Smt S.Thangamani

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri

Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka) · Prakasham · Andhra Pradesh

Smt S.Thangamani, Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri, is posted at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka), Prakasham, Andhra Pradesh, India. 2,186 court orders on record since 2015. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, EP cases.

2,186

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/169/2011

Sana Peda Venkateswarlu vs Mule nagireddy

25 Apr 2018

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: KANIGIRI

Present: Smt.S.Thangamani, Junior Civil Judge, kanigiri.

Dated this the 25th day of April, 2018

O.S.169/2011

Between:

Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, son of Pitchireddy,

Hindu, aged about 65 years, Agriculture,

Permanent resident of Shankavaram village,

Kanigiri Mandal of Prakasam District.

Presently residing at Shapur Takluq of

Gulbarg District of Maharastra state.

… Plaintif

And

1.Mule Nagireddy, son of Pitchireddy, (died)

Aged about 80 yeas, Hindu, Agriculture,

Shankavaram village and Kanigiri Mandal of Prakasam District.

2.Mule Bramhareddy, son of Mule Nagireddy aged 45 years, Hindu, Agriculture,

Shankavaram village and Kanigiri Mandal of Prakasam District.

3.Mule Peda Bramhaiah, s/o Nagireddy, aged about 45 years, Hindu, agriculturist, resident of Chintalapalem village, Kanigiri

Mandal, Prakasam District.

4.Mule Bala Bramha Reddy, s/o Nagireddy,aged about 42 years, Hindu, agriculturist, resident of Venkateswarapuram, D.No.28/95-74,

Nellore town and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

2 (D.3 and D.4 are added as per orders in I.A.720/2014

dated 16-7-2015)

…. Defendants

The suit coming on 23-4-2018 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri A.Bal Reddy, Advocate for Plaintif and of Sri K.Subbarayudu, Advocate for Defendants 2 to 4, D.1 died, upon perusal of material on record, upon hearing and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:- :: J U D G M E N T ::

1. This is a suit filed for declaration of title of the plaintif and for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, representatives, agents and assignees from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintif, his men, agents, representatives and assignees and for costs of the suit.

2. The brief averments of the Plaint are that the plaint schedule property in S.No.374/B2, 373/2 an extent of Ac.0-14 cents and Ac.0-28 cents of

Sankavaram village, kanigiri Mandal, Prakasam District. The suit schedule property is originally the ancestral property of the plaintif’s family. The suit schedule property is settlement patta granted in the name of Sana Peddaiah who is the grand father of the plaintif at about 90 years ago. Immediate after patta Sana Peddaiah is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property along with his son Pitchaiah.. At the time of Survey and settlement Sana Peddaiah name was entered in the settlement Register,

Sankavaram village. At about 60 years ago, Sana Peddaiah died leaving his only son Sana Pitchaiah(father of the plaintif). After death of Sana Peddaiah,

Sana Pitchaiah and sons Pedda Venkateswarlu (Plaintif), Sana Chinna

Venkateswarlu, Sana Thirupathaiah, Sana Venkateswarlu @ Kunteiah are in 3 joint possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The plaintif acted as Kartha to their Joint Family. At about 25 years ago the family disputes arose between the plaintif and his brothers. On that the plaintif and his brothers orally partitioned entire properties of their father Sana

Pitchaiah into four equal shares. In that partition the suit schedule property and some other properties were allotted to the share of the plaintif. The revenue authorities thoroughly enquired and recognized the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintif and entered plaintif’s name in the revenue records and issued pattadar passbook and title deed in the name of plaintif. The plaintif raised dry crops every year.

The plaintif is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property.

The defendants who were strangers to the suit schedule property and having docile nature and an evil eye over the suit schedule property as land grabbers in the village they have no manner of right, title or possession over the suit schedule property are canvassing in the village that the suit schedule property belongs to them and the plaintif and his brothers have no right, title or possession on it and if necessary they will forcibly enter into the suit schedule property even by use of force. Recently due to rainfalls the plaintif went to the suit schedule land for ploughing it on 2-10-2011 the defendants with their followers obstructed the plaintif and his family members for cultivating the suit schedule land. At the intervention of the village elders the defendants went away. It is no longer safe as the defendants are powerful in the village and they have got rich and men power, the plaintif and his family frequently left the village for cooly works, hence the plaintif is constrained to file the suit. The defendants are contending that the land comprising S.No.373/2 measuring an extent of Ac.0- 25 cents out of the total extent of Ac.0-84 cents and an extent of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/2B out of the total extent of Ac.1-26 cents was succeeded by the 2nd defendant and the revenue authorities have registered the above 4 extents in the name of 1st defendant basing on the 10 (1) account in R.O.R records and issued pattadar pass book and title deed in favour the 2nd defendant and have been regularly booking cultivation of the above lands in the name of the 1st defendant and also registered 1 (B) and 1 (A) records in the name of the 2nd defendant. The plaint schedule land is always in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the plaintif. The plaintif is regularly cultivating the plaint schedule land every year and raising dry crops even till today. The plaintif is in possession but a cloud is cast on the title of the plaintif on account of the written statement filed by the defendants as they are claiming a real title and therefore the plaintif is obliged to seek the relief of the declaration of title and consequential permanent injunction and alternative recovery of possession.

3. D.1 died, D.2 got filed his Written Statement and D.3 and D.4 adopted the written statement of D.2. The brief averments of the written statement and additional written statement are that an extent of Ac.0-14 cents in S.No.373/2 and Ac.0-28 cents in S.No.374/B2, were originally belonged to the ancestors of the plaintif is not true. The allegation that pattadar pass book and title deed were issued in favour of the plaintif entering the name of the plaintif in Revenue records is not true. The allegation that the family of the plaintif have cultivated the schedule land is also not true. The allegation that the plaintif and his brothers are in possession and enjoyment the schedule lands to the knowledge of all the villagers and the defendants and the plaintif has been cultivating the schedule land since more than 60 years till then is also not true. The papers filed by the plaintif are created with the collusion of the Revenue officers tampering the revenue records. The plaintif without filing the documents under which he succeeded the lands has filed the suit creating fake documents which are not creating any title to the plaintif for the schedule 5 lands. The allegation that the plaintif and his brothers are frequently going to Maharashtra and other districts for cooly works and used to cultivate the schedule lands as and when rain falls has been clearly proving that the plaintif is not in possession of the schedule lands. The allegation that the defendants are strangers, evil natured persons and land grabbers in the village, and cast an evil eye and have no manner of right, title or possession of the schedule lands and have been canvassing in the village stating that plaint schedule lands are belonging to them without having right, title, or possession and without filing documents proving their title. The allegation that the defendants have been canvassing in the village that they will forcibly enter into the schedule lands and plough the schedule lands and on 2-10-2011 the defendants with their followers obstructed the plaintif and his family members from cultivating the schedule lands and at that time the village elders intervened and sent the defendants and the defendants are powerful and rich in the village having men power and thereby the plaintif have been constrained to file the suit and other allegations are also not true.

It is further submitted that the plaintif without having right, title, possession or enjoyment of the schedule lands has filed the suit seeking injunction orders against the defendants who are having right, title, possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule lands. Originally the land comprising in

S.No.373/2 admeasuring an extent of Ac.0-25 cents out of the total extent of

Ac.0-84 cents and an extent of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/B2 out of the total extent of Ac.1-26 cents were succeeded by the 1st defendant who is the father of second defendant and the revenue authorities have registered the above extents in the name of father of second defendant basing on the 10 (1) accounts in R.O.R records and issued pattadar pass book and title deed in favour of second defendant and have been regularly booking cultivation of the above lands in the name of father of second defendant and also registered in 1B and 1A records in the name of the 2nd defendant. It is 6 further submitted that the papers filed by the plaintif are also clearly proving that the 2nd defendant and father of second defendant has got right, title, possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule lands. As per the schedule filed by the plaintif the plaintif has no title, possession or enjoyment of the schedule lands and the defendants alone are having right, title, possession and enjoyment of the lands within the boundaries mentioned in the schedule. The allegation that the plaintif is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property is not true. The suit filed by the plaintif alone without impleading his brother who is undivided and living jointly with him as per allegations of the plaint, the suit is not maintainable under law and sufers non-joinder of proper and necessary parties and the same is liable to be dismissed. There is no cause of action for the plaintif to file the suit and the cause of action stated in the plaint has been created for the purpose of filing the suit. They prayed the Hon’ble Court to dismiss the suit.

4. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues and additional issues are framed for trial:- 1.Whether the plaintif is in possession and enjoyment of the Plaint schedule property as on the date of filing of suit ?

2.Whether the plaint schedule property is in possession and enjoyment of the 2nd defendant by way of succession from his father?

3.Whether the plaintif is entitled for permanent injunction over the the plaint schedule properties as prayed for? and 4.To what relief?

Additional issues:-

5.Whether the suit is maintainable for non-joinder of the brother of the plaintif who is proper and necessary party?

6.Whether the plaintif has right to claim the suit schedule property which has been in possession and enjoyment of the defendants by virtue of granting pattadar pass book and title deed registering cultivation accounts in favour of the father of the defendants?

5. During the course of trial, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.19 were marked for plaintif. D.W.1 to D.W.5 were examined and

Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.7 were marked for defendants. Ex.X.1 to Ex.X.13 were marked through P.W.2.

6. Heard both sides.

7. Issue No.1 and 3 :- To prove his case, the plaintif himself got examined as P.W.1 and he got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.19 and he got examined P.W.2 who is Tahsildar and Ex.X.1 to Ex.X.13 were marked through

P.W.2. P.W.1 deposed that the suit schedule property is settlement patta granted in the name of Sana Peddaiah who is the grand father of him at about 90 years ago. Immediate after patta Sana Peddaiah is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property along with his son Pitchaiah.. At the time of Survey and settlement Sana Peddaiah name was entered in the settlement Register, Sankavaram village. At about 60 years ago, Sana

Peddaiah died leaving his only son Sana Pitchaiah. After death of Sana

Peddaiah, Sana Pitchaiah and sons Pedda Venkateswarlu (Plaintif), Sana

Chinna Venkateswarlu, Sana Thirupathaiah, Sana Venkateswarlu @ Kunteiah 8 are in joint possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. He acted as Kartha to their Joint Family. At about 25 years ago the family disputes arose between him and his brothers. On that he and his brothers orally partitioned entire properties of their father Sana Pitchaiah into four equal shares. In that partition the suit schedule property and some other properties were allotted to the share of him. The revenue authorities thoroughly enquired and recognized the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by him and entered his name in the revenue records and issued pattadar passbook and title deed in his name. He raised dry crops every year. He is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The defendants who were strangers to the suit schedule property and having docile nature and an evil eye over the suit schedule property as land grabbers in the village they have no manner of right, title or possession over the suit schedule property are canvassing in the village that the suit schedule property belongs to them and he and his brothers have no right, title or possession on it and if necessary they will forcibly enter into the suit schedule property even by use of force. Recently due to rainfalls he went to the suit schedule land for ploughing it on 2-10-2011 the defendants with their followers obstructed him and his family members for cultivating the suit schedule land. At the intervention of the village elders the defendants went away. It is no longer safe as the defendants are powerful in the village and they have got rich and men power, he and his family frequently left the village for cooly works, hence he is constrained to file the suit. As per orders in I.A.No.888/2016 in O.S.No.169/2011, dated 6-4-2017 amendment carried out. The defendants are contending that the land comprising S.No.373/2 measuring an extent of Ac.0-25 cents out of the total extent of Ac.0-84 cents and an extent of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/2B out of the total extent of Ac.1- 26 cents was succeeded by the 2nd defendant and the revenue authorities have registered the above extents in the name of 1st defendant basing on the 9 10 (1) account in R.O.R records and issued pattadar pass book and title deed in favour the 2nd defendant and have been regularly booking cultivation of the above lands in the name of the 1st defendant and also registered 1 (B) and 1 (A) records in the name of the 2nd defendant. The plaint schedule land is always in exclusive possession and enjoyment of him. He is regularly cultivating the plaint schedule land every year and raising dry crops even till today. He is in possession but a cloud is cast on the title of him on account of the written statement filed by the defendants as they are claiming a real title and therefore he is obliged to seek the relief of the declaration of title and consequential permanent injunction and alternative recovery of possession. It is false that he filed the suit created with the collusion of the revenue officers tampering the revenue records. He without filing of the documents under which he succeeded the lands has filed the suit creating the fake documents which are not creating any title to him for the schedule lands, he without having right, title, possession or enjoyment of the schedule lands has filed this suit seeking injunction orders against them who are having right, title, possession and enjoyment of the plain schedule lands.

Originally the land comprising survey number 373/2 measuring an extent of

Ac.0-28 cents out of total extent of Ac.0-84 cents and an extent of Ac.0-14 cents in S.No.374/2B total extent of Ac.0-84 cents in S.No.374/2B out of the total extent of Ac.1-26 cents were succeeded by the 1st defendant who is the father of second defendant and the revenue authorities have registered the above extents in the name of father of second defendant basing on the 10 (1) accounts in R.O.R records and issued pattadar pass book and title deed in favour of second defendant and have been regularly booking cultivation of the above lands in the name of father of second defendant and also registered in 1B and 1A records in the name of the 2nd defendant. The documents filed by him are created documents for getting exparty injunction orders without having any right, title, possession and enjoyment. The 10 documents filed by the defendants are clearly proving that the 2nd defendant and father of second defendant has got right, title, possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule lands. He has no title, possession or enjoyment of the schedule lands and the defendants alone are having right, title, possession and enjoyment of the lands within the boundaries mentioned in the schedule are all false. He got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.19.

8. P.W.2 deposed that in RSR in survey number 373/2 the name of Sana

Peddaiah is mentioned. In 10(1) Account the name of Sana Pitchaiah is mentioned. In 1(A) Sana Pedda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah is mentioned in

Survey numbers 373/2, 374/2B. The name of Sana Pedda Venkateswarlu, s/o

Pitchaiah is mentioned in 1B in Khata number 1172. He brought faslies 1418 to 1426, the adangal extracts 1415, 1416, 1417 and 1427 are not available. The name of Sana Pedda Venkateswarlu is mentioned in faslies 1418 to 1426 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B. Ex.X.1 to Ex.X13 were marked through him.

9. P.W.1 admitted in her cross-examination that he filed the settlement patta issued in favour of Sana Peddiah. He did not file any document to prove about the partition of the suit schedule property among his brothers and allotment of share towards his share. He further admitted that partition was efected in the presence of elders Papasani Papirddy, Kesireddy and

Madathala Subbareddy. The suit schedule property is his ancestral property.

He allotted other lands to his brothers and took the suit schedule property towards his share. He further admitted that the defendants also filed

Pattadar pass books and title deed, adangal extracts proving that the deceased Nagireddy has got right and title for Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/2B 11 and Ac.0-13 cents in S.No.372/2. He lost his pattadar pass book but he did not apply for duplicate Pattadar pass book.

10. P.W.2 admitted in his cross-examination that re survey and resettlement have taken place in the year 1905. In Ex.X.1 the name of Sana Peddaiah was recorded. Subsequently 10(1) accounts were prepared basing on the right, possession and enjoyment of the individual rights. In Ex.X.2 the names of

Mule Peraiah, Mule Obanna, Mule Pitchaiah, Mule Guravaiah, Sana

Nagamma, Sana Pitchaiah and Sana Nagaiah were registered basing on the rights, possession and enjoyment of the lands comprising in S.No.373/2, 374/B2. In Ex.X.2 the extent of land owned and possessed by above six persons have not been mentioned. But all six persons registered in Ex.X.2 will get equal rights in the above survey numbers. Basing on the ROR act, 1971 and Rule framed in the year, 1989 1B registers are prepared He further admitted that if anybody succeeds property by purchase or by decree passed by civil court the names of persons will be registered in Ex.X.3 1 (A) an extant of Ac.0-13 cents was registered on the name of Mule Nagireddy, s/o

Pitchireddy for S.No.373/2. So also for S.No.374/B2 an extent of Ac.0-12 cents was registered on the name of Mule Nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy i.e.,

Ex.X.3. 1(A) that is Ex.X.3 prepared is final and there is no authority to any authority to alter the same without any order by competent authority. In

Khata No.1211 the name of Mule Nagireddy, S/o Pitchireddy was registered in 1(B) for an extent of Ac.0-12 cents for S.No.374/B2 and for extent of Ac.0- 13 cents for S.No.373/2. Subsequently the Khata No.1211 registered on the name of Mule Nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy was transferred to Khata No.910. In that Khata an extent of Ac.0-12 cents was registered for S.No.374/2 and in

S.No.273/2 was registered for an extent of Ac.0-13 cents that is his mistake in S.No.273/2 was mentione instead of 373/2 it is only mistake crept by the officials by putting S.No.273/2 instead of recording S.,No.373/2. Ex.X.3 12

Adangal extract for fasli 1418the name of Mule nagirddy, s/o Pitchiredy was registered as enjoyer for an extent of Ac.0-13 cents for S.No.373/2 So also in the same fasli for S.No.374/B2 the name of Mule nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy was registered as enjoyer for extent of Ac.0-12 cents. Adangal extract for fasli 1419 i.e. Ex.X.6 an extent of Ac.0-13 cents was registered on the name of Mule Nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy, for S.No.373/2. So also an extent Ac.0-12 cents was registered on the name of Mule Nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy for

S.No.374/B2. In all the adangals Ex.X.5 to Ex.X.13 an extent of Ac.0-13 cents for S.No.374/B2 and for an extent of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.373/2 was registered on the name of Mule Nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy, Their records reveal that Mule Nalgireddy, s/o Pitchireddy has been in possession and enjoyment of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/B2 and for an extent of Ac.0-13 cents in S.No.373/2. Ex.B.1 pattadar pass book, Ex.B.2 title deed were issued by their office in favour of Mule Nagireddy, s/o Pitchireddy for an extent of Ac.0- 12 cents in S.No.374/B2 and for an extent of Ac.0-13 cents in S.No.373/2.

Ex.B.3 ROR is issued by the then Tahsildar, Kanigiri in favour of Mule

Nagireddy, ws/o Pitchireddy for an extent of Ac.0-13 cents in S.No.373/2 and for an extent of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/B2. Ex.B.4 and Ex.B.5 are issued by their office in favour of Mule Nagireddy for an extent of Ac.0-13 cents in

S.No.373/2 and for an extent of Ac.0-12 cents in S.No.374/B2 in favour of

Mule Nagireddy, S/o Pitchi reddy.

11. In re-examination P.W.2 admitted that in Ex.X.2 the column of the

Aasami name of Sana Pitchaiah, s/o Peddaiah was mentioned. In Ex.X.3 the name of Sana Pitchaiah, s/o Peddaiah round up and names Mule nagireddy and others names added but he does not know the reason for roundup the name of Sana Pitchaiah. In Ex.X.4 in Khata number 1211 there is no extension in S.No.373/2 in th e name of Mule Nagireddy. As per Ex.X.5 the khata No.7 is in the name of Mule Nagireddy. At present Mule Nagireddy 13 khata number is changed as 910. in Ex.X.6 the khata No.7 for fasli 1419 is in the name of Mule Nagireddy. In Ex.X.7 the khata No.7 for fasli 1420 is in the name of Mule Nagireddy. In Ex.X.8 there is no extension in the name of Mule

Nagireddy for for fasli number 1421. in Ex.X.9 there is no extension in the name of Mule Nagireddy for fasli number 1422 in Ex.X.10 there is no extension in the name of Mule Nagireddy for fasli number 1423. in Ex.11 there is no extension in the name of Mule Nagireddy for fasli number 1424, in

Ex.X.12 there is no extension in th name of mule Nagireddy for fasli No.1425.

In Ex.X.13 there is no extension in the name of Mule Nagireddy for fasli 1426.

12. The plaintif proved is title and possession. He got marked Ex.A.1 title deed, Ex.A.2 true extract of resurvey and settlement register. In that his name is clearly mentioned as enjoydar and pattadar. As per evidence of

P.W.1 and P.W.2 the plaintif filed settlement patta and title deed and as per evidence of P.W.2 the name of plaintif round up and defendants name added but there is no order in that round up. And the defendants have so many khata numbers instead of extension of khata numbers. Moreover, the defendants got lands basing on partition agreement. There is no right or title or possession basing on the partition agreement. Hence the plaintif proved his title and possession by way of marking Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.19 and the

Tahsildar gave evidence basing on the records and Ex.X.1 to Ex.X.13 were

Marked. Hence the plaintif proved the title, possession and enjoyment over the Plaint Schedule Property. Hence Issue No.1 and 3 are answered in favour of plaintif against the defendants.

13. ISSUE NO.2:- To prove their case, the defendants got examined

D.W.1 to D.W.5 and got marked Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.7. The revenue authorities issued pattadar Passbook in favour of defendants. Mere obtaining revenue 14 records not create any right over the suit schedule properties. As per evidence of P.W.2 the defendants names are added and round up the name of the plaintif without any order. It clearly shows that the defendants obtained passbook from the revenue authorities influencing the revenue authorities. Moreover, the khata numbers of the defendants not extended and there are so many khata numbers in the name of defendants. Hence

Issue No.2 is answered in favour of plaintif and against the defendants.

14. Issued No.5 : Plaintif filed suit on his property only. They have already got partitioned. So non- joinder of parties do not arise. Hence the issue is answered in favour of plaintif and against the defendants.

15. Issue No.6: The plaintif has proved his possession and enjoyment and title by virtue of title deed over the suit schedule property. He has perfect right and title by way of succession and ROR extract. In the light of facts stated above the plaintif proved his title, possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property. The defendants got marked revenue records but there is no link document how they got those properties and correction in

ROR and other revenue records, round up the name of father of plaintif and added the names of defendant without any proper order. Even though the defendants got marked their revenue records, mere getting revenue records no right and title shall be acquired by the defendants. The Tahsildar admitted that no extension of khata numbers and so many khata numbers in the name of defendants and he further admitted that he does not know how the defendants got those properties. Hence this issue is answered in favour of plaintif and against the defendants.

16. Issue No.4 :- In the result, the suit is decreed with costs declaring the plaintif as the absolute owner of the plaint schedule properties and granting consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, representatives, agents, assignees from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintif, his men, representatives, agents and assignees.

Typed to my dictation by the shorthand writer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 25th day of April, 2018.

JUNIOR CIIVIL JUDGE,

Kanigiri.

Appendix of Evidence Witnesses Examined For Palintifs:- For Defendants:

P.W.1 : Sana Peda Venkateswarlu D.W.1: Mule Brahma reddy

P.W.2 : K.V.Satyanarayana D.W.2 : Mule yogi Reddy

D.W.3 :G.Laxmi reddy

D.W.4 : K. Rama Subbareddy

D.W.5: Mule Venkata Reddy

Exhibits Marked

For Plaintif:-

Ex.A.1 : Title Deed in the name of plaintif issued by by revenue authorities.

Ex.A.2 : True extract of resurvey and settlement register.

Ex.A.3 : True extract of 1A register

Ex.A.4 : True extract of No.3 adangal 16

Ex.A.5 : 1B extract obtained from Mee seva in the name of plaintif dated 3- 10-2017.

Ex.A.6 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1421 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.7 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1422 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017.

Ex.A.8 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1423 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.9 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1424 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.10 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1425 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.11 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1426 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.12 : No.3 adangal for survey number 373/2 for fasli 1427 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.13 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1421 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.14 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1422 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.15 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1423 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.16 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1424 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.17 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1425 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017 17

Ex.A.18 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1426 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

Ex.A.19 : No.3 adangal for survey number 374/2B for fasli 1427 in the name of plaintif, dated 16-8-2017

For Defendants:-

Ex.B.1 : Pattadar pass book issued in favour of deceased father of

Defendants.

Ex.B.2 : Title deed issued in favour of deceased father of Defendants

Ex.B.3 : Computer copy of 1B register attested by Tahsidar

Ex.B.4 : Adangal extract for fasli 1419 (marked subject to objection)

Ex.B.5 : Adangal extract for fasli 1420 (marked subject to objection)

Ex.B.6 : Original Partition Agreement dated 11-7-1929

Ex.B.7 : Statement of Encumberance on property from mee seva dated 19-1- 2018

Documents Marked through P.W.2, Tahsildar.

Ex.X.1 : Attested copy of RSR registered on the name of Sana Peddaiah of Survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.2 : Attested copy of 10(1) account registered on the name of Sana Pitchaiah of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.3 : Attested copy of 1(A) account registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.4 : Attested copy of 1B (ROR) account registered on the name of Sana Pedda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.5 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1418 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.6 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1419 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.7 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1420 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.8 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1421 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.9 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1422 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.10 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1423 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.11 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1424 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.12 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1425 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

Ex.X.13 : Attested copy of No.3 adangal registered on the name of Sana Peda Venkateswarlu, s/o Pitchaiah of fasli No. 1426 of survey numbers 373/2 and 374/2B.

J.CJ., Kanigiri.

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: KANIGIRI

Present: Smt.S.Thangamani, Junior Civil Judge, kanigiri.

Dated this the 12th day of April, 2018

O.S.1/2010

Between:

Sammani Bhagya Laxmi, w/o Venkata Ramana Rao,

Hindu, House Wife, aged about 55 years, resident of D.No.574, 9th ward, Kanigiri village and Mandal of Prakasam District.

… Plaintif

And

1.Sirimamilla Malakondamma, wife of Sri Bala Guravaiah, house wife, aged 35 years, 2.Sirimamilla Bala Guravaiah, s/o Guravaiah, House welfare officer, B.C.Hostel, Kanigiri, aged 45 years,

Both are Hindus, wife and husband, residents of

N.G.O colony, Venkateswara Cinema Theatre,

Kanigiri village and Mandal, Prakasam District. …. Defendants

This is a suit filed for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, assignees, legal heirs and representatives from in any way interference or causing obstructions with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property by the plaintif and for costs of the suit. Plaint Presented on: 19-1-2010 and filed on: 19-1-2010

Court fee :- For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction the relief of Permanent Injunction is notionally valued at Rs.5,000/- on which a court fee of Rs.411/- is paid u/s 26 ( c) of APCF and SV Act, 1956.

The suit coming on 1-3-2018 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri J.S.Babu rao, Bala Bramham Murahari, Advocates for Plaintif and of Sri Abdul Gafar Shai Advocate for Defendants, upon perusal of material on record, upon hearing and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court doth order and decree:-

1. that the suit be and the same is hereby dismissed;

2. that the defendants do pay to the plaintif a sum of Rs.nill/- towards costs of the suit. (No cm and fc filed) ( Plaint Schedule is attached herewith the decree) 20

Given under my hand and the seal of this court, this the 12th day of April, 2018.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KANIGIR.

TABLE OF COSTS

For Plaintifs: For Defendants:

Stamp on Vakalat Rs. 2-00 No cm and fc filed Stamp on plaint Rs. 411-00 --------------- Rs. 413-00 ------------------ no cm and fc filed

J.C.J.,Kanigiri

CC/68/2018 Acquitted

Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Bandi Sivakumar

26 Apr 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : : KANIGIRIIN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : : KANIGIRI

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT in Calendar Case No. 68 of 2018 in

Cr.No. 40 of 2017.

1.Date of Offence:13-11-2017

2.Date of report or complaint:13-11-2017

3.Date of taken on file:13-03-2018

4.Date of apprehension of accused:05-01-2018

5.Date of release on bail:--

6.Date of commencement of trial:02-04-2018

7.Date of close of trial:25-04-2018

8.Date of Sentence or Order:26-04-2018

9.Complainant: Sub-Inspector of Police, Veligandla P.S

10. Description of accused:

1. Bandi Sivakumar, S/o. Sambaiah, age 39 years, Rajaka caste, Yadava Bazar,

Krishna Mandir, Old Guntur Town. (A1 Splitup case in C.C.NO. 89/2018, dt. 27-03- 2018).

2. Akkinapalli Ramesh, S/o. Venkateswarlu, 30 years, Rajaka caste, Karlapadu

Village of Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur District. …… Accused (A2)

11. Section of Law:U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code.

12. Plea of accused:Pleaded not guilty

13. Finding of the Court:Found not guilty 2

14. Sentence or Order: Sentence or Order:In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishableIn the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable

U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) ofU/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) of

Criminal Procedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chainCriminal Procedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chain in in

CPR.No. 19/2018already given to interim custody of A.Thirupathamma(PW3) hoCPR.No. 19/2018already given to interim custody of A.Thirupathamma(PW3) holdslds good after expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is herebygood after expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is hereby directed to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases. directed to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases.

Explanation for the delay and remarks: This case was taken on file on 13-03- 2018 against the accused. On 27-03-2018 A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. A1 not produced from District Jail. This case is splitup against A1 and numbered as in

CC.NO. 90/2018. Copies furnished to A2, under section 207 Criminal Procedure

Code. On 28-03-2018 accused A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. Accused examined U/Sec.239 Criminal Procedure Code. A Charge framed U/Sec. 379 of

Indian Penal Code read over and explained the telugu for which he denied the guilty and claimed to be tried. On 02-04-2018 A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. LW1 to LW3 examined as PW1 to PW3 and Ex.P1 and M.O.1 marked. On 06-04-2018 A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. LW7, LW5 and LW6 examined as PW4 to PW6 and Ex.P2 marked. On 20-04-2018 LW11 and LW9 examined as PW7 and PW8 and

Ex.P3 marked. On 25-04-2018 accused produced from District Jail, Ongole. LW13 and LW12 examined as PW9 and PW10 and Exs.P4 and P5 marked. The evidence of LW4, LW8 and LW10 given up by learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Accordingly

Prosecution evidence closed. On 26-04-2018 accused examined U/Sec. 313

Criminal Procedure Code he denied the stated no defence evidence and there is no incriminating material against him and heard arguments on both sides and Judgment

pronounced (V.S.J). Hence, the delay.

Sd/-S.Thangamani

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

KANIGIRI.

Copy submitted to:

The Hon’ble I-Addl. Dist., & Sessions Judge, Prakasam District, Ongole.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRTE OF I-CLASS:: KANIGIRI

Present : Smt S.Thangamani

Judicial Magistrate of I-Class, Kanigiri.

Thursday this the 26th day of April, 2018.

CC.No. 68 of 2018

Between:

State: Sub-Inspector of Police, Veligandla P.S .… Complainant

Vs.,

1. Bandi Sivakumar, S/o. Sambaiah, age 39 years, Rajaka caste, Yadava Bazar,

Krishna Mandir, Old Guntur Town. (A1 Splitup case in C.C.NO. 90/2018, dt. 27-03- 2018).

2. Akkinapalli Ramesh, S/o. Venkateswarlu, 30 years, Rajaka caste, Karlapadu

Village of Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur District. …… Accused (A2)

This case is coming on 26-04-2018 this day before me for final hearing in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant and Legal Aid Counsel

for accused A2, and upon hearing their arguments and the matter and having stood

over for consideration to this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Veligandla P.S filed a charge sheet against the accused A2 in Cr.No. 40/2017, U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code with the following allegations:

2. The brief facts of charge sheet is that: LW1/ Venna Venkateswara Reddy is living by grazing she buffaloes, daily she drove her buffaloes to Kattakindapalli fields. As usual on 13-11-2017 at 10.00 hours LW3/Annapureddy Thirupathamma while going to buffaloes grazing towards southern direction to his village at a distance of 1.5 k.m while LW3/Annapureddy Thirupathamma standing beside R & B road and grazing buffaloes two unknown persons came ner to LW3 on Motor cycle and one of them asked about way to proceed Nagulavaram Village and another one pulled 22 grams of gold saradu worth about Rs. 50,000/-, and decamped with the booty towards southern direction from village LW2/Nallabothula Chenna Krishnaiah who came near to LW3/Annapureddy Thirupathamma made a call to LW1/ Venna 4

Venkateswara Reddy and narrated the same. Immediately LW1/ Venna

Venkateswara Reddy along with his villagers searched for offenders in surrounding villages but in vine. After LW1/ Venna Venkateswara Reddy reported the same in the police station. Basing on the report of LW1/ Venna Venkateswara Reddy, while

S.I of police engaged in other duty LW12/SK.Nagoor Meeravali, registered the report as a case in Crime No. 40/2017 under section 379 of IPC (Chain snatching) of

Veligandla P.S. On 13-11-2017 at 17.00 hours, submitted the originall copy of F.I.R, along with the report of the complainant to this court of Kanigiri and remaining copies of F.I.Rs to all officers concerned and took up investigation into. During the course of investigation LW12/SK.Nagoor Meeravali examined LWs 1 to 6 and recorded their statements under section 161 (3) Cr.P.C. And LW12/SK.Nagoor Meeravali visited the scene of offence and prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence and made sincere efforts to detect the case. On 03-12-2017 LW13/P.Chowdaiah-S.I took up further investigationin this case have verified the investigation made by

LW12/SK.Nagoor Meeravali and found it on correct lines. LW11/M.Sreenivasarao-I/C recovered the stolen property i.e., 22 grams of gold sarudu from A1 and A2. During the course of investigation LW13/P.Chowdaiah-S.I produced the A1 and A2 on

before this court Kanigiri on P.T warrant on 12-01-2018 and on 05-01-2018

respectively. On 19-12-2017 on request of LW13/P.Chowdaiah-S.I, LW9/Surepalli

Chinna Guravaiah and LW10/Erla Polaiah conducted property identification parade to LW1/Venna Venkateswara Reddy. After completion of investigation

LW13/P.Chowdaiah-S.I filed the charge sheet.

3.This court took cognizance of case against the accused A2, for the offences punishable U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code.

4.Copies of documents were furnished to accused A2 as required under section 207 of Criminal Procedure Code.

5.Accused A2 examined under section 239 of Criminal Procedure Code, a charge framed U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code read over explained in Telugu, for which he denied the pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.During the course of trial, the prosecution has LW1 to LW3, LW7, LW5, LW6,

Lw11, LW9, LW13 and LW12 examined as PW1 to PW10 got marked Exs.P1 to P5 and M.O.1 marked. The evidence of LW4, LW8 and LW10 given up by learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor. Accordingly prosecution evidence closed.

7.After closure of Prosecution evidence, accused A2 examined U/Sec.313 of

Criminal Procedure Code by explaining the incriminating prosecution evidence in question form in Telugu, for which he denied and reported that there is no defense evidence.

8. Heard arguments on bothsides.

9.Now the Point for determination is that: Whether the Prosecution has proved the guilt of accused A2, for the offence punishable U/Sec. 379 of Indian

Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt?

10. PW1 deposed that on 13.11.2017 he received phone call from PW2 and informed that when PW3 went for grassing our cattle at about 10.0 a.m. PW3 reached 1 ½ kilometer of Northern side our village on main road by that time two persons came on motor bike and suddenly snatched gold chain from neck of PW3 and escaped both of them on motor bike. PW3 made cries then PW2 came to the place and asked about the incident. After that PW3 came to his home and informed the same to me. The gold chain weighed about 22 grams. On the same day himself and PW3 went to the Kanigiri Police station and gave report about the incident. He can’t identify the persons who snatched gold chain. Ex.P1 is Report.

11. PW2 deposed that on 13.11.2017 at about 10.00 a.m. He went to his fields.

He heard cries of PW3 who was grassing cattle nearby his fields. Immediately he went to PW3 and asked what happened. When she replied two persons came on 6 motor bike and suddenly snatched gold chain from neck of PW3 and escaped both of them on motor bike. He informed the same to PW1 through cell phone. On the same day PW1 and PW3 went to the Kanigiri Police station and gave report about the incident. He can’t identify the persons who snatched gold chain.

12. PW3 deposed that at about four months back on one day she went to to graze cattle to the northern side of their village and she has standing on main road.

At that time two persons came on motor bike and suddenly snatched gold chain from her neck and escaped both of them on motor bike. She informed the same to PW1 and PW2. On the same day himself and PW1 went to the Kanigiri Police station and gave report about the incident. She can’t identify the persons who snatched gold chain. M.O.1 is gold chain(Sarudu).

13. PW4 deposed that on 11-12-2017 Inkollu Circle Inspector called him to act as mediator on credible information about the movement of the accused. Himself along with LW8/A.Babaiah and police staff went to Alavalapadu cross road at National

Highway No.16. C.I. conducting vehicle checking at about 8.00 a.m. we found four persons in one car. Police examined them and discloses that four persons were accused in various crimes in the state of A.P. In their presence the four persons discloses their names and address particulars and also confessed about the commission of theft of gold chain at Kattakindapalli village, Veligandla P.S.

jurisdiction. Police asked one person about the property and from the possession of the one person by name A.Ramesh police seized to gold chains in one plastic cover.

The person who is standing in the accused box is the person police arrested in his presence. Police arrested another three persons also and also seized motor bikes other gold ornaments from the possession of four persons in his presence under cover of mediatornama, dated 11.12.2017. Himself and LW8/A.Babaiah attested as mediators. Ex.P2 is certified copy of Mediatornama, dated 11.12.2017. M.O.1 was recovered from A2 in his presence.

14. PW5 deposed that at about four months back on one day at 10.00 a.m.

Himself and PW3 went to our fields. He was cutting grass for cattle and PW3 was standing in the road. He heard cries of PW3 and rushed to her. PW3 stated me that some unknown persons came on motor bike pull away gold chain from her neck.

After that himself and PW3 went to our house. After that PW3 and PW1 went to police station and gave report.

15. PW6 deposed that on 13.11.2017 at 10.00 a.m. himself and PW3 went to our fields. He was doing work in his field. PW3 was standing in the road for grassing cattle. He heard cries of PW3 and rushed to her. PW3 stated him that some unknown persons came on motor bike pull away gold chain from her neck.

After that himself and PW3 went to our house. After that PW3 and PW1 went to police station and gave report.

16. PW7 deposed that on 11.12.2017 at about 9.00 a.m. himself along with his staff on credible information about the movement of accused we conducting vehicle checking at Alavalapadu cross road. On that we stopped one car bearing No.AP16

BJ 7259. We observed four persons in that car. He enquired them about the names and particulars and replied that Bandi Siva Kumar-A1 and Akkinapalli Ramesh-A2 in this case and Chinthala Sisindri, Poojala Ramu. On enquiry in the presence of mediators they confessed that they are living on committing theft and also they committed theft of one car at Guntur on September, 2017 and also confessed that they committed theft of one two wheeler at Chimakurthi bearing No.AP 27 BK 1872.

On riding on that motor bike on 09.11.2017 A1 and A2 snatched gold chain from one lady while she was drove her she buffaloes in to the fields at Kothuru village, Kanigiri

Mandal. On 13.11.2017 A1 and A2 snatched gold chain from PW1 while she was drove her she buffaloes in to the fields at Kattakrindapalli village, Veligandla Mandal.

He asked about the stolen property then A2 shows brought them from his pocket on a plastic cover. On his enquiry the accused also confessed about the committal of various offences in the District. He seized two gold chains along with motor bike 8 from the possession of the accused and arrested the accused under cover of mediatornama. After that he send the accused for Judicial Remand. He informed about the recovery of stolen property to the S.H.O., Kanigiri P.S. and S.H.O., of

Veligandla P.S. and handed over the seized property which was stolen property in this case to the concerned S.H.O.

17. PW8 deposed that on 10.12.2017 at about 10.00 a.m. S.I. of police,

Veligandla called him to act as mediator for identification property which was recovered from the accused. On that himself and LW10/Erla. Polaiah took gold chain from S.I. of police and gathered two identical gold chains from another shop and conducted identification property by PW1 at Z.P.High School, Veligandla. PW1 identified gold chain which was given by S.I. to us as it belongs to her. So that he drafted identification Mahazar. He returned said property to the S.I. Himself and

LW10/Erla. Polaiah attested on identification Mahazar as mediators. Ex.P3 is the

Identification Mahazar, dated 10.12.2017.

18. PW9 deposed that on 03.12.2017 he took up investigation in this case and perused the investigation done by PW10 and found it correct lines. On 11.12.2017

PW7 informed me about the arrest of the accused and recovery of stolen property.

On 12.01.2018 A1 produced before this Hon’ble Court on P.T. Warrant and also he received stolen property from PW7. 05.01.2018 A2 produced before this Hon’ble

Court on P.T. Warrant. On 19.12.2017 he made preparation for property identification parade through PW1 with PW8 and LW10/Erla. Polaiah. PW1 identified property which was received from PW7 as stolen property in this case. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the A1 and A2, U/Sec.379 of I.P.C.

19. PW10 deposed that on 13.11.2017 at about 5.00 p.m. PW1 came to the P.S.

and presented a written report he registered the same as case in Cr.No.40/2017,

U/Sec.379 of I.P.C. He submitted the original F.I.R to the Hon’ble J.F.C.M.Court,

Kanigiri and copies to all concerned officers. Ex.P4 is the F.I.R. He secured the

PW1, PW2, PW5 and PW6 and PW3, LW4/Nallabothula Chennaiah and examined 9 them and recorded their statements U/s.161(3) Cr.P.C. at Police station.

Immediately he visited the scene of offence situated at Kattakrindapalli village fields and prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence. Ex.P5 is the Rough Sketch.

After that he hand over the C.D. file to PW9 for further investigation.

20. PW1 is the defacto complainant, she cannot identified the person who20. PW1 is the defacto complainant, she cannot identified the person who snacks gold chain. PW2 is the ears evidence, he also cannot identified the personsnacks gold chain. PW2 is the ears evidence, he also cannot identified the person who snacks the gold chain. PW3 also not identified the person who snacks the goldwho snacks the gold chain. PW3 also not identified the person who snacks the gold chain. chain.

21. PW4 admitted in his cross examination the police arrested the accused in his revenue limits therefore police called him to act as a mediator after seized the property and arrested the accused. the mediatornama drafted that only one time i.e., 9-00 a. m to 11-30 am the second mediator drafted from 1-00 p.m is not drafted in front of him and he did not signed in that mediatornama. As per the mediatornama the police only drafting the mediatornama but not seized the property from various places mediatornama the police leave to him and proceeded to seized in stolen property it clearly shows that PW4’s evidence in that presence he was not acted as mediator of 2nd mediatoranama in his presence no property was seized by the police seizurenama not proved.

22. PW7 admitted in his cross examination he has not personal knowledge22. PW7 admitted in his cross examination he has not personal knowledge about the arrest of the accused of the stolen property from the accused. he broughtabout the arrest of the accused of the stolen property from the accused. he brought the accused before this court on P.T warrant. Hence the prosecution failed to provethe accused before this court on P.T warrant. Hence the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.

23. In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec. 37923. In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) of Criminalof Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) of Criminal

Procedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chainProcedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chain in CPR.No. in CPR.No.

19/2018already given to interim custody of A.Thirupathamma(PW3) ho19/2018already given to interim custody of A.Thirupathamma(PW3) holds goodlds good after expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is herebyafter expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is hereby directed to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases. directed to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, corrected and pronounced by me in open Dictated to the Personal Assistant, corrected and pronounced by me in open

court on this the 26thcourt on this the 26th day of April, 2018. day of April, 2018.

Sd/- S.Thangamani

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I-CLASS,

KANIGIRI.

Appendix of evidenceAppendix of evidence Witness examinedWitness examined For Prosecution:For Prosecution: For defence: For defence: PW1: Venna Venkateswara ReddyPW1: Venna Venkateswara Reddy -- NIL -- -- NIL -- PW2: Nallabothula Chenna KrishnaiahPW2: Nallabothula Chenna Krishnaiah PW3: Annapureddy ThirupathammaPW3: Annapureddy Thirupathamma PW4: B.Surendhra BabuPW4: B.Surendhra Babu PW5: Annapureddy SrilakshmammaPW5: Annapureddy Srilakshmamma PW6: Venna ThirupathireddyPW6: Venna Thirupathireddy PW7: M.Sreenivasa RaoPW7: M.Sreenivasa Rao PW8: Surepalli Chinna GuravaiahPW8: Surepalli Chinna Guravaiah PW9: P.ChowdaiahPW9: P.Chowdaiah PW10: SK.Nagoor MeeravaliPW10: SK.Nagoor Meeravali Documents marked on behalf of prosecution Documents marked on behalf of prosecution Ex.P1: Report of PW1Ex.P1: Report of PW1

Ex.P2: Certified copy of Mediatornama, dated 11-12-2017Ex.P2: Certified copy of Mediatornama, dated 11-12-2017

Ex.P3: Identification Mahazar, dated 10-12-2017.Ex.P3: Identification Mahazar, dated 10-12-2017.

Ex.P4: First Information Report of PW10.Ex.P4: First Information Report of PW10.

Ex.P5: Rough sketch of PW10.Ex.P5: Rough sketch of PW10.

Documents marked on behalf of defense Documents marked on behalf of defense

--- NIL ------ NIL ---

Material objects marked Material objects marked

M.O.1: Gold ChainM.O.1: Gold Chain

Sd/- S.ThangamaniSd/- S.Thangamani

J.F.C.M.KANIGIRI.J.F.C.M.KANIGIRI.

CC/46/2018 Acquitted

A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Bandi Siva Kumar

26 Apr 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : : KANIGIRIIN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : : KANIGIRI

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT in Calendar Case No. 46 of 2018 in

Cr.No. 211 of 2017.

1.Date of Offence:09-11-2017

2.Date of report or complaint:09-11-2017

3.Date of taken on file:20-02-2018

4.Date of apprehension of accused:11-12-2017

5.Date of release on bail:--

6.Date of commencement of trial:02-04-2018

7.Date of close of trial:25-04-2018

8.Date of Sentence or Order:26-04-2018

9.Complainant: Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S

10. Description of accused:

1. Bandi Sivakumar, S/o. Sambaiah, age 39 years, Rajaka caste, Yadava Bazar, Krishna Mandir, Old Guntur Town. (A1 Splitup case in C.C.NO. 89/2018, dt. 27-03- 2018).

2. Akkinapalli Ramesh, S/o. Venkateswarlu, 30 years, Rajaka caste, Karlapadu Village of Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur District. …… Accused (A2)

11. Section of Law:U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code.

12. Plea of accused:Pleaded not guilty

13. Finding of the Court:Found not guilty

14. Sentence or Order: Sentence or Order: In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable

U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) ofU/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) of

Criminal Procedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chainCriminal Procedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chain in in

CPR.No. 4/2018 already given to interim custody of defacto complainant holds goodCPR.No. 4/2018 already given to interim custody of defacto complainant holds good after expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is hereby directedafter expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is hereby directed to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases. to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases.

2 . Explanation for the delay and remarks: This case was taken on file on 20-02-2018 against the accused. On 27-03-2018 A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. A1 not produced from District Jail. This case is splitup against A1 and numbered as in

CC.NO.89/2018. Copies furnished to A2, under section 207 Criminal Procedure Code.

On 28-03-2018 accused A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. Accused examined

U/Sec.239 Criminal Procedure Code. A Charge framed U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal

Code read over and explained the telugu for which he denied the guilty and claimed to be tried. On 02-04-2018 A2 produced from District Jail, Ongole. LW1 to LW3 examined as PW1 to PW3 and Ex.P1 and M.O.1 marked. On 06-04-2018 A2 produced from

District Jail, Ongole. LW5 examined as PW5 and Ex.P2 marked. On 20-04-2018 LW7 and LW9 examined as PW5 and PW6 and Ex.P3 marked. On 25-04-2018 accused produced from District Jail, Ongole. LW10 examined as PW7 and Exs.P4 and P5 marked. The evidence of LW4, 6, 8 given up by learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

Accordingly Prosecution evidence closed. On 26-04-2018 accused examined U/Sec.

313 Criminal Procedure Code he denied the stated no defence evidence and there is no incriminating material against him and heard arguments on both sides and

Judgment pronounced (V.S.J). Hence, the delay.

Sd/- S.Thangamani

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

KANIGIRI.

Copy submitted to:

The Hon’ble I-Addl. Dist., & Sessions Judge, Prakasam District, Ongole.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRTE OF I-CLASS:: KANIGIRI

Present : Smt S.Thangamani

Judicial Magistrate of I-Class, Kanigiri.

Thursday this the 26th day of April, 2018.

CC.No. 46 of 2018

Between:

State: Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S.… Complainant

Vs.,

1. Bandi Sivakumar, S/o. Sambaiah, age 39 years, Rajaka caste, Yadava Bazar,

Krishna Mandir, Old Guntur Town. (A1 Splitup case in C.C.NO. 89/2018, dt. 27-03- 2018).

2. Akkinapalli Ramesh, S/o. Venkateswarlu, 30 years, Rajaka caste, Karlapadu

Village of Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur District. …… Accused (A2)

This case is coming on 26-04-2018 this day before me for final hearing in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Complainant and Legal Aid Counsel

for accused A2, and upon hearing their arguments and the matter and having stood

over for consideration to this day, the court delivered the following:

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

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S filed a charge sheet against the accused A2 in Cr.No. 211/2017, U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code with the following allegations:

2. The brief facts of charge sheet is that: LW1/Thammineni Venkata

Subbulu is living by grazing she buffaloes, daily she drove her buffaloes to Kotturu fields. As usual on 09-11-2017 afternoon she drove her she buffaloes to the fields and after grazing on the evening while she returning home, at about 16-30 hours when she reached near curve turning of Kalagatla road by the time two unknown offenders came on her rear side on their motor cycle and stopped their motor cycle in front of her, and the pillion rider of motor cycle get-down from motor cycle and suddenly he snatched the gold chain (Sarudu) from the neck of LW1/Thammineni

Venkata Subbulu and decamped with the booty. On that LW1/Thammineni Venkata 4

Subbulu raised cried, but no one present there, LW4/Atla Venkateswarlu hearing the cries of LW1/Thammineni Venkata Subbulu, later LW1/Thammineni Venkata Subbulu came to her house and informed the same to LW2/Thammineni Venkatareddy and

LW3/Thammineni Venkateswarlu and reported the same in the police station. Basing on the report of LW1/Thammineni Venkata Subbulu. LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I registered the same as a case in Cr.No.211/2017, under section 379 of Indian Penal

Code of Kanigiri P.S on 09-11-2017 at 18-00 hours and submitted the original FIR along with the report of LW1/Thammineni Venkata Subbulu to this court Kanigiri and investigated into. During the course of investigation LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I examined LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I, LW2/Thammineni Venkatareddy, LW3/Thammi and LW4/Atla Venkateswarlu and recorded their statements under section 161(3) of

Cr.P.C., and LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I visited the scene of offence and prepared rough sketch of ht scene of offence and made sincere efforts to detect the case.

Later on 11-12-2017 LW9/M.Sreenivasa Rao-Inspector of Police arrested the A1 and

A2. A1 and A2 confessed in this case also, and LW9/M.Sreenivasa Rao-Inspector of

Police recovered the stolen property i..e, 3 sovereigns of gold Sarudu from A1 and

A2. During the course of investigation LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I produced the A1 and A2 before this court Kanigiri on P.T.Warrant on 18-12-2017. On 19-12-2017 on request of LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I, LW7/Shaik Basha Mohiddin-V.R.O and

Lw8/Shaik Khasimpeera-V.R.O conducted property identification parade to

LW1/Thammineni Venkata Subbulu. After the completion of investigation

LW10/U.Sreenivasulu-S.I filed the charge sheet.

3.This court took cognizance of case against the accused A2, for the offences punishable U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code.

4.Copies of documents were furnished to accused as required under section 207 of Criminal Procedure Code.

6.During the course of trial, the prosecution has LW1 to LW3, LW5, LW7, LW9 and LW10 examined as PW1 to PW7 got marked Exs.P1 to P5 and M.O.1 marked.

The evidence of LW4, LW6 and LW8 given up by learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor. Accordingly prosecution evidence closed.

7.After closure of Prosecution evidence, accused A2 examined U/Sec.313 of

Criminal Procedure Code by explaining the incriminating prosecution evidence in question form in Telugu, for which he denied and reported that there is no defense evidence.

8. Heard arguments on bothsides.

9.Now the Point for determination is that: Whether the Prosecution has proved the guilt of accused, for the offence punishable U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal

Code beyond all reasonable doubt?

10. PW1 deposed that at about four months back on one day after noon when she returned after grassing their cattle at about 4.30 p.m. She reached Kalagatla road by that time two persons came on motor bike and stopped before her and one person asking some address and another person suddenly snatched his gold chain from her neck and escaped both of them on motor bike. She made cries that no one was there to rescue her. After that she went to her home and informed the same to her son. The gold chain weighed about 24 grams. After two hours herself and PW2 went to the Kanigiri Police station and gave report about the incident. She can’t identify the persons who snatched her gold chain. After one month police informed her about the recovery of her gold chain and shown to her at Z.P.High School,

Kanigiri. Ex.P1 is Report. M.O.1 is gold chain(Sarudu).

11. PW2 deposed that on 09.11.2017 when PW1 returned after grassing their cattle at about 4.30 p.m. She reached Kalagatla road by that time two persons came on motor bike and stopped before PW1 and one person asking some address and another person suddenly snatched gold chain from neck of PW1 and escaped both of them on motor bike. PW1 made cries that no one was there to rescue me. After that PW1 came to his home and informed the same to him. The gold chain weighed about 24 grams. After two hours himself and PW1 went to the Kanigiri Police station and gave report about the incident.

12. PW3 deposed that on 09.11.2017 when PW1 returned after grassing their cattle at about 4.30 p.m. She reached Kalagatla road by that time two persons came on motor bike and stopped before PW1 and one person asking some address and another person suddenly snatched gold chain from neck of PW1 and escaped both of them on motor bike. PW1 made cries that no one was there to rescue me. After that PW1 came to his home and informed the same to him. The gold chain weighed about 24 grams. After two hours PW1 and PW2 went to the Kanigiri Police station and gave report about the incident

13. PW4 deposed that on 11.12.2017 Inkollu Circle Inspector called him to act as mediator on credible information about the movement of the accused. Himself along with LW8/Shaik Khasimpeera and police staff went to Alavalapadu cross road at National Highway No.16. C.I. conducting vehicle checking at about 8.00 a.m. we found four persons in one car. Police examined them and discloses that four persons were accused in various crimes in the state of A.P. In their presence the four persons discloses their names and address particulars and also confessed about the commission of theft of gold chain at Kothuru village, Kanigiri P.S.

jurisdiction. Police asked one person about the property and from the possession of the one person by name A.Ramesh police seized to gold chains in one plastic cover.

The person who is standing in the accused box is the person police arrested in his presence. Police arrested another three persons also and also seized motor bikes 7 other gold ornaments from the possession of four persons in his presence under cover of mediatornama, dated 11.12.2017. Himself and LW8/Shaik Khasimpeera attested as mediators. Ex.P2 is certified copy of Mediatornama, dated 11.12.2017.

M.O.1 was recovered from A2 in his presence.

14. PW5 deposed that on 10.12.2017 at about 9.00 a.m. Sub-Inspector of police,

Kanigiri called him to act as mediator for identification property which was recovered from the accused. On that himself and LW8/Shaik Khasimpeera took gold chain from Sub Inspector of police and gathered two identical gold chains from another shop and conducted identification property by PW1 at Z.P.High School, Kanigiri.

PW1 identified gold chain which was given by S.I. to us as it belongs to her. So that he drafted identification Mahazar. He returned said property to the S.I. himself and

LW8/Shaik Khasimpeera attested on identification Mahazar as mediators. Ex.P3 is the Identification Mahazar, dated 10.12.2017.

15. PW6 deposed that on 11.12.2017 at about 9.00 a.m. himself along with his staff on credible information about the movement of accused we conducting vehicle checking at Alavalapadu cross road. On that we stopped one car bearing No.AP16

On riding on that motor bike on 9.11.2017 A1 and A2 snatched gold chain from PW1 while she was drove her she buffaloes in to the fields at Kothuru village, Kanigiri

Mandal. On 13.11.2017 A1 and A2 snatched gold chain from another lady while she was drove her she buffaloes in to the fields at Kattakrindapalli village, Veligandla

Mandal. He asked about the stolen property then A2 shows brought them from his pocket on a plastic cover. On his enquiry the accused also confessed about the 8 committal of various offences in the District. He seized two gold chains along with motor bike from the possession of the accused and arrested the accused under cover of mediatornama. After that he send the accused for Judicial Remand. He informed about the recovery of stolen property to the S.H.O., Kanigiri P.S. and

S.H.O., of Veligandla P.S. and handed over the seized property which was stolen property in this case to the concerned S.H.O.

16. PW7 deposed that on 09.11.2017 at about 6.00 p.m. PW1 came to the P.S.

and presented a written report he registered the same as case in Cr.No.211/2017,

U/Sec.379 of Indian Penal Code submitted the original F.I.R. to this Court, Kanigiri and copies to all concerned officers. Ex.P4 is the First Information Report. He secured the PW1 to PW3 and LW4/Atla Venkateswarlu on examined them and recorded their statements U/Sec.161(3) of Cr.P.C. at Police station. Immediately he visited the scene of offence situated at Kothuru village fields and prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence. Ex.P5 is the Rough Sketch. On 11.12.2017 PW6 informed me about the arrest of the accused and recovery of stolen property. On 18.12.2017 A1 and A2 produced before this court on P.T. Warrant and also he received stolen property from PW6. On 19.12.2017 he made preparation for property identification parade through PW1 with PW5 and LW8/Shaik Khasimpeera.

PW1 identified property which was received from PW6 as stolen property in this case. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the A1 and A2,

U/Sec.379 of Indian Penal Code.

17.17.PW1 is the defacto complainant who gave report to the police. She statedPW1 is the defacto complainant who gave report to the police. She stated that she cannot identified the person who snacks her gold chain. PW2 is the ear thethat she cannot identified the person who snacks her gold chain. PW2 is the ear the evidence. PW4 admitted in his cross examination the police arrested the accused inevidence. PW4 admitted in his cross examination the police arrested the accused in his revenue limits therefore police called him to act as a mediator after seized thehis revenue limits therefore police called him to act as a mediator after seized the property and arrested the accused. the mediatornama drafted that only one time i.e.,property and arrested the accused. the mediatornama drafted that only one time i.e., 9-00 a. m to 11-30 am the second mediator drafted from 1-00 p.m is not drafted in9-00 a. m to 11-30 am the second mediator drafted from 1-00 p.m is not drafted in front of him and he did not signed in that mediatornama. As per the mediatornamafront of him and he did not signed in that mediatornama. As per the mediatornama 9 the police only drafting the mediatornama but not seized the property from variousthe police only drafting the mediatornama but not seized the property from various places mediatornama the police leave to him and proceeded to seized in stolenplaces mediatornama the police leave to him and proceeded to seized in stolen property it clearly shows that PW4’s evidence in that presence he was not acted asproperty it clearly shows that PW4’s evidence in that presence he was not acted as mediator of 2ndmediator of 2nd mediatoranama in his presence no property was seized by the police mediatoranama in his presence no property was seized by the police seizurenama not proved. seizurenama not proved.

18. PW6 admitted in his cross examination the Investigating Officer admitted18. PW6 admitted in his cross examination the Investigating Officer admitted that in his not conducted identification stolen property with the PW1. He came tothat in his not conducted identification stolen property with the PW1. He came to conclusion that the accused committed the offence only basing on the confessionalconclusion that the accused committed the offence only basing on the confessional statement of the accused.statement of the accused.

19. PW7 admitted in his cross examination he has not personal knowledge19. PW7 admitted in his cross examination he has not personal knowledge about the arrest of the accused of the stolen property from the accused. he broughtabout the arrest of the accused of the stolen property from the accused. he brought the accused before this court on P.T warrant. Hence the prosecution failed to provethe accused before this court on P.T warrant. Hence the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.

20. In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec. 37920. In the result, A2 is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec. 379 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) of Criminalof Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted U/Sec.248(1) of Criminal

Procedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chainProcedure Code., In this case property i.e., M.O.1 is the gold chain in CPR.No. in CPR.No.

4/2018already given to interim custody of defacto complainant4/2018already given to interim custody of defacto complainantholds goodholds good after after expiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is hereby directed toexpiry of appeal time. The Superintendent District Jail, Ongole is hereby directed to release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases. release the accused A2 forthwith, if he is not required any other cases.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, corrected and pronounced by me in open Dictated to the Personal Assistant, corrected and pronounced by me in open

court on this the 26thcourt on this the 26th day of April, 2018. day of April, 2018.

Sd/-S.Thangamani

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I-CLASS,

KANIGIRI.

Appendix of evidenceAppendix of evidence Witness examinedWitness examined For Prosecution:For Prosecution: For defence: For defence: PW1: Thammineni Venkata SubbuluPW1: Thammineni Venkata Subbulu -- NIL -- -- NIL -- PW2: Thammineni VenkatareddyPW2: Thammineni Venkatareddy PW3: Thammineni VenkateswarluPW3: Thammineni Venkateswarlu PW4: B.Surendra Babu PW4: B.Surendra Babu 10

PW5: Shaik Basha MohiddinPW5: Shaik Basha Mohiddin PW6: M.SreenivasaraoPW6: M.Sreenivasarao PW7: U.SreenivasuluPW7:U.Sreenivasulu Documents marked on behalf of prosecution Documents marked on behalf of prosecution Ex.P1: Report of PW1Ex.P1: Report of PW1

Ex.P2: Certified copy of Mediatornama, dated 11-12-2017Ex.P2: Certified copy of Mediatornama, dated 11-12-2017

Ex.P3: Identification Mahazar, dated 10-12-2017.Ex.P3: Identification Mahazar, dated 10-12-2017.

Ex.P4: First Information Report of PW7.Ex.P4: First Information Report of PW7.

Ex.P5: Rough sketch of PW7.Ex.P5: Rough sketch of PW7.

Documents marked on behalf of defense Documents marked on behalf of defense

--- NIL ------ NIL ---

Material objects marked Material objects marked

M.O.1: Gold Chain.M.O.1: Gold Chain.

Sd/-S.Thangamani

J.F.C.M.KANIGIRI.

CC/321/2015 Acquitted

State Inspector of Police, Pamur circle vs Rekalagunta Subhashini

26 Apr 2018

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS :: KANIGIRI

Present :: Smt.S.Thangamani, Judl.Magistraste of I Class, Kanigiri.

Dated this the 26th day of April, 2018

C.C.No.321/2015

State:

Sub-Inspector of Police, Pamur Circle. ….Complainant

Verses 1.Rekalagunta Subhashyini, w/o Channaiah, 35 years, Rajaka by caste, native of Hasanapuram village, A.S.Peta Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore Distrcit, Now residing at Ayyappa Nagar, Pamur village.

2.Ponguri Harish babu, s/o Mallikharjunachary, 22 years, Kamsali by caste, Satyanarayanapuram, Pamur village and mandal.

….. Accused

3. Dates of

Occurrence : 29-8-2015 at about 17-00 hours

Complaint : 29-8-2015 at about 22-30 hours

Apprehension of accused : 22-3-2016

Commencement of trial : 15-3-2018

Closure of trial : 26-4-2018

Sentence or Order : 26-4-2018

Plea of Accused : not guilty

Finding of the Court : not guilty

In the result, A.1 and A.2 are found not guilty for the offencesa u/s 3,4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and they are acquitted u/s 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of A1 and A.2 shall be in force for a period of 6 months as contemplated u/s 437-A of Cr.P.C. The property M.O.1 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over. M.O.2 and M.O.3 shall be confiscated to state after appeal time is over.

4. Explanation for delay:

The case was taken on file on 30/12/2015. On 22-03-2016 the accused appeared before the court and the accused were furnished with the copies of 2 documents. On 12-7-2016 the accused were examined u/s 239 of Cr.P.C and charges were framed against the accused u/s 3, 4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic ( Prevention) Act, read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. During the course of trial, from 15-03- 2018 to 26-4-2018, P.W.1 to P.W.7 were examined and Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.6 were marked for prosecution and no documents were marked for defence. On 25-04- 2018 the prosecution side evidence was closed. On 26-04-2018 the accused were examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C, they denied the incriminating material and reported no defence evidence and on the same day heard both sides and on the same day Judgment was pronounced vide separately. Hence the delay.

Judl.Magistrate of I Class,

Kanigiri.

Copy Submitted to:

The Hon’ble I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Ongole

Copy to

The Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District, Ongole.

//true copy//

Judl.Magistrate of I Class,

Kanigiri.

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS :: KANIGIRI

Present :: Smt.S.Thangamani, Judl.Magistrate of I Class, Kanigiri.

Dated this the 26th day of April, 2018

C.C.No.321/2015

State:

Sub-Inspector of Police, Pamur Circle. ….Complainant

Verses 1.Rekalagunta Subhashini, w/o Channaiah, 35 years, Rajaka by caste, native of Hasanapuram village, A.S.Peta Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore Distrcit, Now residing at Ayyappa Nagar, Pamur village.

2.Ponguri Harish babu, s/o Mallikharjunachary, 22 years, Kamsali by caste, Satyanarayanapuram, Pamur village and mandal.

….. Accused

The Calendar Case coming on 26-4-2018 for final hearing before me in the presence of Asst.Public Prosecutor for State/Complainant and of Sri Abdul Gaffar Shaik, Advocate for Accused, upon perusal of material on record, upon hearing arguments, having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:- :: J U D G M E N T ::

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pamur Police Station filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.95/2015 of Pamur Police Station, for the offences punishable u/s 3, 4, 5,7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

2. The case of prosecution in brief is that the accused A.1 is native of

Hasanapuram village in A.S.Peta Mandal of S.P.S.R.District and presently residing at Ayyappa Nagar, Pamur since a month prior to the date of offence in the house of L.W.6 Bathula Krishna for rent. About 10 years ago the husband of A.1 left her and went away and about a year ago A.1 met with an accident and unable to do any work to maintain herself and her children and choose to run brothel for earning money by procuring women from outside for prostitution. L.W.1 4

Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji is native of Vijayawada city and about 10 days prior to the offence while she was at Atmakur bus stand, Nellore, the accused happened to meet her and learnt that she was in financial crisis and induced her that she will provide work to her at Pamur and noted her mobile number. L.W.2 Gonu

Srikanth, L.W.3 Mannam Ramulu, L.W.4 Miriyam Madhu Babu who are the residents of Ayyappa Nagar noticed the illegal activities of A.1 and warned her but she did not change her activities. L.W.5 Bathula Ashok, who is the relative of

L.W.6 Bathula Krishna, came to know about the illegal activities that were being carried out by A.1 in the house of L.W.6 informed the matter to L.W.6 through phone. On 29-08-2015 morning L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji came to the house of A.1 at Pamur as informed by A.1 through phone to secure some work.

Then A1 forced L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji to adopt prostitution for money.

At first L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji did not agree for the same but as she was in dire need of money for the treatment of her child, she surrendered to A.1.

As per the instructions of A.1, L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji participated in the sexual intercourse with three gallants who paid Rs.500/- each to A.1. A.1 in turn paid half of the amount to L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji taking the other half for her. In the evening of 29-08-2015 A.1 secured A.2 through phone and sent him to L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji and gave two conldoms for use during secual intercourse. On 29-08-2015 on information L.W.10 M.Rajesh Kumar,

Inspector of Police secured L.W.7 Konjeti Subhasini and L.W.8 Shaik Moulali, rushed to the rented house of A1 along with them and his staff in police jeep and on seeing the police party A.1 and A.2 tried to skulk away from there. L.W.10

M.Rajesh Kumar, Inspector of Police apprehended A.1 and A.2 with the assistance of his staff and on interrogation in the presence of L.W.7 Konjeti Subhasini and

L.W.8 Shaik Moulali, A1 confessed that she was running a brothel in the rented house by procuring women by inducing them and taking half of the money earned by the victims as her share and in that way she secured L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji for prostitution for prostitution received Rs.500/- each from three gallants 5 who had intercourse with L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji paid half of the amounts to L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji and took the other half for her and in the evening she secured A2 to her house through phone and sent him to L.W.1

Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji for intercourse and she was watching at the door. On interrogation A.2 confessed that he came to the rented house of A1 on being informed by A1 about availability of a beautiful lady and while he was with L.W.1

Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji in a compromising position he heard the sound of police jeep got up and tried to escape. L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji was found in possession of a five hundred rupees currency note and kohinoor company condom packet containing 3 condoms. A.1 was found in possession of five 100 rupees notes. L.W.10 M.Rajesh Kumar arrested A.1 and A.2 at 21-45 hours and seized the cash found in possession of L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji and A.1 and also the condoms packet under the cover of medaitors report duly attested by L.W.7 Konjeti Subhasini and L.W.8 Shaik Moulali. L.W.10 M.Rajesh Kumar brought the accused A.1 and A.2 and L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji to Pamur

Police Station at about 22-30 hours and got the mediators report registered as a case in Crime No.95/2015 u/s 3,4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 of Pamur P.S. by L.W.9 V.Sambasivaiah and took up investigation. During the course of investigation L.W.10 M.Rajesh Kumar, Inspector of Police, Pamur Circle sent the accused A.1 and A.2 to the Hon’ble Court for remand. L.W.10 M.Rajesh

Kumar also produced L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji before the Honourable

Court for necessary directions with regard to her care and protection and as per the directions of the Honourable Court L.W.1 Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji was handed over in Ashanivas help transit home, Machavaram village, N.G.Padu

Mandal. After completion of investigation L.W.10 M.Rajesh Kumar filed charge sheet against A.1 and A.2 for the offence u/s 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

3. The case was taken on file for the offence punishable u/s 3, 4, 5 and 7 of 6

Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

4. On appearance of accused before the court, copies of documents were furnished to them as required u/s 207 of Cr.P.C. Accused were examined u/s 239 of Cr.P.C. Charges u/s 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 were framed, read over and explained to accused in Telugu for which they pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.

5. During the course of trial, the prosecution got examined P.W.1 to P.W.7 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.6, M.O.1 to M.O.3. No documents were marked for defence. No witnesses were produced on behalf of defence.

6. After closure of prosecution side evidence, accused were examined u/s 313 of Cr.P.C by explaining them the incriminating evidence against them in the evidence of Prosecution Witnesses, they denied the same. They reported no defence evidence.

7. Heard both sides.

8. Now the point for determination is :

Whether the prosecution is able to prove the charges levelled against the accused beyound reasonable doubt?

9. POINT : P.W.1 deposed that she knows A.1 and A.2. She has one son who is suffering from ill health, for his medical purpose she is in need of money and work. About three years back, on one day she went to Nellore to see her relatives.

On that day when she was at Athmakur bus stand at Nellore A1 came to her and asked her about her details and also obtained her phone number saying that she will arrange work to earn money for the purpose of medical treatment of her son.

After 10 days A.1 made phone call to her and said that she arranged work and she 7 had to come to Pamur. As per that on 29-8-2015 she came to Pamur and A.1 came to the bus stand and received her and brought her to A.1’s rental house. On the same day A.1 instigated her to do prostitution with unknown persons. As she need money for her son medical expenses she agreed for that and A.1 said that the earned money will be distributed half of the amount to each other. On the same day A1 arranged three persons and took Rs.500/- from each person and gave Rs.250/- for each person to her. She acted as per direction of A.1 and made prostitution with those three persons. On the same day evening again A.2 came to her and gave Rs.500/- to A.1. At about 7 PM police along with some other persons came to the house where she made prostitution and enquired her about the illegal living with A.1 and A.2. She stated before police what was happened to her. After that police arrested A.1 and A.2. She was produced before the Hon’ble

Court. She was shifted to State Home as per order of the Hon’ble Court.

10. P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.6 turned hostile.

11. P.W.5 deposed that at about 10-30 AM P.W.7 handed over to him mediator report and instructed him to register the mediator report as F.I.R. He registered the same as a case in Cr.No.95/2015, u/s 3,4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) act, 1956. He submitted the original F.I.R to the Hon’ble Court and copies to all concerned officers. Ex.P.3 is F.I.R. After that he sent the copy of FIR to P.W.7 M.Rajesh Kumar, for further investigation.

12. P.W.7 deposed that on 29-8-2015 at about 6 PM on receipt of information about running prostitution in the rented house at Ayyappa Nagar, Pamur he secured the mediators P.W.4 and L.W.7 Konijeti Subhashini and also his staff reached the house of P.W.6 Bathula Krishna. He noticed A.1 and A.2 trying to skulk away and with the assistance of his staff he caught hold of A.1 and A.2 and 8 on enquiry before the mediators A.1 and A.2 confessed that A1 running a brothel house by procuring women inducing for money and taking half of the money earned by the victims as her share and also confessed that A.1 trapped P.W.1 and made her to do prostitution with A.2 on that date. So that as per directions of

A.1, P.W.1 acted with A.2 and while P.W.1 doing prostitution with A.2 police came to the place and apprehended them. Then his staff women P.C.298, 400 searched

P.W.1 and found Rs.500/-note with number JPG056085, two kohinur condoms and found Rs.100/- notes five from A.1 bearing serial number 2EB06J583, 8TH705848, CR934326, 3LA040889, 8TF222535. Then he seized the currency notes and condoms packets from them in the presence of mediators for further investigation under cover of mediator report and he arrested A.1 and A.2 u/s 3,4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Act at 9-45 PM and duly attested by the mediators.

Ex.P.5 is the mediator report , dated 29-8-2015. M.O.1 is two Kohinur condoms.

M.O.2 is Rs.100/- notes five with serial numbers 2EB06J583, 8TH705848,

CR934326, 3LA040889, 8TF222535. M.O.3 is Rs.500/- note with Serial number

JPG056085. Then he arrested A.1 and A.2 and the victim girl was brought to

Pamur Police station at 10-30 PM. The mediatornama was handed over to P.W.5 and the same was registered as a case in Cr.No.95/2015 u/s 3,4,5,and 7 of

Immoral Traffic act on 29-8-2015 at 10-30 PM. Then he examined the victim girl

P.W.1 with the help of women P.C.400 and recorded her statement. The victim girl was then handed over to Anganawadi Supervisor for her stay during the night.

On the next day he sent A.1 and A.2 to the Hon’ble Court for judicial remand. On 30-8-2015 he visited the scene of offence situated at Ayyappa Nagar, Pamur, examined the same and prepared rough sketch of scene of offence. Ex.P.6 is the rough sketch. Then he secured the presence of P.W.2, P.W.3 and L.W.4 Miriyam

Madhu babu, examined them and recorded their statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. The victim girl was produced before the Hon’ble Court for her care and protection. On 31-8-2015 he secured L.W.5 Bathula Ashok, P.W.6 and examined them and recorded their statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. On 31-8-2015 as per the directions of 9

Hon’ble Court the victim girl was handed over at Asha Nivas Help Transit Home,

Machavaram village, N.G.Padu Mandal. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.

13. P.W.1 admitted in her cross-examination that she is resident of Vijayawada.

Her husband name is Rajasekhar. Now they are residing at Prakash Nagar of

Mangalagiri Mandal. She is not native of Nellore district and her sister belongs to

Nellore District. In the first instance the first accused met her at Atmakur bus stand, Nellore but she can not the exact date when she met A.1. She does not remember phone number of her and also cannot say the phone number of A.1 from which number A.1 made phone call. She has not informed the same to her husband when she was leaving to A.1. She boarded the bus of Nellore at

Vijayawada with the help of her husband and got down Nellore Bus without consent and knowledge of her husband and again boarded Pamur Bus. She does not know either street name or door number of first accused. On the same day evening police arrested A.1 and A.2 and police took away her to the police station.

She does not know the name of house of A.1. She does not know anything about antecedents of 1st accused. Police examined her in the police station. She did prostitution at the instigation of A.1 for money. There are residential houses near the house of A.1.

14. P.W.7 admitted in his cross-examination that A.1 is the nonlocal person and she was residing in a rented house. He has not received any documentary evidence as A.1 was residing in that house. In his investigation, there are no disputes between A.1 and P.W.3, P.W.2, L.W.4 Miriyam madhu babu, L.W.5 Bathula

Ashok and P.W.6. MO.1 to 3 are available in open market. He did not send A.2 and

P.W.1 for medical examination.

15. P.W.1 is the victim and she herself admitted that she did prostitution for 10 money and the mediator and eye witnesses turned hostile and the Investigation

Officer admitted that M.O.1 to M.O.3 are available in open market. In the circumstances, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyound all reasonable doubt.

16. In the result, A.1 and A.2 are found not guilty for the offences u/s 3,4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and they are acquitted u/s 248(1) Cr.P.C.

The bail bonds of A1 and A.2 shall be in force for a period of 6 months as contemplated u/s 437-A of Cr.P.C. The property M.O.1 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over. M.O.2 and M.O.3 shall be confiscated to state after appeal time is over.

Typed to my dictation by the Short Hand Writer, corrected and pronounced by me in open court this the 26th day of April, 2018

Sd/- S.Thangamani Sd/- S.Thangamani

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

KANIGIRI. KANIGIRI.

Appendix of Evidence Witnesses Examined

For Prosecution: For Defence:

P.W.1 : Bondalapati Bhanu @ Bujji -none-

P.W.2 : Mannam Ramulu

P.W.3 : Gonu Srikanth

P.W.4 : Shaik Moulali

P.W.5 : V.Sambasivaiah, SI of Police

P.W.6 : Bathula Krishna,

P.W.7 : M.Rajesh Kumar, Inspector of Police

Documents Marked

For Prosecution:

Ex.P.1 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of L.W.3 Mannam Ramulu

Ex.P.2: 161 Cr.P.C statement of L.W.2 Gonu Srikanth

Ex.P.3: F.I.R.

Ex.P.4 : 161 Cr.P.C statement of L.W.6 Bathula Krishna

Ex.P.5 : Mediators report

Ex.P.6 : Rough Sketch

For Defence: -nil-

M.Os.MARKED

M.O.1: Two Kohinur condoms.

M.O.2 : Rs.100/- notes five with serial numbers 2EB06J583, 8TH705848,

CR934326, 3LA040889, 8TF222535.

M.O.3 : Rs.500/- note with Serial number JPG056085

Id/- S.T.M.

JMFC, Kanigiri.

//true copy//

Judl.Magistrate of I Class,

Kanigiri.

OS/209/2017

Itha Ram Murthy vs Kondeboina Ramaiah

24 Apr 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: KANIGIRI

PRESENT : Smt.S.Thangamani,

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri.

Tuesday this the 24th day of April, 2018

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 209 of 2017

BETWEEN :

Itha Ram Murthy, S/o. Guravaiah, Hindu, aged about 68 years, Landlord, resident of Pedaggulapalli Village, C.S.Puram, Kanigiri Mandal of Prakasam District.

.. Plaintiff

AND

Kondeboina Ramaiah, S/o. Vengaiah, Hindu, aged about 60 years, Landlord, R/o.

Vengannagunta Village, C.S.Puram Village, Prakasam District.

... Defendant

The suit is coming on 24-04-2018 this day for final plaintiff evidence in the presence of Sri Abdul Gaffar Shaik Advocate for plaintiff, and the defendant having remained exparte, and having stood over for consideration till this day, this

Court made the following :-

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

Full satisfaction memo filed by plaintiff counsel. Full satisfaction recorded.

Suit is dismissed as settled out of court.

Pronounced by me in open Court, this the 24th day of April, 2018.

Sd/- S.Thangamani

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri.

// Appendix of Evidence //

-N I L-

Sd/- S.Thangamani

J.C.J.KANIGIRI

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: KANIGIRI

PRESENT : Smt.S.Thangamani,

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri.

Tuesday this the 24th day of April, 2018

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 209 of 2017

BETWEEN :

Itha Ram Murthy, S/o. Guravaiah, Hindu, aged about 68 years, Landlord, resident of Pedaggulapalli Village, C.S.Puram, Kanigiri Mandal of Prakasam District.

.. Plaintiff

AND

Kondeboina Ramaiah, S/o. Vengaiah, Hindu, aged about 60 years, Landlord, R/o.

Vengannagunta Village, C.S.Puram Village, Prakasam District.

... Defendant

Suit for recovery of Rs. 1,68,600/- being the principal and interest due on a pronote dt. 21-12-2014 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.

1,00,000/- agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 24% p.a either to the plaintiff for to his order and costs of the suit.

Date of Presentation:06-11-2017

Date of Filing:15-12-2017

Valuation and Court Fee:For the purpose of Court fees and jurisdiction the suit is valued at Rs. 1,68,600/- on which a C.F of Rs. 4,126/- is herewith paid under sec.20 of A.P.C.F & S.V.Act.

Cause of Action: The Cause of action for the suit arose on 21-12-2014 when the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note in faovur of plaintiff and on 01-05-2017 when the plaintiff got issued the lawyers notice to the defendant and the same was acknowledged by the defendant, but the defendant did not choose either to make payment or to give reply. The suit promissory note executed at Pedagogulapalli Village,

C.S.Puram Mandal, Prakasam District within the territorial Jurisdiction to entertain this suit.

1.That the suit be and the same is here by dismissed as settled out of court; and

2.That the both parties do bear their own costs;

Given under my hand and the seal of this Court, this the 24th day of April, 2018.

Sd/- S.Thangamani

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KANIGIRI.

// TABLE OF COSTS //

-NIL-

Sd/- S.Thangamani

J.C.J.KANIGIRI

NOTE:Both parties concerned in this case are hereby informed that the exhibited and non/exhibited documents should retrieve within the stipulated time on a condition that “the same should produce as and when required by the Court”.

Order Record 2,128 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/46/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Bandi Siva Kumar	26 Apr 2018	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/68/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Bandi Sivakumar	26 Apr 2018	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/321/2015	State Inspector of Police, Pamur circle vs Rekalagunta Subhashini	26 Apr 2018	Judgment	Acquitted
OS/169/2011	Sana Peda Venkateswarlu vs Mule nagireddy	25 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/209/2017	Itha Ram Murthy vs Kondeboina Ramaiah	24 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/142/2015	Gosu Prabhakar vs Kurapati Srinivas @ Srinivasa Rao	24 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
EP/43/2011	Vuppala Obulesu vs Shaik Nazeer Basha	23 Apr 2018	Order	—
OS/27/2018	Erla Guravaiah vs Pokala Krishna Reddy	23 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/155/2016	Adusumalli Mallikarjuna Rao aliesMallikarjuna vs Muthakani Yedukondalu	23 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/232/2015	Manchikanti Ranga Subbarayudu vs Arava Santha Kumari	23 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/20/2018	A.P.StateSub-Inspector of Police, P.C.Palli Police Station vs Nelapati Ravi	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/40/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, P.C.Palli Police Station vs Yerraguntola Israyelu	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/41/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, P.C.Palli Police Station vs Yanabari Suresh	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/64/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, C.S.Puram P.S. vs Kolliboina Narayana	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/71/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Yekambaram Chenchuramaiah	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/109/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Malla Venkateswarlu	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/110/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, P.C.Palli P.S. I.C.Kanigiri P.S. vs Kattulapalli Venkata ramanareddy	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/112/2018	Sub-Inspector of police, P.C.Palli P.S. i/c Kanigiri P.S. vs Gude Malakondaiah	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/122/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, Pamur P.S. vs Shaik Khadar Basha	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/126/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, P.C.Palli Police Station vs Pragada Pedda Pullaiah	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/127/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, Veligandla Police Station vs Cheppali Bala Subbaiah alias Sathish	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/128/2018	Sub-Inspector of Police, Pamur P.S. vs Syed Karimulla	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/130/2017	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, P.C.Palli Police Station vs Kanchani Konda Reddy	22 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/400/2017	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, H.M.Padu P.S. vs Kalavakuri Ravi Kiran alias Deva Dasu	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
CC/401/2017	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, H.M.Padu P.S. vs Penumala Bala Chennaiah	22 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
MC/17/2017	Vanamsetty Jayalakshmi vs Vanamsetty Suresh	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
MC/32/2015	Thokala Kalyani vs Thokala Murali Krishna	22 Apr 2018	Order	—
OS/33/2018	Veeramasala Sudhakar vs Yenimireddy Subba Reddy	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/57/2017	Shiak Gouse Basha vs Sanikommu Konda Reddy	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/74/2016	Parvatha Venkata Rami Reddy vs Pamula Venkata Subbamma	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/173/2017	Thodimdala Ramanaiah vs Ganta Ramanaiah	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/173/2017	Thodimdala Ramanaiah vs Ganta Ramanaiah	20 Apr 2018	Decree	—
CC/1/2016	Mannam Ramulu vs Gundapuneni Subba Rao	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/28/2015	State Sub Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Gottimukkala Chennaiah	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/42/2013	State sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S vs Shaik Mahammad Gouse	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/71/2014	Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise station, Kanigiri. vs Vattivella Srirangam	20 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
EP/56/2017	Gundabathina Veera Brahmam alias Gundabathina Veera Brammam vs Madhavarapu Madhava	19 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/11/2018	Gochipathala Marthamma vs Kasula Subbaiah	19 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/273/2015	State Sub Inspector of Police, Pamur P.S. vs Pathapati Bramhaiah @ Bramha Naidu	19 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/45/2017	Rayalla Vijaya Lakshmi vs Kadiri Hari Prasad	18 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/178/2014	State Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Gottimukkala Chennaiah	18 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/183/2014	State Sub Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S vs Gottimukkala Chennaiah	18 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/12/2015	Vundela Obul Reddy vs Marella Edukondalu	17 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/30/2017	Tammineni Sreeramulu Reddy vs Shaik Mahaboob Basha alias Gouse Basha	17 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/62/2017	Policherla Venkata Chennarao vs Kadiri Hari Prasad	17 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/163/2017	Bonam Lakshmi Devi vs Bonam Sreekanth	17 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/64/2016	State Sub Inspector of Police, Pamur P.S. vs Mallineni Venkata Swamy	17 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/3/2018	Imkollu alias Inakollu Venkateswara Reddy vs Erapani Subba Rao	16 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/205/2017	Thiriveedhi Satya Narayana vs Kotikala Peda Chennaiah	16 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/264/2014	State sub inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Jupudi Vijaya Raju	16 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/37/2018	Pydimarri Venkateswarlu vs Thavva Brahmaiah	13 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/202/2017	Syed Shahidun vs Putta Ramanaiah	13 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/215/2017	Vadde Prakash Reddy vs Kandi Thirupathaiah	13 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/234/2016	Singamsetty Venkata Subba Rao vs Beejapuru Jilani	13 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/1/2010	Sammani Bhagya Laxmi vs Sirimamilla Malakondamma	12 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/6/2018	Thiriveedhi Satya Narayana vs Penumala Kesaiah	12 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/229/2014	State Station House Officer, P.C.Palli P.S. vs Manuboina Mallikarjuna	12 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/69/2008	State Inspector of Police, H.M.Padu P.S. vs Pasumuru Venkateswarlu --- A11	11 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/75/2014	State Sub Inspector of Police, Veligandla P.S. vs Reddem Chinna Venkata Swamy	11 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/168/2017	Bathula Kotamma vs Dorasila Kranthi Reddy	10 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/42/2012	The State Inspector of Police, Kanigiri Circle. vs Mahammad Manarul Shaik	09 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/93/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Budamguntla Nagaraju	07 Apr 2018	Order	—
OS/20/2012	syed moulali vs Vsdandugula seetamma	06 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
PRC/10/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, Veligandla Police Station vs Udumula Sekhar	06 Apr 2018	Order	—
OS/34/2016	Indla Venkateswarlu vs Papabathini Anjaneyulu	04 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
MC/12/2015	Vaddempudi Venkata Sushmaswaraj-- Minor vs Vaddempudi Subba Rao	04 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/161/2014	The Proh. and Excise Sub Inspector, Kanigiri. vs Bathina Srinu @ Srinivasulu	03 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
PRC/1/2017	Tagaram Mariyamma vs Jonnalagadda Francis	03 Apr 2018	Order	—
EP/11/2018	Pilli Raghu Ramireddy vs Bedamsetty Subbamma	02 Apr 2018	Order	—
EP/16/2016	Gujjula Narasa Reddy vs Sanivarapu Venkateswar Reddy	02 Apr 2018	Order	—
EP/44/2017	Dugireddy Bala Narayana Reddy-Died vs Mohammad Kalesha Jonny	02 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/24/2018	shaik Haseena vs Mora Ramireddy	02 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/144/2012	Chanduluri Malakondarayudu vs Keesara narayana	02 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
OS/165/2017	Mandla Lakshmi vs Shaik Rahamthulla	02 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
CC/262/2015	Sankathala China Hazarathaiah vs Pondla Mary Evaline	02 Apr 2018	Judgment	—
EP/12/2018	Paydimarri Venkata Satyanarayana Rao vs Dabbukottu Avulaiah	28 Mar 2018	Order	—
EP/52/2014	Kancherla Venkateswarlu vs Anneboyina Bala Guntaiah	28 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/174/2017	Konidena Yerukalaiah vs Konidena Adi Lakshmi	28 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/112/2010	State Sub Inspector of Plice, Kanigiri P.S. vs Jagannadham Ramanaiah	28 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/157/2016	Golla Satyanarayana vs Beejapuru Jilani	27 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/258/2017	A.P.State Sub Inspector of Police, Pamur P.S. vs Varikuti Srinivasulu alias Seenaiah	23 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
EP/29/2017	Chittela Chandrasekhar Reddy vs Yarramreddy Pitchireddy	22 Mar 2018	Order	—
EP/34/2017	Gadde Krishnaiah vs Gundlathoti Arunamma	22 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/7/2018	Kodidala Chinna Ramakka alias Ramakka vs Valicherla Madhusudhana Rao	21 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/147/2013	State Sub Inspector of Plice, Pamur P.S vs Punati Mallikharjuna	21 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/148/2013	Statek Sub-Inspector of Police, Pamur P.S. vs Shaik Chinna Nayab Rasool	21 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/19/2018	Kotha Mangamma vs Kasireddy Ramanamma	19 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/90/2017	Thammineni Alluri Reddy vs Bobba Ambireddy alias Abbireddy	19 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/166/2017	Thalluri Venkata Satyana Narayana vs Shaik Kaleesha	19 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/186/2016	Adusumalli Nagabhushanam vs Muthakani Yedukondalu	19 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/69/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, H.M.Padu P.S. vs Shaik Mahaboob Basha	17 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/156/2017	Modi Sreenivasulu vs Cheedarla Malleswari	16 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/164/2017	Keesara Venkateswarlu vs Vantipenta Ramesh	16 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/139/2016	Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Mogili Nagesh Kumar	16 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/195/2017	Nukala Koteswara Rao vs Vemula Ramanaiah	15 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/134/2016	Devineni Veeranjanelu vs Muthakani Yedukondalu	14 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/179/2016	Adusumalli Basavaiah vs Muthakani Yedukondalu	14 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
CC/73/2018	A.P.State Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanigiri P.S. vs Jettiboina Venkateswarlu	14 Mar 2018	Order	—
CC/220/2014	The Proh. @ Excise Sub Inspector, Kanigiri. vs Thota Prathap Reddy	14 Mar 2018	Judgment	—
OS/43/2017	Katakam Chalapathi Rao vs Kanamarlapudi Narasimha Rao	13 Mar 2018	Judgment	—

Showing 100 of 2,128 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2018		75
Mar 2018		55
Feb 2018		49
Jan 2018		54
Dec 2017		85
Nov 2017		52
Oct 2017		57
Sep 2017		92
Aug 2017		50
Jul 2017		124
Jun 2017		51
May 2017		37

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt S.Thangamani handled?

Smt S.Thangamani has handled 2186 court orders since 2015 at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka). The average disposal rate is 63 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt S.Thangamani hear?

Based on available records, Smt S.Thangamani primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka).

Where is Smt S.Thangamani currently posted?

Smt S.Thangamani is posted as Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka), Prakasham, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Smt S.Thangamani available online?

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

How fast does Smt S.Thangamani dispose cases?

Smt S.Thangamani disposes approximately 63 cases per month, based on 2186 orders handled over their tenure at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka).

Since when is Smt S.Thangamani serving?

Smt S.Thangamani has been serving at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka) since 2015.

Case Types

CC 45%

OS 36%

EP 11%

MC 4%

PRC 2%

STC 1%

RCC 0%

DVC 0%

Posting History

Oct 2016 — Apr 2018

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri · 1,273 orders
Jun 2015 — Aug 2016

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri · 913 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 4

Convicted 2

Other Judges at this Court

Smt.B.Rupasree

Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri

976 orders

← View all judges at Junior Civil Judge's Court, Kanigiri (Taluka)