Sri. S. Ravi Kumar

1 Of 6 Spl.SC No 198 of 2021

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND

DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

NAGARKURNOOL.

Wednesday, the 29th day of December, 2021.

Present:- Sri Swarna Ravi Kumar,

IV Addi., District & Sessions Judge, Nagarkurnool. FAC: SPL. SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK SPL.COURf

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL & DISPOSAL OF RAPE & POCSO ACT CASES.

NAGARKURNOOL.

Spl.SC.No.198 of 2021.

Between: The State. rep.by the Circle Inspector Police, Amrabad.

.. .. Complainant.

And

Banavath Ramesh, S/o Denya,Age: 28 Years, Caste: Lambada, Occu: Student, R/o Maisammakunta Thanda . Miryalaguda Manda!,

...... Accused.

This case is coming up before me for final hearing on 23.12.2021 in presence of the learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.M. Rajesh Babu Naik Advocate for the accused, and the matter having stood over for consideration till today this court delivered the following:

IUDGMENT

The Circle Inspector of Police, Amrabad has filed Charge Sheet in

Cr.No. · 129/2020 of Amrabad P.S U/Ss.376, 366 IPC and Sec.6(1) r/w 5(1) of

POCSO Act - 2012.

2. The brief averments of the Charge Sheet:- a. The victim girl/LW.3 is aged 16 years studying intermediate 1st year in a .,--:;;:;;~·~ college in Achampet, due to lock down she is staying at her parents in v The accused is resident of Maisammakunta thanda of Miryalaguda . (I ~n; relative of the victim girl. When the victim girl attended a "' ' , I .. ""' ((. i ~' ,,... AR KU Ri..on , I t I

· ·f J "0.\1, --

. . , __ ,,, ·:,·.1' . ··-------"'\ ., .~;"' ~-, V" , .. -,:, ~1,· ~. .-..

: 2 Of 6 her Mama/uncle, took her marriage, the accused himself introduced to her as tarted conversation. The cell phone number and used to call her and bot are s h . . h • · nocent minor girl, she accused made her physically to love him, since s e Is in used to call him daily on phone.

b. On 17-12-2020 during morning hours, the accused made call to the victim girl that he is coming to the village to take her from ·home and get marry and he came on motorbike to the village, picked up, went to Nalgonda town, then to

Hyderabad, stayed in the house of his brother in law Daravath Srikanth a car driver at Manganur colony ~ntil 23-12-2020 and had sexual intercourse with victim girl for four times.

c. On 24-12-2020, the accused and victim girl went to the house of accused in Maisammakunta thanda of Miryalaguda Mandal and both are participated in sexual activity. On 27-12-2020, the LW.19/M Venkataiah, SI of Police, Amrabad

PS went to Maisammakunta thanda got the accused and victim girl to the Police station.

3. The learned 1st Addi. Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, took cognizance for the offences U/Ss.376. 366 IPC and Sec.6(1) r/w 5(1) of POCSO Act - 2012.,registered as SPL.SC.No.198 of 2021. As per the the order of the

Prl.District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar vide Dis.No.2819 dt: 29.10.2020 the case is made over to this court for disposal as per law.

4. On appearance of accused, the copies of the documents upon which the prosecution is relied upon are furnished U/sec. 207 Cr.P.C, charges framed, for the offences U/Ss.366, 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, read over and explained to him in telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be ' I tried.

5. During trial, the prosecution ha.s examined P~sl to 8 examined exhibits Pl · The accused was examined U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. expl~ining the ence for which he denied and false, and reported no defense.

r

~\,-v-

i,~,, ·~,.. tt":11~·., . : •

~--~

3 Of 6 Spl.SC No 198 of 2021

6. Heard the learned 5 1 . P . Public Prosecutor and defense counsel.

7.

Now the Point for consideration is: Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt?

a.

The evidence of PW.6/B.Mojes coupled with the Ex.P6/Report,dt:18-12- 2020, Ex.P7 /FIR is that on 18-12-2020 at 6.30 pm the PW.1 came to PS and submitted a report then he registered the same as case in crime No.129/2020 under a girl missing and submitted FIR to all concerned, examined and recorded ,the st~tement of PW.1, on the next day visited the scene of offence observed the same in the presence of PW.5, LW.I10/M.Jaipal drawn rough sketch/Ex.P8/CDF. But in his cross examination, denied the suggestion of defence that the report under Ex.P6 is created.

b.

The PW.1 who is the father of the victim and gave report to the PW.6 under Ex.P6 and also statement did not corroborate the same. His evidence is that he do not know anything about the case, he never gave report to the Police as to missing of his daughter/LW.3 and suspecting the accused for that. Of court he admitted his signature on the report but state that it was obtained by the village elder in a panchayath and he do not know the purpose of it. Even in his cross examination U/Sec.154 of the Indian Evidence Act, did not elicit anything in support of the case of the prosecution .

c.

The PW.5 in whose presence the PW.6 said to be observed the scene of offence drawn rough sketch and incorporated in the CDF did not corroborate the same. His evidence is that he never stood as a mediator for scene observation but when he went to Amrabad PS for a land panchayath Police obtained his ,, signature on some written papers and he do not know the contents of those papers. Even in his cross exarninrition U/Sec.154 of the Indian Evidence Act, did ----0£~~- :!J:·t anything in support of the case of the prosecution . ~\o\\• 'f r ,11, d (I~ • f . ,l ~ ~~eci~/ S es~ :: :, _. _ . .' t'<i\,.,~~ ~ffe eVidence of PW.7/M.Venkataiah, the SI of Police, Amrabad PS is that " ' H~ .. , , ,

(!{ /

,~'!,, \HAGMKUl<NOOL / . ) 0~ ~} 12-~0t~ on the information he along with PW.4 went to ·Maisammakunta 1 \

'\~l~ ~:;.>' l(j.J2:,

~-.I' '\. /,\. .::,,---~q l ~_-v-:- 4 Of 6 Spl.SC No 198 of 2~ thanda found the accused and victim in the house of accused then the PW.4 examined and recorded the statement of victim girl/PW.3 under Ex.P4. Basing on that he altered the section of law. The PW.4/M.Padma, WHC Achampet P.S.

corroborated the PW.7 as to she accompanied him to Maisammakunta thanda recording of statement but the statement was recorded at the Police Station but not the at the house of c1ccused at Maisammakunta thanda. But the

Ex.P4/statement of the victim reveals it was recorded by the PW.4 at the house of accused in Maisammakunta thanda of Miryalaguda, but it does not bear the signature of the victim girl. Th~refore, it cannot be considered that it was given by the victim girl.

e. The PW.3/victim girl who is said to be given statement to the PW.4 that the accused is their close relative and agreed to marry, on 17-12-2020 the accused came to her, picked up her on his motorcycle, went to Hdyerabad, then

Manganur colony, Hayatnagar 9nd stayed in the house of relative of accused on that night, the accused in the name of marriage had sexual intercourse with her and they were present at the said house until 23-12-2020 during which the accused had sexual intercouse with her for four times. then the accused took her their home at Maisammakunta thanda, on that night also he had sexual intercourse with her etc., but she did not corroborate the same. Her evidence is that she do not know anything about the case and lodging of complaint by her father Police did not examine her. The PW.2 who is mother Of the victim girl/PW.1 also stated that she do not know anything about the case. Police did not examine her. Even in their cross examination U/Sec.154 of the Indian

Evidence Act, did not elicit anything in support of the case of the prosecution.

f. The evidence of PW.8/K.Beesanna, the then Cl of Police, Amrabad is that he verified the investigation of PW.6 and PW. 7 found it on correct lines then he J.>i;· .. I/ . /',,_,<+ '°' .,".'~ "'ii,fern.,l;ff~ scene of offence i.e., the house of PW.l at Laxmapur thanda 1rff i x1fff dj' \, ·1 recorded the statements of PWs 4 and 5/G Kanda and '0 , .. . J~~~\ iom tg"' it t he victim to the hospital to the medical examination and \\}\~M

\.-t, ·. "IP."

r ,') "°

~\1., ----

·-;~~Q:~-;;;~?

~-~-::fr"~-. I J,.,,-- 5 Of 6 Spl.SC No 198 of 202i I later he recorded the confessio'n of the accused in the presence of Lws 11 and 12/Ch.Raju and M Venkat · h · d . . a1a seize one cell phone from his possession under a confession panchanama/Ex.Pl2 etc.,

g.

Since, the evidence of PW.8 reveals that the confession of accused was recorded in the Police station itself and in his presence. Therefore, the confession of accused is hit by Ss.25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act. Since the victim girl/PW.3 herself not supported the case of the prosecution, the prosecution ,is fa ilea to prove the guilt' of the accused ~,1

8.

For the reasons in the foregoing Paras, It is found that the prosecution is failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences U/Ss.376, 366 IPC and

Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act - 2012.

9. ·1n the result, the accused is found not guilty and thereby acquitted under

Sec.235(1) Cr.P.C for the· offences U/Ss.366,376,IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO

Act - 2012.

10. The unmarked case property., Samsung A207F/DS Blue colour cell phone shall be returned to the accused ..

11. The bail bonds if any of accused shall stand canceled and the sureties are discharged after lapse of six months.

Dictated directly on computer to Typist, pronounced by me in the open

Court, on this,the 29th day of December, 2021. r

fi;Pf.\\~

IV Addi.Dist.& Sessions Judge, (F.A.C) Fast Track Special Sessions Judge, (POCSO Act Cases), Nagarkurnool.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(Witnesses Examined for)

PROSECUTION: DEFENCE PWl: M. Mothilal -None- PW2 : Saroja

P , f7'

Sp!.SC Nt» 198 of 20:'.; 6 Of ti

PW3: Victim girl PW4: M. Padma PWS: Gantala Konda PW6: P. Mojes PW7 : M. Venkataiah PW8: K. Beesanna

_\:XH 18 iT5 MARKED f-OR

PROS EC UTION: DEFEIIICE Ex.Pl : Signature on report, dt: 1.3-12-7020 Nil Ex.P2: Statement of PWl U/sec 161 Cr.P.C. Ex.P3: Statement of PW2 U/•;,,c 161 Cr.P.C. Ex .P4: Statement of PW3 U/sec. J.6J Cr.P.C Ex.PS: Signature of lsL r,,edi,Jtor on C.OY. Ex.P6: Report, dt:18-12--2020 Ex.P7: F.LR. Ex.PS: C.D.F Ex.P9: Sectior Alteration Memc Ex.P:l 0: Medical exc:rni:1at1on ;-,2.port 2,:·1d final opinion Ex.P11 FSL Report

Ex.PB . Pvtenc; i-epori" f.x .Pi4 . Statement of victim UJ'.;. J 54 Cr. P.C Ex. PI S: C.D.F, d t: 28-1-202 1 !::x.Pl6: Bonafide CertificatE oi •J1ct:rn

r

IV Add , .Disu ~ ~'.: Ju dge ,

(F'J.\.C)Fast T~ack Special Sessio.n:; Judge, (POCSO Act Cases). Nagarkurnool.

j

7

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT F'OR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL

AND DISPOf. AL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

NAGARKURNOOL.

,-- -- ---- ·- ·- ·- ------------------ --- ----1-·---------------------------1 '1. jCase fllo . : I SPL. SC.No. 198 of 2021 1 -+- ------- ------·---------- ----------- -~------------------------1

r : N~me of the accused 12. Name of the Station _ ___ : iP.S. Amrabad

I 1

_____ i,: 8anavath Ramesh -~

14. Date of , I --------1-r---------------·-< I I ;

:1. Occurrence

L--- - --·.· ------ -- ----- -------------+ 1 17.12.2020 to 28.02.2019

I- - ---------------

i2' Complaint j [18.12.2020 ------ --------- - -- -- - - ·--- ---- -·•·----- --_...l. - - -------- 3_ App;-ehension : ;21.12.2020 I !4 Released on bail : J21.0l.2021

---- ----+-r---------------~ I

r--- ,s. Commitment : ,12.08.2021

-_____ J ;16.11.2021 . I

----1----+- - -------

16~ Commencement oft~i c1i I •---- ------------ --- ---

i: :17.12-2021

,7 _ Close of trial of Orde~/Judgr;ed-- -------r~ 9.12 .2021

7 1'tcq uitt~ !----- --

Sentence of Order/Judgment ' L

---- - --- -- - -------I !

5. !: 1No Delay. !Explanation for Delay --------

- - ___

' , , I

- -- ------

'-- ------------- -··-- --·--· - -- - -- ----- .l_ J_ --___,

~\t/

IV ,l\ddl.Dist.& Sessions JucJge, (F.A.C) Fast Track Specia! Sessions Judge, (POCSO J\ct Cases), Nagarkurnool.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE IV ADDTIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT

(FT.C)., NAGARKURNOOL

Friday, this the 31st day of December, 2021

Present:- Sri Swarna Ravi Kumar,

IV Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge,

FTC., Nagarkurnool.

M.O.P.No.7 of 2021

Between:

Islavath Laxman S/o Islavath Venkatram,

Age: 29 years, Occ: Electrician,

Caste: Lambada(ST), R/o Bolgatpally

village of Achampet Mandal.

..Petitioner

And

Islavath Sunitha W/o Islavath Laxman, Age:27 years, Occ: House Wife, Caste: Lambafa(ST), R/o Chenchu Palgu thanda(H/o) Laxmapur village

Achampet Mandal

..Respondents

This petition coming up before me for final disposal on 31.12.2021 in presence of Sri.Mohd. Hameed All, Advocate for the petitioner and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following

ORDER

The petitioner is absent. Therefore, the petition is dismissed.

Pronounced by me in open court, on this the 31s* day of December, 2021.

Ssioi

S ACK Co

IV Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge,

(F.T.C)., Nagarkurnool.

N