Currently Serving

S.Sarita

Fast Track Special Court for expeditious disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Bhadradri Kothagudem

Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex · Bhadradri Kothagudem · Telangana

S.Sarita, Fast Track Special Court for expeditious disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Bhadradri Kothagudem, is posted at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex, Bhadradri Kothagudem, Telangana, India. 509 court orders on record since 2025. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CRLMP, SC, AS cases.

509

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

SC.POCSO/35/2025 Acquitted

PS Yellandu vs Mangala Raviteja

16 Apr 2026

1 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL DESIGNATED JUDGE FOR TRIAL

CASES OF RAPE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AGAINST

SEXUAL OFFENCES UNDER POCSO ACT – CUM - I ADDL., DISTRICT

AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BHADRADRI KOTHAGUDEM

THURSDAY, THIS THE 16th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

Present:Smt. S. Sarita, I Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Designated Judge for expeditious disposal of cases of rape and protection of Children againstSexualAct-(POCSO)Act, Kothagudem.

SC POCSO No.35 Of 2025

1.Name of the Complainant :The State of Telangana through the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Yellandu.

2.Name of the Accused :MangalaRaviteja,S/o Ramakrishna, Age: 23 years, Occu: Decoration, R/o H.No.5-9-47, 24 Area,YellanduMandalof Bhadradri Kothagudem District, N/o 5-5-137, Harijan Basthi, YellanduMandal,Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

3.Offences under sections :96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (i) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

4.Crime Number and74 of 2025 Name of Police Station :Yellandu PS

5.Plea of the accused :Pleaded Not Guilty

6.The finding of the Court :Found Not Guilty

7.Sentence of Order :Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (i) r/w 6 of 2 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.235 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

8.Prosecution conducted by : Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl., Public Prosecutor,

9.Defence conducted by : Sri. B. Madhava Rao, Advocate, Kothagudem

This case is coming on 09.04.2026 before me, for a final hearing in the presence of Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl.,Public Prosecutor for the State, and Sri B. Madhava Rao, Advocate, Kothagudem, for the

Accused; and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

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

1.The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Yellandu laid a charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.74/2025 of PS. Yellandu for the offences punishable Under Sections 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of

POCSO Act, 2012.

2.The grave-men of charge against accused is that the accused taken away the victim girl from her house and committed sexual 3 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026 intercourse with her. Hence, the acts of accused constitute the offence punishable U/Secs.96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:-

(i). On 24.02.2025 at 22:00 hours, LW.1/complainant, who is mother of the victim girl lodged a report with police alleging that the accused had taken away her daughter under the guise of love and marriage.

(ii).Immediately, LW.1 went to the police station and lodged a report with the police. On receipt of the report, the Sub-Inspector of Police, PS.

Yellandu/LW.19 registered a case in Cr.No.74/2025, Under Sections 137 (3) of BNS and issued FIR, sent to all concerned and took up the investigation and prepared the Crime Details Form in the presence of

Lws.9 and 10 mediators.

(iii).During the course of investigation, LW.19 collected the study certificate of the victim girl from LW.3 and as per the said certificate the date of birth of the victim girl is 18.03.2008. While the investigation was in progress on 26.02.2025 at 12:30 hours, the victim girl came to the police station, then, he got recorded her statement by LW.5 under 4 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026 the videography. Basing on the statement of the victim girl, LW.20 altered the section of law to 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO

Act, 2012. During the course of investigation, LW.20/SDPO, Yellandu sent the victim girl for her medical examination and got examined her by LW.15/Medical Superintendent, Govt., General Hospital,

Kothagudem and furnished the medical report and preserved the material objects of pubic hair, nail clippings, vulva swabs and vaginal swabs and sent the same to RFSL for examination and report.

(iv).LW.20 got recorded the statement of the victim girl by LW.17 under section 183 of BNSS. Later, he examined and recorded the statements of the witnesses. On 04.03.2025 he apprehended the accused at Nehrungar of Yellandu and recorded his confession statement and later visited the scene of offence where the accused and victim participated in sexual intercourse and prepared Crime Details

Form-III in the presence of Lws.13 and 14 and seized bike under the cover of seizure panchanama and later visited the 4th scene of offence where he also participated sexual intercourse with the victim and prepared CDF-IV in the presence of same mediators and later LW.21 got conducted potency test of the accused by LW.16 that the he performing/normal sexual activity”.

5 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

(v).Basing on the RFSL report LW.15 furnished the final report stating that According to RFSL report human semen and spermatozoa are detected on vaginal and vulval swab. According to clinical examination, hymen not intact, sexual intercourse might hae occurred”.

LW.21 collected CDR data. After completion of his entire investigation and after collecting all the relevant documents, he filed charge sheet against the accused.

4. Based on the report, cognizance was taken against the accused for the offences Under Sections 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of

POCSO Act, 2012 by the I Addl District and Sessions Judge,

Kothagudem.

5.On the appearance of the accused, he was furnished with copies of documents as required U/sec.207 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure. Prima facie case for the offence punishable Under Sections 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 was framed against the accused.

6.On the appearance of the accused before the court, the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor and the defence Counsel were heard

under section 226 of Cr. P.C. and considering the material on record, 6 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026 as per section 228 of Cr. P.C., Charges Under Sections 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 are framed, read over, and explained to the accused for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.During the trial, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 3 and

Exs.P.1 to P.18 were marked.

8.After the closure of the prosecution evidence, when the accused is examined U/sec.313 of the Code of criminal procedure with reference to the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, he denied the same. However, he did not choose to adduce any evidence on his behalf.

9.This court has heard the arguments of the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the accused.

10.The points that arise for determination are, as follows:

1. “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of

the accused for the offence punishable Under Sections 96, 64 of

BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 beyond all reasonable

doubt?

2. To what Result?

7 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

P O I N T NO.1 :

11.In the present case on hand, the charge was framed against the accused that on the date of the alleged incident the accused committed sexual intercourse on a minor girl by taking away her from her house and committed the offence punishable under sections 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. But PW.1 simply stated that his signature was obtained on some papers by his relatives and she does not know its contents. PW.2 also did not support the prosecution case and she denied to have stated to police as in Ex.P.3.

12.Further, the evidence of PW.3, who is the investigating officer and his evidence is only procedural in nature.

13.For the forgoing reasons, as no incriminating material can be culled out from Pws.1 to 3, hence, it is inevitable to hold that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of accused for charge for offence punishable U/Sec.96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO

Act, 2012 against accused beyond reasonable doubt.

8 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

P O I N T NO.2 :

In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs. 96, 64 of BNS and Sec.5 (I) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.235 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16 th day of April, 2026.

FAC. Fast Track Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl.

Sessions Judge, Kothagudem

9 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE::

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

P.W-1R. Muthamma P.W-2Victim P.W-3B. Satyanarayana

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

-Nil-

DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

Ex.P-1Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.1.

Ex.P-2Sec.164 of Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.1.

Ex.P-3Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-4Sec.164 of Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-5Signature of PW.2 on Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement

Ex.P-6Report

Ex.P-7First Information report

Ex.P-8Crime Details Form-I

Ex.P-9Study Certificate of the Victim Girl/PW.2

Ex.P-10Section alteration memo

Ex.P-11Sec.63 (4) (c) certificate

Ex.P-12Medical examination report

Ex.P-13Potency test report

Ex.P-14RFSL Report

Ex.P-15Crime Details Form-II

Ex.P-16Crime Details Form-III

Ex.P-17Relevant portion of confession-cum-seizure panchanama

Ex.P-18Crime Details Form-IV 10 SC POCSO No.35 of 2025, dt.16.04.2026

MATERIAL OBJECTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE

PROSECUTION

MO.1: C.D

FAC. Fast Track Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions

Judge, Kothagudem

SC.POCSO/17/2025 Acquitted

Kothagudem I Town vs Nunavath Sai Kumar

20 Apr 2026

1 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL DESIGNATED JUDGE FOR TRIAL

CASES OF RAPE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AGAINST

SEXUAL OFFENCES UNDER POCSO ACT – CUM - I ADDL., DISTRICT

AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BHADRADRI KOTHAGUDEM

MONDAY, THIS THE 20th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

Present:Smt. S. Sarita, I Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Designated Judge for expeditious disposal of cases of rape and protection of Children againstSexualAct-(POCSO)Act, Kothagudem.

SC POCSO No.17 Of 2025

1.Name of the Complainant :The State of Telangana through the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Kothagudem.

2.Name of the Accused :Nunavath Sai Kumar @ Dharar Sai Kumar, S/o. Nunavath Kishan, Age: 29 Years, Occ: Private Employee, R/o. Q.No.C-2-5B, Gouthampur of Chunchupalli Mandal N/o. H.No.76, Manikyaram Village of Singareni Mandal of Khammam District.

3.Offences under sections :137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec.5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

4.Crime Number and235 of 2024 Name of Police Station :Kothagudem I Town PS

5.Plea of the accused :Pleaded Not Guilty

6.The finding of the Court :Found Not Guilty

7.Sentence of Order :Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 2 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.235 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

8.Prosecution conducted by : Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl., Public Prosecutor,

9.Defence conducted by : Sri V. Venkateswara Rao, Advocate, Kothagudem

This case is coming on 15.04.2026 before me, for a final hearing in the presence of Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl.,Public Prosecutor for the State, and Sri V. Venkateswara Rao, Advocate, Kothagudem, for the Accused; and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

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

1.The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Kothagudem, laid a charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.235/2024 of PS.

Kothagudem I Town for the offences punishable Under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

2.The grave-men of charge against accused is that the accused kidnapped the victim girl and committed rape on her on the name of 3 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026 love and marriage. Hence, the acts of accused constitute the offence punishable U/Secs.137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO

Act, 2012.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:-

(i). On 24.12.2024 at 17.15 hours, at in front of SCCL Women’s

Degree College Kothagudem, LW.1/complainant, who is mother of the victim girl lodged a report with police alleging that on 20.12.2024, the accused kidnapped the victim girl and committed Rape on her on the pretext of love and marriage.

(ii).Immediately, LW.1 went to the police station and lodged a report with the police. On receipt of the report, the Station House Officer,

PS.Kothagudem I town/LW.16 registered a case in Cr.No.235/2024,

Under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO

Act, 2012 and issued express FIR and took up the investigation and handed over the CD file to the Lw.17.

(iii).During the course of investigation, LW.17 examined and recorded the statement of LWs.1 to 3 in detail in part-II CD and visited the scene of offence, drafted crime details form in the presence of mediators. On requisition LW.07 examined the victim girl and recorded her statement 4 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026 under section 161 of Cr.P.C. On his requisition Lw.13 recorded the statement of the victim girl under section 164 of Cr.P.C. On his requisition Lw.10 examined the victim girl and issued Medical

Examination Report. On 26.12.2024, he apprehend the accused and produced before court for judicial remand. After completion of entire investigation and after collecting all the relevant documents, he filed charge sheet before the court against the accused for the offence punishable under sections 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of

POCSO Act, 2012.

4. Based on the report, cognizance was taken against the accused for the offences Under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 by the I Addl District and Sessions Judge,

Kothagudem.

5.On the appearance of the accused, he was furnished with copies of documents as required U/sec.207 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure. Prima facie case for the offence punishable Under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 was framed against the accused.

5 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026

6.On the appearance of the accused before the court, the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor and the defence Counsel were heard

under section 226 of Cr. P.C. and considering the material on record, as per section 228 of Cr. P.C., Charges Under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2)

(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 are framed, read over, and explained to the accused for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.During the trial, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 5 and

Exs.P.1 to P.8 were marked.

9.This court has heard the arguments of the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the accused.

10.The points that arise for determination are, as follows:

6 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026 1. “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of

the accused for the offence punishable Under Sections 137 (2), 64

(2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 beyond all

reasonable doubt?

2. To what Result?

P O I N T NO.1 :

11.In the present case on hand, the charge was framed against the accused that on the date of the alleged incident the accused kidnapped the minor victim girl and committed Rape on her on the pretext of love and marriage and committed the offence punishable under sections 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO

Act, 2012. But PW.1 simply stated that her signature was obtained on some papers by her relatives and she does not know its contents. PW.2 and PW.3 did not support the prosecution case and they denied to have stated to police as in Ex.P.3 and Ex.P.6.

12.Further, the evidence of PW.4 who is recorded the statement of the victim girl and PW.5 who is the investigating officer and their evidence is only procedural in nature.

7 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026

13.For the forgoing reasons, as no incriminating material can be culled out from Pws.1 to 5, hence, it is inevitable to hold that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of accused for charge for offence punishable u/Sec. 137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of

POCSO Act, 2012 against accused beyond reasonable doubt.

P O I N T NO.2 :

In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.137 (2), 64 (2)(m) of BNS and Sec. 5 r/w 6 of POCSO

Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.235 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences.

The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20 th day of April, 2026.

Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kothagudem 8 SC POCSO No.17 of 2025, dt.20.04.2026

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE::

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

P.W-1B. Lalitha P.W-2victim P.W-3B. Vasram P.W-4G. Vijaya P.W-5M. Karunakar

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

-Nil-

DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

Ex.P-1Signature of Pw.1 on complaint

Ex.P-2Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.1.

Ex.P-3Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-4Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-5Signature of PW.2 on 164 of Statement.

Ex.P-6Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

Ex.P-7Report

Ex.P-8First Information Report

MATERIAL OBJECTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE

PROSECUTION

- Nil -

Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kothagudem

SC.POCSO/77/2023 Acquitted

PS Manuguru vs Vatte Mahesh

29 Apr 2026

1 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE

FOR EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF CASES OF RAPE AND

PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AGAINST SEXUAL OFFENCES UNDER

POCSO ACT – CUM - I ADDL., DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

BHADRADRI KOTHAGUDEM

WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 29th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

Present:Smt. S. Sarita, I Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Designated Judge for expeditious disposal of cases of rape and protection of Children againstSexualAct-(POCSO)Act, Kothagudem.

SC POCSO No.77 Of 2023

1.Name of the Complainant :The State of Telangana through the Inspector of Police, Manuguru.

2.Name of the Accused :Vatte Mahesh, S/o. Kotaiah, Age: 23 Years, Occ: Private Job, R/o. RamanujavaramVillageof Manuguru Mandal.

3.Offences under sections :376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012.

4.Crime Number and381 of 2023 Name of Police Station :Manuguru PS

5.Plea of the accused :Pleaded Not Guilty

6.The finding of the Court :Found Not Guilty

7.Sentence of Order :Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.235 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of 2 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026 appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

8.Prosecution conducted by : Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl., Public Prosecutor,

9.Defence conducted by : Sri R. Venkat,Advocate, Kothagudem

This case is coming on 22.04.2026 before me, for a final hearing in the presence of Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl.,Public Prosecutor for the State, and Sri R. Venkat, Advocate, Kothagudem, for the Accused; and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

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

1.The Inspector of Police, Manuguru, laid a charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.381/2023 of PS. Manuguru for the offences punishable Under Sections 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of

POCSO Act, 2012.

2.The grave-men of charge against accused is that the accused committed rape on minor girl on the pretext of love. Hence, the acts of accused constitute the offence punishable U/Secs.376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012.

3 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026

3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:-

(i). On 17.10.2023 at Ramanujaram Village of Manuguru Mandal,

LW.1/complainant, who is father of the victim girl lodged a report with police alleging that on 04.10.2023 at 12.00 hours, the accused committed Rape on the victim girl on the pretext of love.

(ii).Immediately, LW.1 went to the police station and lodged a report with the police. On receipt of the report, the Inspector of Police,

PS.Manuguru/LW.17 registered a case in Cr.No.381/2023, Under

Sections 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 and issued express FIR and took up the investigation.

(iii).During the course of investigation, LW.17 examined and recorded the statement of LW.1 in detail in part-II CD and visited the scene of offence, drafted crime details form in the presence of mediators. On requisition LW.7 examined the victim girl and recorded her statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. On his requisition Lw.15 recorded the statement of the victim girl under section 164 of Cr.P.C and he collected the study certificate of the victim girl from LW.10. On his requisition

Lw.14 conducted potency test on accused and issued potency test report. After completion of entire investigation and after collecting all the relevant documents, he filed charge sheet before the court against 4 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026 the accused for the offence punishable under sections 376 of IPC and

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

4. Based on the report, cognizance was taken against the accused for the offences Under Sections 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO

Act, 2012 by the I Addl District and Sessions Judge, Kothagudem.

5.On the appearance of the accused, he was furnished with copies of documents as required U/sec.207 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure. Prima facie case for the offence punishable Under Sections 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 was framed against the accused.

6.On the appearance of the accused before the court, the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor and the defence Counsel were heard

under section 226 of Cr. P.C. and considering the material on record, as per section 228 of Cr. P.C., Charges Under Sections 376 of IPC and

Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 are framed, read over, and explained to the accused for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.During the trial, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 4 and

Exs.P.1 to P.11 were marked.

5 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026

9.This court has heard the arguments of the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the accused.

10.The points that arise for determination are, as follows:

1. “Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of

the accused for the offence punishable Under Sections 376 of IPC

and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 beyond all reasonable doubt?

2. To what Result?

P O I N T NO.1 :

11.In the present case on hand, the charge was framed against the accused that on the date of the alleged incident the accused committed Rape on minor girl on the pretext of love and committed the offence punishable under sections 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of

POCSO Act, 2012. But PW.1 simply stated that his signature was 6 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026 obtained on some papers by his relatives and he does not know its contents. PW.2 and PW.3 did not support the prosecution case and they denied to have stated to police as in Ex.P.3 and Ex.P.6.

12.Further, the evidence of PW.4 who is recorded the statement of the victim girl and PW.5 who is the investigating officer and their evidence is only procedural in nature.

13.For the forgoing reasons, as no incriminating material can be culled out from Pws.1 to 4, hence, it is inevitable to hold that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of accused for charge for offence punishable u/Sec. 376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 against accused beyond reasonable doubt.

P O I N T NO.2 :

In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.376 of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.235 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

7 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 29 th day of April, 2026.

Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kothagudem

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE::

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

P.W-1R. Lingaiah P.W-2victim P.W-3Mounika P.W-4A. Ramakanth

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

-Nil-

DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

Ex.P-1Signature of Pw.1 on complaint

Ex.P-2Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.1.

Ex.P-3Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-4Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-5Signature of PW.2 on her 164 of Statement.

Ex.P-6Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

Ex.P-7Report 8 SC POCSO No.77 of 2023, dt.29.04.2026

Ex.P-8First Information Report

Ex.P-9Crime Detail Form

Ex.P-10Study and Conduct Certificate of the victim girl

Ex.P-11Potency Test Report

MATERIAL OBJECTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE

PROSECUTION

- Nil -

Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kothagudem

SC.POCSO/88/2024 Acquitted

PS Aswaraopeta vs Allam Yadagiri

13 May 2026

1 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL DESIGNATED JUDGE FOR

TRIAL CASES OF RAPE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN

AGAINST SEXUAL OFFENCES UNDER POCSO ACT – CUM - I

ADDL., DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BHADRADRI

KOTHAGUDEM

THURSDAY, THIS THE 13th DAY OF MAY, 2026

Present:Smt. S. Sarita, I Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Designated Judge for expeditious disposal of cases of rape and protection of Children againstSexualAct-(POCSO)Act, Kothagudem.

SC POCSO No.88 Of 2024

1.Name of the Complainant :The State of Telangana through the Sub-Inspector of Police, Aswaraopeta.

2.Name of the Accused :Allam Yadagiri, S/o Yellaiah, Age: 20 years, Occu: Coolie, R/o NarayanapuramColonyof Aswaraopeta Mandal.

3.Offences under sections :75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

4.Crime Number and240 of 2024 Name of Police Station :Aswaraopeta PS

5.Plea of the accused :Pleaded Not Guilty

6.The finding of the Court :Found Not Guilty

7.Sentence of Order :Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.232 of Cr.P.C for 2 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026 the said offences. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

8.Prosecution conducted by : Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl., Public Prosecutor,

9.Defence conducted by : Sri G. Kanthaiah,Advocate, Kothagudem

This case is coming on 06.05.2026 before me, for a final hearing in the presence of Smt. P.V.D. Lakshmi, Addl.,Public

Prosecutor for the State, and Sri G. Kanthaiah, Advocate,

Kothagudem,for the Accused; and upon perusal of the material papers on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

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

1.The Investigation Officer, Sub-Inspector of Police, laid a charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.240/2024 of PS.

Aswaraopeta for the offences punishable Under Sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

2.The grave-men of charge against accused is that the accused committed sexual harassment and stalking with an intention to 3 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026 commit outrage the modesty of the victim girl. Hence, the acts of accused constitute the offence punishable U/Secs.75, 78, 351 (2) of

BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:-

(i). On 26.09.2024 at 23:00 hours at the house of the victim girl at

Narayanapuram Colony of Aswaraopeta Mandal, the accused caught hold the hand of the victim girl and dragged her towards him with an intention to outrage her modesty.

(ii).Immediately, LW.1 went to the police station and lodged a report with the police. On receipt of the report, the Station House

Officer, PS.Aswaraopeta/LW.9 registered a case in Cr.No.240/2024,

Under Sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and issued FIR and took up the investigation.

(iii).During the course of investigation, LW.9 examined and recorded the statement of LW.1 and visited the scene of offence and prepared Crime Details Form in the presence of Lws.7 and 8 mediators. Later, he go recorded the statement of the victim girl by

LW.4 under the videography of LW.5. Later, he collected the date of 4 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026 birth certificate of the victim girl from LW.6. On 03.10.2024 at 10:00 hours, he arrested the accused and produced him before the court for judicial remand. LW.9 got recorded the statement of the victim girl under section 183 of BNSS. After completion of entire investigation and after collecting all the relevant documents, he filed charge sheet before the court against the accused for the offence punishable under sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of

POCSO Act, 2012.

4. Based on the report, cognizance was taken against the accused for the offences Under Sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 by the I Addl District and Sessions Judge,

Kothagudem.

5.On the appearance of the accused, he was furnished with copies of documents as required U/sec.207 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure. Prima facie case for the offence punishable Under

Sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 was framed against the accused.

5 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026

6.On the appearance of the accused before the court, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the defence Counsel were heard under section 226 of Cr. P.C. and considering the material on record, as per section 228 of Cr. P.C., Charges Under Sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 are framed, read over, and explained to the accused for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.During the trial, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 3 and

Exs.P.1 to P.8 were marked.

8.After completion of prosecution evidence, Section 313 Cr.P.C.

Examination is dispensed with as there are no incriminating circumstances appeared against the accused in the prosecution case.

9.This court has heard the arguments of the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the accused.

10.The points that arise for determination are, as follows:

6 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026 1.“Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of

the accused for the offence punishable Under Sections 75, 78,

351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 beyond all

reasonable doubt?

2. To what Result?

P O I N T NO.1 :

11.In the present case on hand, the charge was framed against the accused that on the date of the alleged incident the accused outraged the modesty of the victim girl and committed the offence punishable under sections 75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012. But PW.1 simply stated that her signature was obtained on some papers by her relatives and she does not know its contents. PW.2 and PW.3 did not support the prosecution case and they denied to have stated to police as in Ex.P.5 and

Ex.P.6.

12.For the forgoing reasons, as no incriminating material can be culled out from Pws.1 to 3, hence, it is inevitable to hold that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of accused for charge for offence punishable U/Sec.75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, 7 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026

Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 against accused beyond reasonable doubt.

P O I N T NO.2 :

In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Secs.75, 78, 351 (2) of BNS, Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and he is acquitted U/S.232 of Cr.P.C for the said offences.

The bail bonds of the accused shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked and invaluable property, if any, shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13 th day of May, 2026.

Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions

Judge, Kothagudem

8 SC POCSO No.88 of 2024, dt.13.05.2026

:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE::

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

P.W-1Mother of victim P.W-2Grand mother of Victim P.W-3 Victim

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

-Nil-

DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

Ex.P-1Signature of Pw.1 on complaint

Ex.P-2Signature of PW.1 on Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.1 Ex.P-3Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. Statement of PW.1.

Ex.P-4Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.1.

Ex.P-5Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P-6Sec.161 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

Ex.P-7Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

Ex.P-8Signature of PW.3 on Sec.164 of Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

MATERIAL OBJECTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE

PROSECUTION

- Nil -

FAC. Fast Track Special Sessions Judge for expeditious Disposal of cases and Rape and Protection of Children against sexual offences (POCSO Act), Kothagudem-cum-I Addl. Sessions

Judge, Kothagudem

CRLMP.BAIL/374/2026

Kathala Alias Katwala Suresh vs State of Telangana

19 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR THE

TRIAL OF CASES UNDER NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC

SUBSTANCES ACT-CUM- I ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE AT

KOTHAGUDEM

TUESDAY, THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

Present:Smt. S. Sarita, Spl. Designated Judge for trial of case under NarcoticDrugsandPsychotropic Substances Act, 1985-cum- I Addl.,

Sessions Judge, Kothagudem.

Crl.M.P.No.374 of 2026 in

Cr.No.85 of 2025 of P.S. Burgampahad

BETWEEN:

A.6: Kathala @ Katwala Suresh, S/o Nageswara Rao, Age: 28 years, Occu: Mason work, R/o Mazeed Road, Sarapaka Village of Burgampahad Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

…...Petitioner/accused No.6

and

The State through The P.S.Burgampahad through Addl.Public Prosecutor, Bhadradri Kothagudem.

...Respondent/Complainant

This petition is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri M. Ramachandraiah, Advocate for Petitioner/accused No.6; and of Spl. Public Prosecutor for Respondent/Complainant and upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

:: O R D E R ::

1.This petition is filed U/Sec.483 of BNSS, 2023 Act by the petitioner/accused No.6 with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.

2.The brief facts of the petition averments are as follows:

That on 22.03.2025 at 12:00 hours, at Sammakka

Sarakka Gaddelu, Burgampahad Village, the complainant and his staff apprehended the accused Nos.2 and 3 while they were transporting the

Ganja on Maruthi Car bearing No.TS-08-JQ-2960 and seized 121.140 kgs of Ganja in the presence of the mediators. Further, accused No.2 confessed that previously he and his friends i.e., Accused Nos.1, 5 to 7, they all are transported the Ganja and apprehended by the police and sent to jail in several cases at various police stations. In this case also, on 22.03.2025 petitioner/accused No.6 along with accused Nos.2, 3, 5 and 7 went to Motu, Kalimela of Odisha State in Baleno Car and purchased the Ganja from one Bheema/accused No.10. On the next day morning accused Nos.1, 3 to 7 and the petitioner/accused No.6, were shifted the Ganja across the Godavari River through the boat of accused No.9 and reached to Vinjaram and arranged the Ganja packets in a Car dickey. Further, A.1 instructed to A.2 to transport the Ganja to

Yellandu X road along with A.3, remaining persons will reach there later; on that A.2 and A.3 were proceeded to Yellandu X road on TS-08-

JA-2960 Baleno Car, while they reached to Sammakka Saralamma

Gaddelu at Burgampahad, the police apprehended them.

3. Basing on the confession and seizure panchanama, the P.S.

Burgampahad registered a case in Cr.No.85/2025 under section 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii) (c), 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.

4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner/accused No.6 submitted that a false case is filed against the Petitioner/accused No.6 with false allegations. The Petitioner/accused No.6 is the sole bread winner of his entire family members as such his further detention would cause much hardship to his entire family. Hence, prays to allow the petition.

5. The learned Asst., Public Prosecutor submitted that the Sub-

Inspector of Police, PS Burgamapahd seized (121.140) kgs. of Ganja from the possession of accused Nos.2 and 3 and they confessed the guilt that he and other accused persons along with this petitioner/accused No.6 purchased the Ganja from A.10. Further, submitted that if the petitioner/accused No.6 is released on bail, there is every possibility to continue his illegal Ganja business and the accused Nos.1, 4 to 6, 8 and 10 were not yet arrested and they are absconding and if the petitioner is released on bail he may help in absconding other accused persons to escape and it will be difficult to apprehend these accused persons and it will be difficult to secure their presence before the court and will repeat the transportation of Ganja.

Further he will tamper the evidence and influence the witnesses.

Therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. The Supreme court has reiterated that bail in NDPS cases cannot be granted unless there are reasonable grounds for believing that the person accused in not guilty of such an offence. The Hon’ble Supreme

Court in the judgment referred in the case of Narcotics Control Bureau

V. Mohit Aggarwal held that “the length of the period of custody or

the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial has

commenced are by themselves not considerations that can be

treated as persuasive grounds for granting itself to the

respondent under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.”

7. The Apex Court thereafter, explained that “the term

“reasonable grounds” used in clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of

Section 37 would signify grounds for the Court to believe that the

accused is not guilty of the alleged offense. It also means

trustworthy and plausible. An additional factor that goes hand in

hand with the aforesaid satisfaction is likelihood that the

accused won’t conduct any crimes while out on bail.”

8. On perusal of the record it goes to reveal that the petitioner/Accused No.6 is in Judicial custody from 07.03.2026. The allegations levelled against the petitioner/accused No.6 is for the offence under Section 8 (c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (c), 29 of NDPS Act. The quantity of the Ganja seized is 121.140 kgs which is massive. In the present case, it cannot be concluded at this stage that the accused is not guilty of the offence or he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Hence, for reasons assigned above, this court is not inclined to grant bail.

IN THE RESULT: The petition is dismissed.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19 th day of May, 2026.

Special Sessions Judge for trial of cases under NDPS Act-cum-cum-I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kothagudem

Order Record 488 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CRLMP.BAIL/369/2026	Sagar Sivaji Mastud Alias Dadu Shet Barshi vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/373/2026	Barla Sandeep vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/374/2026	Kathala Alias Katwala Suresh vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/377/2026	Niridi Sairam vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/379/2026	Bikash Haldar Alias Shibo vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/381/2026	Komuraj vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/383/2026	Shivakar Pramod Kumar vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/384/2026	MITHUN RAY vs State of Telangana	19 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/340/2026	Gunja Mahesh vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/362/2026	Midiyam Govindh vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/367/2026	SANMUGAM M vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/368/2026	MOHAMMAD ABDUL MASOOD REHEMAN vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/371/2026	Pasupuleti Pavan Kumar vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/375/2026	Bharat Singh vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/376/2026	Gogula Satish vs State of Telangana	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/410/2026	Vasamsetty Narasimha Sai Kiran vs PS yellandu	18 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.NDPS/195/2022	Proh and Excise, Bhadrachalam vs Sonar Bala Kerishna	15 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/360/2026	Amit Rohidas Sonavane alias Amit Rohidas Patil alias Amit vs State of Telangana	15 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/364/2026	Pulaparthy Satyadeva vs State of Telangana	15 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/365/2026	Gunji Veladri Alias Byragi vs State of Telangana	15 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLRP/3/2023	Shaik Shafi Ahmed vs The State of Telangana rep by Station House Officer	14 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/88/2024	PS Aswaraopeta vs Allam Yadagiri	13 May 2026	Judgement	Acquitted
CRLMP.BAIL/359/2026	Abhijit Tarfdar vs State of Telangana	13 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/350/2026	Maddela Prasada Rao vs State of Telangana	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/351/2026	Killo Ramachandra vs State of Telangana	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/352/2026	Gandhikota Chand alias Basha Javeed vs State of Telangana	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/353/2026	Ajit Naga vs Prohibition and Excise BHADRACHALAM	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/357/2026	Ungarala Sareen Kumar vs State of Telangana	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/358/2026	Mekala Srinivasalu vs State of Telangana	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/8/2025	PS Aswapuram vs Ganaparapu Naresh	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/111/2024	Manuguru vs Kubera	12 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.NDPS/166/2022	PS Kothagudem II Town vs Dharavath Durga Shankar @ Nani	11 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/348/2026	Kilo Somaraju Alias Somru vs State of Telangana	11 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.NDPS/68/2022	S.H.O Burgampahad vs Kemudu Madhav	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/311/2026	Jadi Ganesh vs P S BHADRACHALAM TOWN	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/324/2026	Pittal Kiran vs State of Telangana	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/341/2026	Musala Kishandas Alias Kishan vs State of Telangana	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/344/2026	Kuvvarapu Nagendra Babu vs State of Telangana	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/345/2026	Md Rakheed vs State of Telangana	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/346/2026	pangi Gasiramu pani gasiram vs State of Telangana	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
MVOP/25/2023	Gubbala Venkatram vs Malreddy Upendar Reddy	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/335/2026	Gopal Kumar Saha vs State of Telangana	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/343/2026	Prince Kumar vs State of Telangana	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/307/2026	Menthula Bhargav vs PS Chunchupalli	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/318/2026	Jilakara Akash vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/321/2026	Kota Krishna vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/322/2026	Gaddala Srinu Alias Srinivasa Rao vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/323/2026	Barla Sandeep vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/325/2026	Bharat Singh vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/326/2026	Bhukya Shankar vs Manuguru	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/327/2026	Gowrla Kalyan vs P S Cherla	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/328/2026	Kurapati Buchaiah Alias Mani vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/331/2026	Kathala Alias Katwala Suresh vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/332/2026	Jatoth Sunil vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/333/2026	Pawan kumar vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/334/2026	Ramavath Ramesh vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/342/2026	Bikash Haldar Alias Shibo vs State of Telangana	05 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.NDPS/121/2022	S.H.O.Kothagudem I town vs Bhukya Srinivas	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/305/2026	MITHUN RAY vs P S PROHIBITION And EXCISE STATION BHADRACHALAM	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/330/2026	Badditi Saiman Raj Alias Chintu vs State of Telangana	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/6/2025	Palvoncha Town vs Golkonda Suresh	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
MVOP/154/2023	Javathi @ Juvvadi Laxmi vs Payam Veerabhadram	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/296/2026	Komuraj vs Kothagudem II Town	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/297/2026	Kalumula Ramesh vs PS Tekulapally	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/303/2026	Mekala Srinivasulu vs SHO Chandrugonda	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/304/2026	Pangi Ramesh Alias Ravi vs P S Manuguru	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/306/2026	Jhansi lyappan vs P S Palvoncha Town	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/308/2026	Mutyam Ramu Yadav vs SHO Kothagudem I town	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/309/2026	Kemodo Surendra Alias Sudheer Alias Vivek Alias Debadas Kelo vs P S Manuguru	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/310/2026	Narayana Lal Gurjar vs Tekulapalli	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/313/2026	Kurapati Buchaiah Alias Mani vs P S Bhadrachalam	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/314/2026	Gaddamsetti Surya Prakash vs PS Bhadrachalam Town	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/317/2026	Sanmugam M vs State of Telangana	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/320/2026	Shivakar Pramod Kumar vs State of Telangana	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
AS/19/2022	Banoth Arun Kumar vs Veesam Satyanarayana	30 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/295/2026	Abhijit Tarfdar vs PS Paloncha Town	30 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/312/2026	Kathi Bhavana vs P S Palvancha Town	30 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/319/2026	Komaram Shiva Prasad vs State of Telangana	30 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC.POCSO/77/2023	PS Manuguru vs Vatte Mahesh	29 Apr 2026	Judgement	Acquitted
CRLMP.BAIL/294/2026	Ajit Naga vs Proh and Ex. Bhadrachalam	28 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/298/2026	Dhanalakshmi Suresh vs PS Paloncha Town	28 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/299/2026	Guti Upendra Alias Nagaraju vs PS Burgampadu	28 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/300/2026	Gandhikota Chand Basha vs PS Paloncha Rural	28 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC.NDPS/203/2022	Proh and Excise, Palvancha vs Prathipati Rajesh	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/271/2026	Bikas Haldar Alias Shibo vs PS Dammapeta	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/273/2026	Kathala Alias Katwala Suresh vs PS Burgampadu	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/274/2026	Gowrla Kalyan vs PS Cherla	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/275/2026	Kurapati Buchaiah Alias Mani vs PS Tekulapally	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/276/2026	KORRA DHARA BABU vs PS Bhadrachalam Town	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/277/2026	KORRA DHARA BABU vs PS Bhadrachalam Town	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/279/2026	Gundam Vishnuvardhan Reddy Alias Vishnu vs PS Kothagudem III Town	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/284/2026	Pawan kumar vs PS Tekulapally	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/287/2026	Pittal Kiran vs PS Burgampadu	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/288/2026	Palle Bharath vs PS Bhadrachalam Town	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/289/2026	Bharat Singh vs PS Tekulapally	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/290/2026	Ramavath Ramesh vs PS Tekulapally	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/291/2026	Bhuri Singh vs Kothagudem I Town	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/258/2026	Vanthala Emalayya vs Ps Dammapeta	23 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/272/2026	Ambati Laxmi Narasimha Goud vs Kothagudem III town	23 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/280/2026	Md Rakheed vs PS Paloncha Town	23 Apr 2026	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 488 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		74
Apr 2026		126
Mar 2026		75
Feb 2026		65
Jan 2026		42
Dec 2025		19
Nov 2025		22
Oct 2025		31
Sep 2025		21
Aug 2025		22
Jul 2025		9
Jun 2025		3

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has S.Sarita handled?

S.Sarita has handled 509 court orders since 2025 at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 39 orders per month.

What types of cases does S.Sarita hear?

Based on available records, S.Sarita primarily handles Criminal matters (Sessions Cases, Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Appeal Suits, Civil Misc. Appeals) and Motor Accident matters (Motor Accident Claims) at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is S.Sarita currently posted?

S.Sarita is posted as Fast Track Special Court for expeditious disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Bhadradri Kothagudem at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex, Bhadradri Kothagudem, Telangana.

Are judgments by S.Sarita available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by S.Sarita are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does S.Sarita dispose cases?

S.Sarita disposes approximately 39 cases per month, based on 509 orders handled over their tenure at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is S.Sarita serving?

S.Sarita has been serving at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex since 2025. and is currently posted there.

Case Types

CRLMP 60%

SC 24%

AS 7%

MVOP 6%

CC 1%

CMA 1%

CRLRP 1%

OS 1%

Posting History

Apr 2025 — Present

Fast Track Special Court for expeditious disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Bhadradri Kothagudem · 41 orders
Apr 2025 — Present

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhadradri Kothagudem · 468 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 4

Other Judges at this Court

Smt.G.Prema Latha

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bhadradri K...

27 orders

Ms. Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum - Judicial Magis...

17 orders

K Sai Sri

I Additional Junior Civil Judge - Cum- I Additiona...

215 orders

Sri V.Vinay Kumar

III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class...

382 orders

Mr. Bathala Ravi Kumar

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Additiona...

935 orders

Sri. K. Kiran Kumar

Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Session...

336 orders

Smt Kavitha Karnati

I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum- I Additional...

210 orders

← View all judges at Kothagudem, PDJ Court Complex