if shown to me. MO1 is the gold chain which is seized from the pos- session of accused. After marking of gold chain same was re- turned to PW1.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused

I am doing medical shop business. It is true, my brother is also do- ing medical shop business. It is true, PW1 is also doing medical shop by name and style Reddy Medical Shop. I do not know what business is doing by LW5. My medical shop name is Apollo Medi- 369 cal Shop. It is true, I am not authorized dealer of Appolo. It is true,

I opened shop at 10Am and closed at 9PM.

PW4 called me when I was at home. My house is situated near Municipal Office located at Ashok Nagar. It is true,

Miryalaguda Bus stand is busy locality with passengers. It is true, in the bus stand one ALN parcel shop, one hotel, one book stall, one Pan shop is located.

Confession panchanama is prepared by writer on dictation of

PW4. I made only one signature on confession panchanama. It is true, on the front page of panchanama my signature is not there.

It is true, my father is famous person and having good reputation in political party.

It is not true to suggest that, myself and my father has good acquaintance with the police, as such on request of PW4 , I made my signature on confession statement.

It is not true to suggest that, accused did not confessed any- thing before us and nothing was seized from his possession. It is not true to suggest that, accused is no way concerned to the present case. It is not true to suggest that, to help the Pw1 I am deposing false hood.

Re-Examination :NIL 370

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

P.W. 1

DVC. No. 17 Of 2019 . Name: K. Shanthi W/o: Jaya Raj R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Coolie Age:28 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination

Witness present and filed chief evidence affidavit in lieu of Chief examination. Admitted the contents in chief affidavit is true and correct. Hence it is treated as Chief Examination.

Ex.A1 is the Wedding paper.

Ex.A2 is the Marriage Photo.

Cross Examination : Respondent remained Exparte.

371

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE I Addl. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

P.W. 2

DVC. No. 17 Of 2019 . Name: Kedari Sunkamma W/o: Venkateshwarlu R/o: Miryalaguda Town Occu: Coolie Age: 45 years Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination

Witness present and filed chief evidence affidavit in lieu of Chief examination. Admitted the contents in chief affidavit true and cor- rect. Hence it is treated as Chief Examination.

Cross Examination : Respondent remained Exparte.

372

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2

CF. No. 1822 Of 2019 . Name: P. Janaiah S/o: Venkatiah R/o:Bommakal Occu: Agriculture Age: 50 years Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Sworn Statement

A1 to A3 stolen the bore well motor of complainant in his agricul- ture field situated at Bommakal village. When they are commit- ting theft of bore well , I witnessed the incident. On seeing the same, I made a phone call to complainant and narrated about the incident. On receipt of information complainant came to the scene and lodged report before Vemulapally Police.

373

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 7 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 418 Of 2019 . Name:P. Lova Raju S/o: Rama Rao R/o:Machilipatnam Occu: SI of Police Age:35 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Nandigama Police station from 21-06-2019 to 31-07-2019

Presently I am working as SI of Police, Machilipatnam Railway

Police station.

On 09-07-2019, while I was present in my Police station I received a credible information from known sources with regard to moments of property offenders. On receipt of said information I immediately orally summoned MRO, Nandigama to provide two mediators. On my request MRO, Nandigama provided two mediators i.e., Pw4 and LW5/ M. Venkata Ravi. I along with them mediators proceeded to Adiviravulapadu village bus stand along with available staff. There I noticed two persons coming on bike, on seeing us, they tried to escape from scene. Immediately with the help of staff I caught the two persons , on interrogation they reveal their names as Vemuri Krishna / A1 and Bandi Narsimha

Rao/ A2 when they are ready to confess about their guilt, I in the presence of mediators recorded the confession statements of A1 374 and A2 and seized one motor bike bearing no. TS 05 EF 5853 from the possession of A1 and further confessed that, they confessed several offences at Khammam, Miryalaguda and Nandigama.

As per the confession of A1 and A2, we proceeded to the house of A2 situated at Lingalapadu village, Nandigama Mandal.

There A2 showned concealed theft property. In the presence of same mediators we seized the 9 motor bikes of different companies. The 9 seized bikes bearing Numbers are follows.

1. AP 20 AU 7054

2. AP 24 AZ 1309

3. TS 05 EF 6647

4. AP 24 AU 7776

5. TS 05 EW 1717

6. TS 03 EC 4359

7. AP 24 AU 3252

8. AP 24 AU 7307

9. AP 24 AU 6871

After completion of confession cum seizure panchanama, I secured signatures of mediators on panchanama. The relevant portion in confession cum seizure panchanama dated 09-07- 2019 is marked as Ex.P10. Later, I intimated to the Pw5 with regard to seizure and arrest of the A1 and A2 in crime No.

283/2019 , U/s 379 IPC on the file of Nandigama Police station.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Kumar Reddy for

Accused No.2.

I did not served any written summons to two mediators. It is not true to suggest that the scene of offence is busy locality. It is true, near by the scene of offence houses are situated. Nobody come forward to act as mediator at the scene of offence.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not request any local person to stand as mediator at the scene of offence and I taken the stock witnesses to the scene of offence. I did not obtain any 375 proof with regard to owner ship of house belongs to A2 from the revenue authorities. I started recording panchanama at 3.00PM and concluded at 05.00PM. Total 2 panchanama’s were prepared by me. I obtained total 8 signatures on the first confession cum seizure panchanama and 4 signatures on second confession cum seizure panchanama.

It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this cases.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Paramesh.P for

Accused No.1.

The cross examination of A2 is adopted to A1 by the counsel for A1.

RE- Examination :NIL 376

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 417 Of 2019 . Name:P. Lova Raju S/o: Rama Rao R/o:Machilipatnam Occu: SI of Police Age:35 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Nandigama Police station from 21-06-2019 to 31-07-2019

Presently I am working as SI of Police, Machilipatnam Railway

Police station.

On 09-07-2019, while I was present in my Police station I received a credible information from known sources with regard to moments of property offenders. On receipt of said information I immediately orally summoned MRO, Nandigama to provide two mediators. On my request MRO, Nandigama provided two mediators i.e., Pw4 and LW5/ M. Venkata Ravi. I along with them mediators proceeded to Adiviravulapadu village bus stand along with available staff. There I noticed two persons coming on bike, on seeing us, they tried to escape from scene. Immediately with the help of staff I caught the two persons , on interrogation they reveal their names as Vemuri Krishna / A1 and Bandi Narsimha

Rao/ A2 when they are ready to confess about their guilt, I in the presence of mediators recorded the confession statements of A1 377 and A2 and seized one motor bike bearing no. TS 05 EF 5853 from the possession of A1 and further confessed that, they confessed several offences at Khammam, Miryalaguda and Nandigama.

As per the confession of A1 and A2, we proceeded to the house of A2 situated at Lingalapadu village, Nandigama Mandal.

There A2 showed concealed theft property. In the presence of same mediators we seized the 9 motor bikes of different companies. The 9 seized bikes bearing Numbers are follows.

10.AP 20 AU 7054

11.AP 24 AZ 1309

12.TS 05 EF 6647

13.AP 24 AU 7776

14.TS 05 EW 1717

15.TS 03 EC 4359

16.AP 24 AU 3252

17.AP 24 AU 7307

18.AP 24 AU 6871

After completion of confession cum seizure panchanama, I secured signatures of mediators on panchanama. The relevant portion in confession cum seizure panchanama dated 09-07- 2019 is marked as Ex.P10. Later, I intimated to the Pw5 with regard to seizure and arrest of the A1 and A2 in crime No.

283/2019 , U/s 379 IPC on the file of Nandigama Police station.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Kumar Reddy for

Accused No.2.

I did not served any written summons to two mediators. It is not true to suggest that the scene of offence is busy locality. It is true, near by the scene of offence houses are situated. Nobody come forward to act as mediator at the scene of offence.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not request any local person to stand as mediator at the scene of offence and I taken the stock witnesses to the scene of offence. I did not obtain any 378 proof with regard to owner ship of house belongs to A2 from the revenue authorities. I started recording panchanama at 3.00PM and concluded at 05.00PM. Total 2 panchanama’s were prepared by me. I obtained total 8 signatures on the first confession cum seizure panchanama and 4 signatures on second confession cum seizure panchanama.

It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this cases.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Paramesh.P for

Accused No.1.

The cross examination of A2 is adopted to A1 by the counsel for A1.

RE- Examination :NIL 379

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 416 Of 2019 . Name:P. Lova Raju S/o: Rama Rao R/o:Machilipatnam Occu: SI of Police Age:35 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Nandigama Police station from 21-06-2019 to 31-07-2019

Presently I am working as SI of Police, Machilipatnam Railway

Police station.

On 09-07-2019, while I was present in my Police station I received a credible information from known sources with regard to moments of property offenders. On receipt of said information I immediately orally summoned MRO, Nandigama to provide two mediators. On my request MRO, Nandigama provided two mediators i.e., Pw4 and LW5/ M. Venkata Ravi. I along with them mediators proceeded to Adiviravulapadu village bus stand along with available staff. There I noticed two persons coming on bike, on seeing us, they tried to escape from scene. Immediately with the help of staff I caught the two persons , on interrogation they reveal their names as Vemuri Krishna / A1 and Bandi Narsimha

Rao/ A2 when they are ready to confess about their guilt, I in the presence of mediators recorded the confession statements of A1 380 and A2 and seized one motor bike bearing no. TS 05 EF 5853 from the possession of A1 and further confessed that, they confessed several offences at Khammam, Miryalaguda and Nandigama.

As per the confession of A1 and A2, we proceeded to the house of A2 situated at Lingalapadu village, Nandigama Mandal.

There A2 showned concealed theft property. In the presence of same mediators we seized the 9 motor bikes of different companies. The 9 seized bikes bearing Numbers are follows.

19.AP 20 AU 7054

20.AP 24 AZ 1309

21.TS 05 EF 6647

22.AP 24 AU 7776

23.TS 05 EW 1717

24.TS 03 EC 4359

25.AP 24 AU 3252

26.AP 24 AU 7307

27.AP 24 AU 6871

After completion of confession cum seizure panchanama, I secured signatures of mediators on panchanama. The relevant portion in confession cum seizure panchanama dated 09-07- 2019 is marked as Ex.P10. Later, I intimated to the Pw5 with regard to seizure and arrest of the A1 and A2 in crime No.

283/2019 , U/s 379 IPC on the file of Nandigama Police station.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Kumar Reddy for

Accused No.2.

I did not served any written summons to two mediators. It is not true to suggest that the scene of offence is busy locality. It is true, near by the scene of offence houses are situated. Nobody come forward to act as mediator at the scene of offence.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not request any local person to stand as mediator at the scene of offence and I taken the stock witnesses to the scene of offence. I did not obtain any 381 proof with regard to owner ship of house belongs to A2 from the revenue authorities. I started recording panchanama at 3.00PM and concluded at 05.00PM. Total 2 panchanama’s were prepared by me. I obtained total 8 signatures on the first confession cum seizure panchanama and 4 signatures on second confession cum seizure panchanama.

It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this cases.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Paramesh.P for

Accused No.1.

The cross examination of A2 is adopted to A1 by the counsel for A1.

RE- Examination :NIL

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT

MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 8 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 403 Of 2019 . Name:P. Lova Raju S/o: Rama Rao R/o:Machilipatnam Occu: SI of Police Age:35 years

Date: 04-02-2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of

1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP

Previously I worked as SI of police, Nandigama Police station from 21-06-2019 to 31-07-2019

Presently I am working as SI of Police, Machilipatnam Railway

Police station.

382

On 09-07-2019, while I was present in my Police station I received a credible information from known sources with regard to moments of property offenders. On receipt of said information I immediately orally summoned MRO, Nandigama to provide two mediators. On my request MRO, Nandigama provided two mediators i.e., Pw4 and LW5/ M. Venkata Ravi. I along with them mediators proceeded to Adiviravulapadu village bus stand along with available staff. There I noticed two persons coming on bike, on seeing us, they tried to escape from scene. Immediately with the help of staff I caught the two persons , on interrogation they reveal their names as Vemuri Krishna / A1 and Bandi Narsimha

Rao/ A2 when they are ready to confess about their guilt, I in the presence of mediators recorded the confession statements of A1 and A2 and seized one motor bike bearing no. TS 05 EF 5853 from the possession of A1 and further confessed that, they confessed several offences at Khammam, Miryalaguda and Nandigama.

As per the confession of A1 and A2, we proceeded to the house of A2 situated at Lingalapadu village, Nandigama Mandal.

There A2 showned concealed theft property. In the presence of same mediators we seized the 9 motor bikes of different companies. The 9 seized bikes bearing Numbers are follows.

1. AP 20 AU 7054

2. AP 24 AZ 1309

3. TS 05 EF 6647

4. AP 24 AU 7776

5. TS 05 EW 1717

6. TS 03 EC 4359

7. AP 24 AU 3252

8. AP 24 AU 7307

9. AP 24 AU 6871

After completion of confession cum seizure panchanama, I secured signatures of mediators on panchanama. The relevant 383 portion in confession cum seizure panchanama dated 09-07- 2019 is marked as Ex.P7. Later, I intimated to the Pw5 with regard to seizure and arrest of the A1 and A2 in crime No.

283/2019 , U/s 379 IPC on the file of Nandigama Police station.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Kumar Reddy for

Accused No.2.

I did not served any written summons to two mediators. It is not true to suggest that the scene of offence is busy locality. It is true, near by the scene of offence houses are situated. Nobody come forward to act as mediator at the scene of offence.

It is not true to suggest that, I did not request any local person to stand as mediator at the scene of offence and I taken the stock witnesses to the scene of offence. I did not obtain any proof with regard to owner ship of house belongs to A2 from the revenue authorities. I started recording panchanama at 3.00PM and concluded at 05.00PM. Total 2 panchanama’s were prepared by me. I obtained total 8 signatures on the first confession cum seizure panchanama and 4 signatures on second confession cum seizure panchanama.

It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this cases.

Cross Examination by learned Counsel Paramesh.P for

Accused No.1.

The cross examination of A2 is adopted to A1 by the counsel for A1.

RE- Examination :NIL 384

DEPOSTION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 1 .CF No. 179 Of 2019 .

Name:T. Hanumanthu S/o: Ramulu R/o: Kalvalapalem Occu: Agriculture Age:45 years Date: 03­02­ 2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Sworn statement

A1 sell his land to me for an amount of Rs.6,50,000/-. I paid Rs. 6,50,000/- to A1, but A1 refused to sell his land to me. I went to Police station to lodge report but police fail to register my report. Later, A1 is trying to sell the land.

385

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 2 examined as P.W.2 

C.C. No. 886 Of 2015 .

Name: D. Mathri W/o: Soma R/o: Venkatadripalem Occu: Agriculture Age:40 years Date: 31­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

PW1 is my daughter. Lw3 / D. Naresh Kumar is my son. I know Lw4 / D. Jaabar. I know accused.

Since 7 years I know the accused as my daughter / Pw1 and brother of ac- cused studied in Same college, as such I know him.

Venkatesh, who is brother of accused and Pw1 loved each other and one day accused along with his family came to our house situated at Venkatadripalem about 6 years ago. Accused, one Bichya Naik , Hazi and Venkatesh came to our house and negotiations took place for marriage alliance and presentation of dowry. Ac- cused demanded one crore dowry for performance of marriage between Pw1 and

Venkatesh. Then we expressed our inability to present one crore to accused and agreed to pay half of the share from our immovable property. Then they accepted my proposal.

After 6 months of the above negotiation we came to know that, Venkatesh is going to perform marriage with another women belongs to Nalgonda. On coming 386 to know Pw1 filed a case against accused. After filing the report, Pw1 made a phone call to accused. In turn, accused abused Pw1 in filthy language as “ vella

thoni valla thoni road mida padukunne danivi , lodge lo padukune danivi

neku na thumudu echi chesthana”. On this aspect Pw1 filed this present case. I cannot say the mobile number of accused , as I am illiterate. Police examined me and recorded my statement.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused. Deferred at Request 387

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 5 examined as P.W. 6

C.C. No. 694 Of 2017 .

Name:R. Srinivas S/o: Sathayanarayana R/o: Miryalaguda Occu: Mechanic Age:48 years Date: 31­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

I know Pw4.

In my presence police did not conducted any panchanama and nothing was seized any objects and also not drawn rough sketch.

Ex,P8 and Ex.P9 are my signatures on panchanama and rough sketch.

About one year ago, I made my signatures on some white papers when I went to

Police station.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 04-02-2017 at 10.00AM police conducted scene of offence panchanama at Sri Mahalaxmi Kirana shop and seized one wooden cricket wicket under cover panchanama and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 388

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that I have stated that as in Ex.P6 ( 161 Statement) and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Reported: Nil

Re-Examination:Nil

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 28-02-2016 at 6.30AM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch at surya rice mill and after completion of panchanama I made my signature and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Reported: Nil 389

Re-Examination: Nil

CC. NO. 125 /2018

PW1( V. Dasru, PC 2920) Date : 31-01-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel E. Karunakar for accused No.1 to 3:

At 10.30 AM , we got the information with regard to offence. On receipt of information we immediately proceeded to scene of offence. The distance between

Police station to scene of offence approximately 1.5km. myself, SI of police and one police constable reached through Car to the scene of offence with in 5 mins. As

I am constable I cannot entry to the general duty, witness as, SHO enter about the making of in GD. I did not gave any passport to SHO.

LW5 summoned the mediators to the scene of offence. LW5 called the mediators as they are present near the scene of offence. Accused signed on the confession panchanama cum seizure, but I do not know how many signatures were taken. Lw5 taken the signatures of mediators but I don't know how many signatures were taken by him. Lw5 drafted and conducted the panchanama. It taken more than one hour to record the confession panchanama. Lw5 examined me at Police station.

Accused confessed that, the said rice is PDS rice as such, I know.

Tahasildhar given certificate stating that, seized rice is PDS. On the date of offence Tahasildhar given certificate. I do not know the name of Tahasildhar.

Tahasildhar is working at Miryalaguda. We did not weigh the seized PDS rice.

It is not true to suggest that, LW5 did not receive any credible information with regard to offence. It is not true to suggest that myself and Lw5 and one PC not proceeded to scene. It is not true to suggest that , Lw5 did not summoned mediators and not recorded confession of the accused in the presence of mediators.

It is not true to suggest that, I do not know anything about the facts of this case. It is not true to suggest that, I got briefed the contents by police constable outside of the court and by seeing the hand palm I am deposing. It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this case only for the purpose of statistical this case was registered by LW5.

390

Re-Examination : NIL 391

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE II ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. 6 examined as P.W. 5

C.C. No. 1566 Of 2015 .

Name: K. Nagaraju S/o: Bixmaiah R/o: Rudraram Occu: Agriculture Age: 30 years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

I know Lw5/K. Saidulu.

About 3 ½ years ago, police enquired with regard to quarrel between accused and

Pw1 at Laxmipuram village. Apart from that, police did not do anything. Apart from me so many persons present at the house of Pw1 situated at Laxmipuram village. Except this I do not know any other facts.

Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 are my signatures on scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch. About 3 ½ years ago, I signed written papers but I do not know contents.

At this stage learned app declared witness as hostile and sought permission to cross examined and permission granted.

Cross Examination by learned APP:

It is not true to suggest that on 12-10-2015 at 10.00AM police conducted scene of offence panchanama and prepared rough sketch at the agriculture field of Pw1, after completion of panchanama I made my signatures and deposing false hood to help the accused.

Cross Examination by learned counsel for accused: Reported: Nil

Re-Examination: Nil 392 393

CC. NO. 125 /2018

PW1( V. Dasru, PC 2920) Date : 31-01-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel E. Karunakar for accused No.1 to 3:

At 10.30 AM , we got the information with regard to offence. On receipt of information we immediately proceeded to scene of offence. The distance between

Police station to scene of offence approximately 1.5km. myself, SI of police and one police constable reached through Car to the scene of offence with in 5 mins. As

I am constable I cannot entry to the general duty, witness as, SHO enter about the making of in GD. I did not gave any passport to SHO.

LW5 summoned the mediators to the scene of offence. LW5 called the mediators as they are present near the scene of offence. Accused signed on the confession panchanama cum seizure, but I do not know how many signatures were taken. Lw5 taken the signatures of mediators but I don't know how many signatures were taken by him. Lw5 drafted and conducted the panchanama. It taken more than one hour to record the confession panchanama. Lw5 examined me at Police station.

Accused confessed that, the said rice is PDS rice as such, I know.

Tahasildhar given certificate stating that, seized rice is PDS. On the date of offence Tahasildhar given certificate. I do not know the name of Tahasildhar.

Tahasildhar is working at Miryalaguda. We did not weigh the seized PDS rice.

It is not true to suggest that, LW5 did not receive any credible information with regard to offence. It is not true to suggest that myself and Lw5 and one PC not proceeded to scene. It is not true to suggest that , Lw5 did not summoned mediators and not recorded confession of the accused in the presence of mediators.

It is not true to suggest that, I do not know anything about the facts of this case. It is not true to suggest that, I got briefed the contents by police constable outside of the court and by seeing the hand palm I am deposing. It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned with this case only for the purpose of statistical this case was registered by LW5.

Re-Examination : NIL 394

CC. NO. 579 /2017

PW1( Merugu Srinivasulu ) Date : 31-01-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel J. Yellaiah for

accused:

I am working in NGO. Since initial day onwards I am working in NGO. Pw2 and 3 are my parents. Accused no.2 is my elder paternal uncle. A1 is my cousin brother. A3 is my elder paternal aunt. It is not true to suggest that, my family and accused having previous land disputes. I am having Ac.01.00 agriculture land in sy.no. 239. A2 is also having Ac.00.20 gts in

Sy.no.239. It is not true to suggest that, A2 is having Ac.1.20 gts in Sy.no.239.

It is not true to suggest that, we encroached Ac.00.20 gts of A2 land as such A2 approached village elders and conducted panchauyath, in the said panchayath village elders admonished us by saying, not to enter into the land of A2. It is not true to suggest that, as I encroached the land of A2 to escape from the liability I filed this false case against the all the accused. Pw2 age is 65 years.

On the date of alleged offence, I was in Suryapet. The distance between Amanagal to Suryapet is 15 km. LW4 called through the cell phone of Pw2 and informed about the alleged incident.

Immediately I called 108 ambulance. Lw4 is my brother. Pw1 is shifted in 108 ambulance to Govt Area hospital, Miryalaguda,

Along with PW2 , Pw3 and one Merugu Anil Kumar went to the hospital. I reached Area hospital at 11.00 AM. They alleged incident occurred at 08.45 AM. Myself and N. Chandra shekar went to the hospital. PW2 stayed in Area hospital for about half an hour from their we shifted him to GV hospital, Miryalaguda.

We engage one private ambulance to shift Pw1 to GV hospital. The Driver name of Ambulance is Saidaiah. We taken 395

PW2 G.V. Hospital at 11.00 AM. Pw1 to taken treatment in GV hospital for 14 days. While I coming to Area hospital I field a report against the accused about the alleged incident and went to Area hospital. On receipt of information by Lw4 that A1 and

A2 pushed Pw2 on the ground as such , I filed a report/ Ex.P1

before Vemulapally Police Station. I lodged report in between

10.00 to 10.30 AM.

I stated before the police that, as PW2 refused to sign on the land documents on the ground that, he want to sign by giv- ing information to me. Police examined me at GV hospital but I don’t know the time. SI of police recorded my statement. Along with me Pw2 and 3 statements are recorded at GV hospital.

It is not true to suggest that, A1 to A3 never bet the Pw2 only on keeping previous land disputes I field a false report. It is not true to suggest that, Pw2 did not taken treatment at GV hospital. It is not true to suggest that, as Pw2 is aged about 65 years on basis of his previous wound I taken a false medical certificate from doctor authorities. It is true, I worked as record writer under one VRO for a period of 6 months. It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way to the present case.

RE- Examination: NIL 396

CC. NO. 579 /2017

PW2( Merugu Janaiah ) Date : 31-01-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel J. Yellaiah for

accused:

I have one acre agriculture land in Amangal village. A2 is also having Ac.1.00 gts land in Amanagal village. I don’t know the Survey Number. I did not reduce anything in to writing with regard to purchasing land from A2. A2 never sold his land to me.

It is not true to suggest that, I encroached Ac.00.20 gts of

A2 land and restrained to enter into Ac.00.20 gts of land. It is not true to suggest that, with regard to land issue a panchayat was conducted by village elders. It is not true to suggest that, in the said panchayath village elders admonished me as I en- croached Ac.00.20 gts of A2 land.

A2 asked me to sign on land documents , but I stated I will sign in the presence of Pw1. It is not true to suggest that, A2 never asked me to sign on the documents and never pushed me on the ground. It is not true to suggest that, A1 never pushed me on the ground.

It is not true to suggest that, keeping previous land dis- putes, Pw1 filed a false report against the accused. One Anil shifted me to the hospital. The alleged offence took place at near my house. After happening of alleged incident, people gathered at the scene of offence. my house and A2 house is di- vided by one CC road. Approximately 20 to 30 houses are situ- ated near by my house. One Anil, Chennaiah, Saidaiah are our neighbors’. I take treatment in Area hospital initially and stayed for 30 minutes, there after I was shifted to private hospital. I taken treatment in GV hospital for a period of 45 days.

397

It is not true to suggest that, accused never bet me only keeping the previous land disputes, we foisted this false case.

Police never examined me.

Re- Examination: NIL 398

CC. NO. 579 /2017

PW3( Merugu Venkatamma) Date : 31-01-2020

Present and re sworn for cross examination

Cross Examination by learned counsel J. Yellaiah for

accused:

My neighbors are one Rajitha, Shanthamma, Jojaiah, merugu

Chennaiah, Merugu Venkataiah and others. At the time of alleged incident all the neighbors gathered at the scene of offence. A1 and A2 came to our house on the ground that, why Pw2 refused to sign on the land documents. In turn, I stated Pw2 will sign on the next day.

It is not true to suggest that, we encroached the Ac.00.20 gts of land of A2 in that regard a panchayath was taken place before el- ders. It is not true to suggest that, A2 and A1 never visited our house on date of alleged incident. It is not true to suggest that,

Pw2 never taken treatment in GV hospital, Miryalaguda. Police ex- amined me at GV hospital on the date of alleged incident. It is not true to suggest that, accused are no way concerned to this case.

Pw1, filed this false complaint by keeping land disputes. Pw2 taken treatment in GV hospital for a period of 20 days.

RE- Examination: NIL 399 400

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

I know 401

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

402

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

403

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

404

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

405

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

406

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

407

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

408

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

409

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, PRL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, II ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

410

Chief Examination by learned APP:

411

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, II ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

412

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, II ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

413

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, II ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP:

414

DEPOSTIION OF WITNESS

I N THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MIRYALGUDA

L.W. examined as P.W. 

C.C. No. Of 2013 .

Name: S/o: R/o: Occu: Agriculture Age: years Date: 29­01­2020

Solemnly affirmed by Sri R.AJAY KUMAR, B.A.LLM, II ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGEs, Miryalguda in accordance with the Provision of Act 44 of 1875.

Chief Examination by learned APP: