Mrs. Saritha Matta

Prl. Junior Civil Judge

Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex · Peddapalli · Telangana

Mrs. SARITHA MATTA, Prl. Junior Civil Judge, is posted at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex, Peddapalli, Telangana, India. 392 court orders on record since 2025. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, DVC cases.

392

Total Orders

Judgments

184

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/119/2025 Acquitted

State through Proh. and Excise Station vs Ainella Hanumanthu

11 May 2026

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.1 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’)

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM – JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NANDIMYADARAM

PRESENT: SMT. SARITHA MATTA Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

N A N D I M Y A D A R A M

MONDAY, ON THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

CC. No.119 of 2025

Between The state through the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Peddapalli (COR No.59 of 2024).

...Complainant

AND

Ainella Hanumanthu, S/o.Ramulu, Aged:65 years, Occupation: Labour, Caste:Mala, R/o.Medaram village of Dharmaram mandal.

… Sole Accused * * * This case is coming up before me on 07.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P. Rakesh, Addl. Public Prosecutor (A.P.P), for the State and Sri. P.Sandeep Kumar, Counsel for the Accused , having been heard, having perused the record and having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

1.The Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Excise Station, Peddapalli has filed a charge sheet against sole Accused for the offence punishable under Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of the Telangana Prohibition Act.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.2 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’) 2(a). The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 17.09.2023 at about 1735 hours, the Investigating officer (LW3) got credible information regarding illegal possession and selling of ID liquor by

Ainella Hanumanthu, then on that information LW3 and other

Constables proceeded to the spot and found a person along with the contraband and on seeing them he tried to escape and on suspicion they detained him and they found (07) liters of ID liquor. Immediately,

LW3 called two Mediators/LW-1 and LW-2 and in the presence of mediators he inquired the Accused and the Accused submitted his particulars and also revealed that in order to gain unlawful profits he is used to sale the I.D liquor near his house to the persons and the investigation officer has drawn two samples from the above liquor and each sample was sealed as per the procedure and affixed with a sign chit containing the signatures of LW1 to LW3. The officer has seized the above contraband under cover of the panchanama in the presence of

LW1 and LW2.

(b).Basing on the Panchanama, T.Satyanarayana(LW3) who is First

Investigation officer registered a case in Cr.No.198 of 2023, dated 17.09.2023, U/sec.7(A) R/W 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act and took up for further investigation, later he issued Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C to Accused with direction to appear before the Hon’ble court whenever receiving the

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.3 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’) summons and sent the samples to the chemical examiner. The LW3 transferred the case diary along with the contraband to prohibition and

Excise station, Peddapalli. Thereafter, the LW4 re-registered a case COR

No.59 of 2024, dated 13.02.2024 in Prohibition and Excise Station,

Peddapalli and received the chemical examination report from

Government Chemical Examiner Regional Prohibition and Excise

Laboratory, Warangal through letter vide No.1138/2023 Sl.No.8820

dated 27.09.2023, stating that the sample I.D Liquor not fit for human

consumption. That, he received proceedings of Deputy commissioner of prohibition and Excise, Karimnagar vide letter no.369/2024/P&Ex/A3,

dated 24.08.2024 with a direction to destroy the seized ID liquor,

accordingly he destroyed the case property on 18.10.2024. Thus, the

Accused has committed an offense U/S 7-A r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition

Act. LW5 concluded his investigation and filed charge sheet against

Accused.

3.This case was taken on file against the Accused for the offence punishable under section U/Sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Proh. & Excise Act, 1995.

4.On appearance of the Accused, copies of relevant documents filed by the prosecution for its case were furnished to Accused as required under Sec.207 Cr.P.C.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.4 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’)

5.The Accused was examined under section 239 Cr.P.C and he denied the allegation levelled against him. Hence, charges under section

U/Sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Prohibition & Excise Act were framed, read over and explained to him in Telugu in which the Accused is pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.To prove its case the prosecution examined PW1 and PW2 and got marked Ex.P1 to P4.

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused was examined

Under section 313 Cr.P.C with reference to the incriminating material available in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which, he denied the incriminating material and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.

8.Heard the arguments of the learned APP and Defense counsel.

9.Now the points for consideration are :

1. “Whether the prosecution has proved the seizure of I.D

liquor from the possession of the Accused or not?

2. “Whether the prosecution established its case beyond all reasonable doubt or not?

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.5 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’)

POINT NO.1 and 2:

10.During the course of trial the LW1 examined as PW1/Devi

Ramana is the Panch witness for confession-cum-seizure Panchanama, he is turned hostile to the case of prosecution and he is cross examined by the prosecution with the permission of the court but nothing was elicited in favour of prosecution even in his cross examination.

11(a).The LW5/investigating officer is examined as PW2, on 17.09.2023 at about 1735 hours LW3 received a credible information about the sale of I.D. Liquor by one Ainella Hanumanthu/Accused, as such LW3 along with PW1 and LW2 and his staff intercepted into the place of accused and on search of accused found (07) liters of I.D. Liquor in the possession of accused. On enquiry the accused disclose his name and other details. Then LW3 secured the presence of PW1, LW2 and conducted panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and drawn the sample and the seized (07) liters of I.D. Liquor in the presence of accused. LW3 along with seized property returned to police station, registered a Cr.No.198/2023 and handed over the CD file to LW4. On perusal of CD file, investigation done by LW3, the LW4 registered the case vide COR.No.59/2024, dated 13.02.2024 for an offence punishable

U/sec.7(A) R/w 8 (e) of T.S. of Prohibition Act. Later, the LW4 has

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.6 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’) served 41A Cr.P.C notice on accused, sent the samples to FSL for chemical analysis and received the report from chemical examiner through letter No.1138/2024 serial No.8820dated 27.09.2023 declaring the sample ID liquor not fit for the human consumption, LW4 sent the remaining quantity of seized I.D. liquor to District prohibition and excise officer, Peddapalli as per orders of Deputy Commissioner of

Prohibition and Excise, Karimnagar vide letter 369/2024/P&Ex/A3

dated 24.08.2024 destroyed the seized I.D liquor on 18.10.2024. later,

the LW4 handed over the file to him. Upon keen verification of investigation done by the LW3 and LW4, he filed the charge sheet.

11(b). In cross examination by counsel for Accused, he denied that, he did not conduct any seizure panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and only for statistical purpose they registered case against accused and no case property was seized from the possession of accused and accused no way concerned with alleged offence.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.7 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’) supported to the prosecution. As such, his evidence is not at all useful to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the Accused. Further since no independent witnesses in this case supported, the learned

APPO has given up the evidence of LW2 to LW4.

13.As per the contents of charge sheet, the Police, Dharmaram conducted confession-cum-seizure panchanama of Accused/Ex.P3 and basing upon the Ex.P3, they registered the FIR, thereafter they sent the entire crime record to the Prohibition and Excise station, Peddapalli but to prove the same the prosecution did not file copy of FIR alleged to have registered basing upon the confession-cum-seizure panchanama of

Accused/Ex.P3 before this court for consideration.

14.In this case, the evidence of PW1 and PW2 not shown any incriminating material against the Accused. There is no evidence on record about illegal possession of ID liquor without having valid license or permission from the Government.

15.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove guilt of the Accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly the Point No.1 and 2 are answered in favour of

Accused and against prosecution.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.8 of 8 CC No. 119 of 2025 (Fair’) 16.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the offense punishable U/sec.7-A r/w 8 (e) of T.S.Proh. Act, and Accused is acquitted U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stands cancelled. No case property.

Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE:

PW-1 Devi Ramana-None- PW-2 G.Jeevan Reddy (I.O)

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1Signature on confession-cum-seizure panchanama Ex.P1COR Ex.P2Confession-cum-seizure panchanama, dated 26.10.2024 Ex.P3Attested copy of FSL report

FOR THE DEFENCE: -Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-Nil-

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

OS/16/2025

Siddi Rajitha vs Gujjula Mallesham

11 May 2026

Dt:11-05-20261 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : AT : NANDIMYADARAM

Present: Smt.Saritha Matta Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Nandimyadaram.

MONDAY, ON THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF May, 2026.

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 16 OF 2025

Between: Siddi Rajitha, W/o.Thallapelli Srikanth, D/o.Siddi @ Gujjula Mallesham, Aged:24 years, Occupation: Household, R/o.H.No.11- 2-145, Laxminagar, GV8 Incline Colony, Ramagundam mandal of Peddapalli District. … Plaintiff

A N D

1. Gujjula Mallesham, S/o.Buchaiah, Aged:44 years, Occupation: Agriculture,

2. Gujjula Latha, W/o.Mallesham, Aged:40 years, Occupation: Housewife,

3. Gujjula Madhu, S/o.Mallesham, Aged: 16 years, Occupation: Student,

4. Gujjula Lucky, D/o.Mallesham, Aged:08 years, Occupation: Student, (The Defendant No.3 and 4 are minors and represented by their natural mother and guardian i.e., the Defendant No.2) All are R/o.H.No.1-6, Khilavanaparthi village of Dharmaram mandal of Peddapalli District.

...Defendants No.1 to 4

*** * ***

This suit is coming before me on 04.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Akari Rajesham, learned counsel for the plaintiff and the defendants No.1 to 4 remained ex-parte, later they did not turn up to contest the case, having been heard and having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiff praying this court to pass a

Preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff entitling her to 1/3rd share

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20262 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

in the suit schedule-A property land to an extent of Ac.0-15gts., in

Sy.No.61/6/1/1/1, suit schedule-B land to an extent of Ac.1-05gts., in

Sy.No.231/G, suit schedule-C property i.e., House No.1-6 all are situated at Khilavanaparthi village of Dharmaram mandal of Peddapally

District. (hereinafter referred as ‘suit schedule-A to C properties’)

2. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:-

(a).ThatthePlaintiff’sfatherbynameGujjula

Mallesham/Defendant No.1 is the owner and possessor of the

Agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0-15gts., in Sy.No.61/6/1/1/1, land to an extent of Ac.1-05gts., in Sy.No.231/G, the House bearing

No.1-6 all are situated at Khilavanaparthi village of Dharmaram mandal of Peddapally District, are hereinafter referred as suit schedule-A to C properties.

(b).The Plaintiff further submitted that the Defendant No.1 inherited the suit schedule-A to C properties from his ancestors and the plaintiff is daughter of Defendant No.1’s first wife but due to the matrimonial disputes the Defendant No.1 and plaintiff mother living separately and the Plaintiff has been residing with her grandmother and grandfather because the Defendant No.1 again married the

Defendant No.2 and Defendant No.3 and 4 are their children, as such the suit schedule-A to C properties are still in joint family

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20263 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

properties of Defendant No.1 and Plaintiff and thy are enjoying their suit schedule properties but the Defendant No.1 to avoid share of plaintiff trying to alienate the suit schedule properties without knowing of Plaintiff.

(c).The Plaintiff further submitted that, on 03.03.2025 she demanded the Defendant No.1 and 2 for partition and separate possession from undivided joint family properties but the Defendant

No.1 and 2 refused to do so, with malafide intention to avoid share to Plaintiff. Hence, the Plaintiff being daughter of Defendant No.1 is entitle of 1/3rd share in suit schedule-A to C and Defendant No.1,3 and 4 are entitle to 1/3rd share in suit schedule-A to C properties.

3.After receipt of summons, the defendants did not choose to appear before this Court, as such, the Defendant No.1 to 3 set exparte on 22.12.2025 and later they did not turn up to contest the matter.

4.During the trial, the Plaintiff got herself examined as PW1 and

Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 marked through her in support of her claim.

5.Heard the arguments of learned Counsel for Plaintiff. Perused the material available on record.

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20264 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

6.Upon perusal of pleadings and other material available on record the court has framed the following issues:-

1. “Whether the suit schedule property is ancestral property or not”?

2. “Whether the plaintiff is entitled to share in the suit schedule properties or not”?

3. If so, as to what extent?

7. ISSUES No.1 and 2:

Since the Issues No.1 and 2 are interlinked and interconnected with each other, this Court inclined to answer the issues together.

8.In order to prove the plaintiffs claim, the plaintiff got examined herself as PW1, filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination reiterating the contents of the plaint thereby substantiating their claim. Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 were marked through PW1.

9.PW1 in support of her pleadings, through her affidavit in lieu of chief examination deposed that the Defendant No.1 inherited the suit schedule-A to C properties from his ancestors. The Ex.A1 is the online Dharani pahani it reflects that the name of the Defendant

No.1 herein reflects as pattedar and possessor of land to an extent of

Ac.0-15gts., in Sy.No.61/6/1/1/1 of Khilavanaparthi village of

Dharmaram mandal. Ex.A2 is the online Dharani pahani it reflects that the name of the Defendant No.1 herein as pattedar and

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20265 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

possessor of land to an extent of Ac.1-05gts., in Sy.No.231/G of

Khilavanaparthi village of Dharmaram mandal.

10. On considering the oral and documentary evidence of the plaintiff, this court find that the main contention of plaintiff that suit schedule-A to C properties joint family properties of Plaintiff and Defendant and the same is inherited by Defendant No.1 who is the father of Plaintiff the suit schedule-A to C properties from his ancestors and the plaintiff is daughter of Defendant No.1’s first wife but due to the matrimonial disputes the Defendant No.1 and plaintiff’s mother living separately and the Plaintiff has been residing with her grandmother and grandfather because the Defendant No.1 again married the Defendant No.2 and Defendant No.3 and 4 are their children, as such the suit schedule-A to C properties are still in joint family properties of Defendant No.1 and Plaintiff and they are enjoying the suit schedule properties but the Defendant No.1 to avoid share of plaintiff trying to alienate the suit schedule properties without knowing of Plaintiff. On 03.03.2025 the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant No.1 and 2 for partition and separate possession from undivided joint family properties but the Defendant No.1 and 2 refused do so, with malafide intention to avoid share to Plaintiff.

Hence, the Plaintiff being daughter of Defendant No.1 is entitle of

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20266 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

1/3rd share in suit schedule-A to C and Defendant No.1, 3 and 4 are entitle to 1/3rd share in suit schedule-A to C properties. But the

Plaintiff to prove her contention did adduce any oral evidence to support her contention except herself examined as PW1.

11.Further, on perusal of documents filed by Plaintiff this court noticed that except filing the online Dharani pahanies marked as

Ex.A1 and A2 in which the name of Defendant No.1 reflects as pattedar and possessor of land to an extent of Ac.0-15gts., in

Sy.No.61/6/1/1/1, land to an extent of Ac.01-05gts., in

Sy.No.231/G both are situated Khilavanaparthi village of

Dharmaram mandal which are herein claimed as suit schedule A and B properties none of document filed by Plaintiff which is required to reflect that the Defendant No.1 is the original pattedar and possessor of suit schedule-A to C properties and those properties inherited through his ancestors. The documents filed by the Plaintiff reflects only the name of Defendant No.1 entered in revenue records as pattedar and possessor with regarding suit schedule A and B properties. But mere entries in revenue records does not create any right, title or interest to such person over the properties shown in revenue records unless until supporting by valid document. Moreover, the Plaintiff failed to file any scrap of paper to

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20267 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

show whether the suit schedule-C property is in the name of

Defendant No.1 or not and whether he has any rights over the suit schedule-C property or not.

12.After scrutiny of the evidence of Plaintiff and Exhibits marked it reveals that the Plaintiff failed to prove that the schedule properties are the ancestral one and joint family properties of Plaintiff and Defendant

No.1 to 4 only and she is entitled for 1/3rdshare in suit schedule properties. When the Plaintiff failed to prove her contention the suit schedule properties are the joint family properties of plaintiff and

Defendants and those properties were inherited by the Defendant

No.1 through his forefathers, this court can not pass decree in favour of Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Issues No.1 and 2 are answered against the Plaintiff.

13. ISSUE NO.3:-

IN THE RESULT, the suit is dismissed without costs.

Typed to my dictation by my Typist, corrected, signed and

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 11 th of May, 2026.

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum –

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

Dt:11-05-20268 of 8 JCJ-Cum-JMFC,Nandimyadaram

OS NO.16 OF 2025(Fair’)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF : FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW1: Siddi Rajitha -NONE-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex.A1Online Dharani Pahani of Sy.No.61/6/1/1/1 Ex.A2Online Dharani Pahani of Sy.No.231/G Ex.A3Market value certificate of suit schedule-C property issued by SRO, Sulthanabad.

For Defendants : -NIL-

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum –

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

Junior Civil Judge Nandimyadaram

CC/57/2025 Acquitted

Prohibition and Excise Inspector vs Bodusa Rajitha

11 May 2026

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.1 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’)

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM – JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NANDIMYADARAM

PRESENT: SMT. SARITHA MATTA Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

N A N D I M Y A D A R A M

MONDAY, ON THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

CC. No.57 of 2025

Between The state through the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Peddapalli (COR No.335 of 2024)

...Complainant

AND

Bodasu Rajitha, W/o.Rajaiah, Aged:30 years, Occupation:Coolie, caste:Oddera, R/o.Dongathurthy village of Dharmaram mandal.

… Sole Accused.

* * * This case is coming up before me on 07.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P. Rakesh, Addl. Public Prosecutor (A.P.P.O), for the State and Sri P.Sandeep Kumar, Counsel for the Accused, having been heard, having perused the record and having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

1.The Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Excise Station, Peddapalli has filed a charge sheet against the Accused for the offence punishable under Sec.7(A) r/w 8(e) of the Telangana Prohibition Act.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.2 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’) 2(a). The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 26.10.2024 at about 1430 hours, the Investigating officer (LW3) got credible information regarding illegal possession and selling of ID liquor by

Bodasu Rajitha, then on that LW3 and other Constables went to near the house of Accused at Dongathurthy village and searched the house of Accused and they found the Accused and on seeing them she tried to escape and on suspicion they detained her and they found (02) liters of

ID liquor. Immediately, LW3 called two Mediators/LW-1 and LW-2 and in the presence of mediators she inquired the Accused and Accused submitted her particulars and also revealed that in order to gain unlawful profits she is used to sell the I.D liquor near her house to the persons and the LW3 officer has drawn two samples from the above liquor and each sample was sealed as per the procedure and affixed with a sign chit containing the signatures of LW1 to LW3. The LW3 has seized the above contraband under cover of the panchanama in the presence of LW1 and LW2. The LW3 has seized the above contraband under cover of the panchanama in the presence of LW1 and LW2 and

LW3 along with seized property return to police station and handed over the CD file to LW4.

(b).Basing on the Panchanama and investigation done by LW3, the

LW4/N.Shirisha who is 2nd investigation officer in this case registered a

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.3 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’) case in COR.No.335 of 2024, dated 26.10.2024 U/sec.7(A) R/W 8(e) of

TS Prohibition Act and took up for further investigation, later she issued Sec.35(3) BNSS to Accused. Later, she send the sample to the chemical examiner and she received the chemical examination report from Government Chemical examiner Regional Prohibition and Excise laboratory, Warangal, vide letter No.2581/2024, SL.No.44638, dated 19.12.2024 stating that the sample I.D Liquor not fit for human consumption. That, she received the proceedings of Deputy Prohibition andexcisecommissioneratKarimnagarvideletter

No.22/2025/P&Ex/A3, dated 20.01.2025 with a direction to destroy the seized ID liquor, Accordingly, she destroyed the case property on 23.01.2025. Thus, the Accused has committed an offense U/S 7-A r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act. The LW5 concluded his investigation and filed charge sheet against Accused.

3.This case was taken on file against the Accused for the offence punishable under section U/Sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Proh. & Excise Act, 1995.

4.On appearance of the Accused, copies of relevant documents filed by the prosecution for its case were furnished to Accused as required under Sec.230 BNSS.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.4 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’)

5.The Accused was examined under section 262 BNSS and she denied the allegation levelled against her. Hence, charges under section

U/Sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Proh. & Excise Act were framed, read over and explained to her in Telugu in which the Accused is pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.To prove its case the prosecution examined PW1 and PW2 and got marked Ex.P1 to P4.

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, the Accused was examined

Under section 351 of BNSS with reference to the incriminating material available in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which, she denied the incriminating material and reported no defence evidence on her behalf.

8.Heard the arguments of the learned APP and Defense counsel.

9.Now the points for consideration are :

1. “Whether the prosecution has proved the seizure of I.D

liquor from the possession of the Accused or not?

2. “Whether the prosecution established its case beyond all reasonable doubt or not?

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.5 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’)

POINT 1 & 2:

10.During the course of trial the LW1/Avula Mahesh examined as

PW1 and is the Panch witness for confession-cum-seizure Panchanama, he is turned hostile to the case of prosecution and he is cross examined by the prosecution with the permission of the court but nothing was elicited in favour of prosecution even in his cross examination.

11(a). The evidence of PW2 who is investigation officer in this case deposed that, on 26.10.2024 at about 1430 hours LW3 received a credible information about the sale of I.D. Liquor by one Bodasu

Rajitha/Accused, as such LW3 along with PW1 and LW2 and her staff and panch witnesses intercepted into the place of accused and on search of accused found (02) liters of I.D. Liquor in the possession of accused. On enquiry the accused disclosed her name and other details.

Then LW3 secured the presence of PW1, LW2 and conducted panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and drawn the sample and the seized (02) liters of I.D. Liquor in the presence of accused. LW3 along with seized property LW3 returned to police station and handed over the CD file to LW4. On perusal of CD file, investigation done by

LW3, LW4 registered the case vide COR.No.335/2024, dated 26.10.2024 for an offence punishable U/sec.7(A) R/w 8 (e) of T.S. of

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.6 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’)

Prohibition Act. Later, LW4 has served 41A Cr.P.C notice on accused, sent the samples to FSL for chemical analysis and received the report from chemical examiner through letter No.2581/2024 serial No.44638

dated 19.12.2024 declaring the sample ID liquor not fit for the human

consumption, LW4 sent the remaining quantity of seized I.D. liquor to

District prohibition and excise officer, Peddapalli as per orders of

Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Karimnagar vide letter 22/2025/P&Ex/A3 dated 20.01.2025 destroyed the seized I.D liquor on 23.01.2025. later, the LW4 handed over the file to him. Upon keen verification of investigation done by the LW3 and LW4, he filed the charge sheet.

11(b). In cross examination by counsel for Accused, the PW2 denied that he did not conduct an seizure panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and only for statistical purpose they registered case against accused. He further denied that no case property was seized from the possession of Accused and Accused no way concerned with alleged offence.

12.On perusal of the evidence of PW1 and PW2, it shows that the evidence of PW2 who is the investigation officer in this case deposed in

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.7 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’) favour of prosecution. But the evidence of PW1 who is the panch witness for Confession-cum-seizure panchanama turned hostile and not supported to the prosecution. As the PW1 turned complete hostile in his evidence, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor (APPO) with the permission of this court cross examined him but nothing could be elicited against the Accused. As such, his evidence is not at all useful to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the Accused. Further no independent witnesses in this case supported to the prosecution case.

13.In this case, all the material witnesses have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. The evidence of PW1 and PW2 not shown any incriminating material against the Accused. There is no evidence on record about illegal possession of ID liquor without having valid license or permission from the Government.

14.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove guilt of the Accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly the Points are answered in favour of Accused and against prosecution.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.11-05-2026Page.No.8 of 8 CC No.57 of 2025 (Fair’) 15.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the offense punishable U/sec.7-A r/w 8 (e) of T.S.Proh. Act, and Accused is acquitted U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stands cancelled. No case property.

Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE:

PW-1 Avula Mahesh-None- PW-2 G.Jeevan Reddy (I.O)

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on confession-cum-seizure Panchanama Ex.P2COR Ex.P3Confession-cum-seizure panchanama Ex.P4Attested copy of FSL report

FOR THE DEFENCE: -Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-Nil-

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

CC/108/2024 Acquitted

State of Telangana vs Praveen Kumar Boini

08 May 2026

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.1 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’)

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM – JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NANDIMYADARAM

PRESENT: SMT. SARITHA MATTA Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

N A N D I M Y A D A R A M

FRIDAY, ON THIS THE 08 TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

CC. No.108 OF 2024

Between The State through SHO. PS Dharmaram (Cr.No.79 of 2024 of P.S.,Dharmaram)

...Complainant

AND A1. Boini Praveen Kumar, S/o.Sammaiah, Aged:31 years, A2. Boini Lavanya, W/o.Sammaiah, Aged:48 years, A3. Boini Sammaiah, S/o.Mallaiah, Aged:62 years, A4. Boini Mounika, D/o.Sammaiah, Aged:27 years, A5. Boini Shravan Kumar, S/o.Sammaiah, Aged:31 years, A6. Boini @ Nuluguri Thirumala, W/o.Shravan Kumar, Aged:32 All are Mudiraj, R/o.Mandamarri Town. …Accused No.1 to 6.

* * *

This case is coming up before me on 30.04.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P. Rakesh, Addl. Public Prosecutor (A.P.P), for the State and Sri M.Rajanna, Counsel for the Accused No.1 to 6, having been heard, having perused the record 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, Dharmaram PS, filed the charge sheet against the Accused No.1 to 6 in Crime No.79/2024 for the offence punishable under sections 498-A of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C) and Sec.4 of DP Act.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.2 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’)

2. The case of the prosecution in a nut shell :

(a).On 17.04.2024 at 1340 hours the complainant/Boini Laxmi @

Vaani came to police station and lodged a written complaint stating that, her marriage was performed with Boini Praveen Kumar three years back, at the time of marriage the complainant parents are given

Rs.20,00,000/- net cash, 20 Tulas gold, another 4 Tulas gold and other house hold articles as dowry worth of Rs.3,00,000/-. After their marriage they lead happy marital life for a period of six months, later the complainant mother-in-law by name Boini Lavanya, father-in-law/Boini Sammaiah, Sister-in-law/Boini Mounika, Brother- in-law/Boini Shravan Kumar, Co-sister/Boini Thirumala are all harassing her mentally and physically by supporting the Boini Praveen kumar to bring the additional dowry of Rs.15,00,000/-, then the complainant informed the same to her parents, then her father has purchased land at Gadda regadi for the cost of Rs.30,00,000/- on 04.12.2021, later the complainant lived happily with her husband and in-laws. After some days they again started harassing the complainant for bring one bike and they did not provide food, medicine to complainant when the complainant has pregnant, after birth of two children they again started harassing her, with this harassment the complainant tried to commit suicide by hanging herself at her in-laws

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.3 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’) house and after that they sent the complainant from their house. In this regard the complainant father conducted panchayath before village elders in between complainant husband and in-laws and complainant but they demanded to bring additional dowry of Rs.15,00,000/- otherwise they will not took her to their house. Finally she requested to take necessary action against them.

(b).Based on the above written information the LW10/S.Ashwini, SI of Police, Dharmaram has registered a case in Cr.No.40/2024,

U/sec.498-A of IPC and Sec.4 of DP Act, and issued FIR to all concerned and took up investigation, during the course of investigation, examined and recorded the statement of LW1 in part-II CD in detail, visited chamanapalli village, secured the presence of the LW8 and LW9 and prepared a rough sketch map of offence and incorporated the physical features in CDF, later, examined and recorded the statements of LW2 to LW5 in part-II CDs, collected the marriage photos and marriage card of LW1 and Accused No.1 from LW1, further secured the presence of LW6 and LW7, examined and recorded their statements in part-II CDs.

(c).Later, on 12.05.2024, the LW10 issued U/sec.41(A) Cr.P.C to the accused No.1. on receipt of notice the Accused No.1 came to PS and

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.4 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’) appeared before LW10 at PS Dharmaram, upon interrogation the

Accused No.1 has voluntarily confessed to have committed this offence along with the other Accused persons i.e., Accused No.2 to 6 and complied the condition and released him with a direction to appear

before the court on receipt of summons. During the course of

investigation LW11 took up further investigation of this case and verified the investigation done by LW10 found to be correct on proper lines. The LW11 concluded his investigation and filed charge sheet against Accused No.1 to 6 for the offences punishable U/sec.498-A of

IPC and Sec.4 of DP Act.

3.Upon perusal of the record, this court took cognizance for the offences U/sec.498-A of IPC and Sec.4 of DP Act and issued summons to accused No.1 to 6.

4.On appearance of the accused No.1 to 6, copies were furnished to them as per the provisions of Sec. 207 Cr.P.C.

5.The accused No.1 to 6 were examined under section 239 Cr.P.C and they denied the allegation levelled against them. Hence, charges under section U/sec.498-A of IPC and Sec.4 of DP Act were framed,

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.5 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’) read over and explained to them in Telugu in which the accused are pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.To prove the case, the prosecution examined complainant as

PW1, Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 were marked through her.

7.Upon perusal of entire record as there is no incriminating material found against the accused in the evidence of the prosecution, the examination of accused under section 313 of Cr.P.C., is dispensed.

8.Heard both sides and perused all the material available on record.

9.Now the point that arises for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the

Accused for the offences punishable U/sec.498-A of IPC and

Sec.4 of DP Act, beyond all reasonable doubts?”

P O I N T:

10.To prove the above said charges against the accused the learned

A.P.P examined the defacto complainant examined as PW1, her signature appearing on police report, dated 17.04.2024 marked as

Ex.P1, her Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1 marked as Ex.P2.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.6 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’)

11.The evidence of PW1 who is defacto complainant in this case deposed that, Accused No.1 is her husband, Accused No.2 to 6 are her in-laws. Her marriage was performed with Accused No.1 in the year 2021, during wedlock they blessed twins. Couple of years ago disturbances arose between her and Accused No.1, as such one of the elder obtained her signature on plain paper. Except that she do not know anything about facts of the case, Police not examine her and not recorded her statement. During the cross examination by learned APPO, she denied that she has stated as in Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement and she further denied that she is deposing false.

12. The PW1 who is defacto complainant in this case, was pleaded complete ignorance about the case facts. As the PW1 turned complete hostile, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor (APPO) with the permission of this court cross examined her but nothing could be elicited against the accused persons. As such, her evidence is not at all useful to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused persons. The learned APPO given up the evidence of LW2 to LW11 by stating material witness was turned hostile.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.7 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’)

13.In this case, the defacto complainant turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. The evidence of PW1 did not show any incriminating material against the accused persons. There is no evidence on record about the Accused persons harassed the PW1 physically and mentally and for bring additional dowry.

14.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused No.1 to 6 beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly the Point is answered in favour of accused No.1 to 6 and against prosecution.

15. In the result,theaccused No.1 to 6 found not guilty for the offences punishable U/sec.498-A of IPC and Sec.4 of DP Act.

Accordingly, accused No.1 to 6 acquitted U/Sec.248(1) for the offence punishable U/sec.498-A of IPC and Sec.4 of DP Act. The bonds and bail bonds of accused No.1 to 6 shall stand canceled after expiry of appeal time. No case property.

Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 08th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Dt.08-05-2026Page.No.8 of 8 CC No.108 of 2024 (Fair’)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE:

PW-1 Boini Laxmi @ Vani-None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1Signature appearing on Police report, dated 17.04.2024 Ex.P2Sec.161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW1

FOR THE DEFENCE:

-Nil- MATERIAL OBJECTS

-Nil-

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

JCJ-cum-JMFC Nandimyadaram

CC/42/2025 Acquitted

Prohibition and Excise Station vs Nunsavath Mohan Nayak

11 May 2026

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.1 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’)

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM – JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NANDIMYADARAM

PRESENT: SMT. SARITHA MATTA Junior Civil Judge-Cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

N A N D I M Y A D A R A M

MONDAY, ON THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

CC. No.42 of 2025

Between The state through the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Peddapalli (COR No.279 of 2024).

...Complainant

AND

Nunsavath Mohan Nayak, S/o.Veera Nayak, Aged:45 years, Occupation: Coolie, Caste:Lambadi, R/o.Banjerupalli village of Dharmaram mandal. … Sole Accused.

* * * This case is coming up before me on 07.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P. Rakesh, Addl. Public Prosecutor (A.P.P), for the State and Sri. P.Sandeep Kumar, Counsel for the Accused, having been heard, having perused the record and having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.2 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’) 2(a). The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 10.08.2024 at about 0815 hours, the Investigating officer (LW3) got credible information regarding illegal possession and selling of ID liquor by

Nunsavath Mohan Nayak, then on that information LW3 and other

Constables proceeded to the spot and found a person along with the contraband and on seeing them he tried to escape and on suspicion they detained him and they found (04) liters of ID liquor. Immediately,

LW3 called two Mediators/LW-1 and LW-2 and in the presence of mediators he inquired the Accused and Accused submitted his particulars and also revealed that in order to gain unlawful profits he is used to sale the I.D liquor near his house to the persons and the investigation officer has drawn two samples from the above liquor and each sample was sealed as per the procedure and affixed with a sign chit containing the signatures of LW1 to LW3. The officer has seized the above contraband under cover of the panchanama in the presence of

LW1 and LW2.

(b).Basing on the Panchanama, G.Jeevan Reddy (LW3)/investigation officer in this case registered a case in COR.No.279 of 2024, dated 10.08.2024 U/sec.7(A) R/W 8(e) of TS Prohibition Act and took up for further investigation, later he issued Sec.35(3) BNSS to Accused. Later, he send the sample to the chemical examiner and he received the chemical examination report from Government Chemical examiner

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.3 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’)

Regional Prohibition and Excise laboratory, Warangal vide letter

No.2026/2024, SL.No.34911, dated 09.09.2024 stating that the sample

I.D Liquor not fit for human consumption. That, he received the proceedings of Deputy Prohibition and excise commissioner at

Karimnagar vide letter No.03/2025/P&Ex/A3, dated 03.01.2025 with a direction to destroy the seized ID liquor, Accordingly, he destroyed the case property on 23.01.2025. Thus, the Accused has committed an offense U/S 7-A r/w 8(e) of AP Prohibition Act. He concluded his investigation and filed charge sheet against sole Accused offence punishable U/sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Proh. & Excise Act, 1995.

3.This case was taken on file against the accused for the offence punishable under section U/Sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Proh. & Excise Act, 1995.

4.On appearance of the accused, copies of relevant documents filed by the prosecution for its case were furnished to accused as required under Sec.230 BNSS.

5.The accused was examined under section 262 BNSS and he denied the allegation levelled against him. Hence, charges under section

U/Sec.7(A) r/w. 8(e) of TS Proh. & Excise Act were framed, read over and explained to him in Telugu in which the accused is pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.4 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’)

6.To prove its case the prosecution examined PW1 and PW2 and got marked Ex.P1 to P4.

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined

Under section 351 of BNSS with reference to the incriminating material available in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which, he denied the incriminating material and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.

8.Heard the arguments of the learned APP and Defence counsel.

9.Now the points for consideration are :

1. “Whether the prosecution has proved the seizure of I.D

liquor from the possession of the Accused or not?

2. “Whether the prosecution established its case beyond all reasonable doubt or not?

POINT NO.1 and 2:

10.During the course of trial the LW1 examined as PW1/Nunsavath

Srinu Nayak is the Panch witness for confession-cum-seizure

Panchanama, he is turned hostile to the case of prosecution and he is cross examined by the prosecution with the permission of the court but nothing was elicited in favour of prosecution even in his cross examination.

11(a).The LW3/Investigating officer is examined as PW2, on 10.08.2024 at about 0815 hours, he received a credible information about the sale of I.D. Liquor by one Nunsavath Mohan Nayak/Accused, as such he

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.5 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’) along with PW1 and LW2 and his staff intercepted into the place of accused and on search of accused found (04) liters of I.D. Liquor in the possession of accused. On enquiry the accused disclose his name and other details. Then he secured the presence of PW1, LW2 and conducted panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and drawn the sample and the seized (04) liters of I.D. Liquor in the presence of accused. He along with seized property returned to police station, registered the case vide COR.No.279/2024, dated 10.08.2024 for an offence punishable U/sec.7(A) R/w 8 (e) of T.S. of Prohibition Act. Later, he has served 41A Cr.P.C notice on accused, sent the samples to FSL for chemical analysis and received the report from chemical examiner through letter No.2026/2024 serial No.34911 dated 09.09.2024 declaring the sample ID liquor not fit for the human consumption, he sent the remaining quantity of seized I.D. liquor to District prohibition and excise officer, Peddapalli as per orders of Deputy Commissioner of

Prohibition and Excise, Karimnagar vide letter 03/2025/P&Ex/A3

dated 03.01.2025 destroyed the seized I.D liquor on 23.01.2025. on

conclusion of his investigation, he filed the charge sheet.

(b). During the cross examination, PW2 denied that he did not conduct any seizure panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and only for statistical purpose they registered case against accused. He

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.6 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’) further denied that no case property was seized from the possession of accused and accused no way concerned with alleged offence.

12.On perusal of the evidence of PW1 and PW2, it shows that the evidence of PW2 who is the investigation officer in this case deposed in favour of prosecution. But the evidence of PW1 who is the panch witness for Confession-cum-seizure panchanama turned hostile and not supported to the prosecution. As the PW1 turned complete hostile in his evidence, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor (APPO) with the permission of this court cross examined him but nothing could be elicited against the Accused. As such, his evidence is not at all useful to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the Accused. Further since no independent witnesses in this case supported, the learned

APPO has given up the evidence of LW2.

13.In this case, the evidence of PW1 and PW2 not shown any incriminating material against the Accused. There is no evidence on record about illegal possession of ID liquor without having valid license or permission from the Government.

14.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove guilt of the Accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly the Point No.1 and 2 are answered in favour of

Accused and against prosecution.

JCJ-cum-JMFC, Nandimyadaram Page.No.7 of 7 Dt.11-05-2026 CC No. 42 of 2025 (Fair’) 15.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the offense punishable U/sec.7-A r/w 8 (e) of T.S.P. Act, and Accused is acquitted

U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stands cancelled. No case property.

Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE:

PW-1 Nunsavath Srinu Nayak-None- PW-2 G.Jeevan Reddy (I.O)

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1Signature of PW1 on confession-cum-seizure Panchanama Ex.P2COR Ex.P3Confession-cum-seizure panchanama,26.10.2024 Ex.P4Attested copy of FSL report

FOR THE DEFENCE: -Nil-

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-Nil-

Sd/-

Junior Civil Judge – cum -

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Nandimyadaram.

Order Record 389 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/16/2025	Siddi Rajitha vs Gujjula Mallesham	11 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/42/2025	Prohibition and Excise Station vs Nunsavath Mohan Nayak	11 May 2026	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/57/2025	Prohibition and Excise Inspector vs Bodusa Rajitha	11 May 2026	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/119/2025	State through Proh. and Excise Station vs Ainella Hanumanthu	11 May 2026	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/108/2024	State of Telangana vs Praveen Kumar Boini	08 May 2026	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/132/2023	State of Telangana vs Bathini Thirupathi	07 May 2026	Order	—
CC/613/2023	The SHO PS Dharmaram vs Kalakuntla Venugopal	07 May 2026	Order	—
CC/154/2023	Kadari Rajaiah vs Dane Ramesh	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/331/2023	The State through SHO PS Dharmaram vs Baddam Santhosh Reddy	06 May 2026	Order	—
CC/333/2023	The State through SHO PS Dharmaram vs Bhuthagadda Ravi alias Ramesh	06 May 2026	Order	—
CC/503/2023	Kadari Rajaiah vs Dane Lingaiah	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/774/2023	The State through the SHO of P.S. Dharmaram, vs Praveen pal	06 May 2026	Order	—
STC.NI/4/2023	Mukthi Srinivas vs Ghatike Bikshapathi	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/786/2023	SHO.P.S. Dharamaram,State of Telangana Cheeduru Karuna vs A1.Cheeduru Vinay Kumar,	05 May 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/479/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Maryala Anjaiah	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/498/2023	Theepireddy Ravinder Reddy vs Theepireddy Thirupathi Reddy	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/672/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Md.Ismail	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
EP/7/2023	Chindam Sunitha, vs Mamidi Shankaraiah,	30 Apr 2026	Order	—
CC/153/2023	Bore Laxmi(PS Dharmaram) vs Bore Mallaiah	30 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/51/2025	Komatireddy Baapu Reddy vs Komatireddy Linga Reddy	29 Apr 2026	Order	—
CC/73/2023	State of Telangana vs Parvatam Anjaiah	27 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/758/2023	Ponnaveni Bakkaiah (SHO PS DHARMARAM) vs A1 Akula Rakesh	27 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/16/2023	Kothapalli Bhudevi vs Kothapalli Mondaiah	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/171/2023	Kothapalli Mondaiah vs Kothapalli Bhudevi	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/21/2023	State of Telangana vs Kunarapu Rajesham	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/323/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Sandela Thirupathi	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/326/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Thridandapani Anil Kumar	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/347/2023	Velpula Rajamallaiah vs Thridandapani Anil Kumar	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/464/2023	Ellala Laxmi vs Kothapalli Sathyanarayana	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/566/2023	Mamidi Rajamma vs Methuku Thirupathi	24 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/157/2023	1.VIDYAMARI RAJENDER vs GANDHAM RAJAIAH	22 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/294/2023	Nampalli Sagar vs Pambala Komuramma	20 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/254/2023	Devi Akhila(DRM) vs Duda Ajay	17 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/125/2025	State through Proh. and Excise Station vs Islavath Jamuna	15 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/121/2023	Eluvaka Thirupathi, vs Eluvaka Narayana,	08 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/134/2023	1. VUPPULLANCHA RAM MURTHY AND ANOTHER vs D1.VUPPULANCHA VENKATA DAYAL	08 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/588/2023	Gouda Narsingam vs Vakulkar Pathru	08 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
EP/6/2024	Dontha Laxmirajam vs Asoda Lachaiah	07 Apr 2026	Order	—
CC/34/2025	State through Proh. and Excise Station, Peddapalli vs Lavudya Padma	06 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/35/2025	Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Peddapalli. vs Bhookya Padma	06 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/93/2025	State throuth Proh. and Excise Station Pe vs Nunsavath Laxmi	06 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/114/2025	State through Proh. and Excise Station vs Bathini Ellaiah	06 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/141/2023	State of Telangana vs Chenelli Praveen	06 Apr 2026	Order	—
CC/239/2023	Japathi @ Namala Manjula vs Japathi Srinivas	06 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/806/2023	State of Telangana vs Sanjay Ganipaka	06 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/197/2023	Botla Laxmana Murthy vs Sripuram Laxmi Narsaih	02 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/229/2023	State of Telangana vs Siripuram laxmi narsaiah	02 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
CC/417/2023	Saidu Mounika vs Kampally Anjaiah	02 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/6/2023	REGULA LAXMI vs MEDAVENI ALIAS BHUDAMMA AND 12 OTHERS.	31 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/13/2025	Karengula Mallaiah vs The Tahsildar	30 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/29/2024	Balla Swamy, State through S.H.O PS Dharmaram vs Rendla Venkatesh	28 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/60/2025	State of Telangana vs Koyyada Laxman	28 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/113/2025	SHOM PS Dharmaram (Bore Manga) vs Sathaiah Satish Maggidi	28 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/192/2023	State of Telangana vs Vepachettu Rajesham	28 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/376/2023	Bathula Lachaiah vs Aggi Lachaiah @ Bathula Lachaiah	28 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/478/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Kallem Jayapal Reddy	28 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/756/2023	Ettari Saritha (SHO PS DHARMARAM) vs A1 Ettari Rajavva	28 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/13/2026	State of Telangana SHO PS Dharmaram (Suthari Kavitha) vs Premsagar Vennam	26 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/14/2026	State of Telangana SHO PS Dharmaram (Naspuri Vijaya) vs Nagaraju Koruktla	26 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/16/2026	State of Telangana vs Sai Ram Aluvala	26 Mar 2026	Order	—
CC/43/2023	State of Telangana through SHO, P.S Dharmaram vs Mutyala Jalapathi Reddy	26 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/44/2023	State of Telangana through SHO, P.S Dharmaram vs Mutyala Jalapathi Reddy	26 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/47/2023	State of Telangana through SHO, P.S Dharmaram vs Galipelli Naresh	26 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/133/2025	SHO PS Dharamaram (Bolishetti Rajireddy) vs Arun Kumar Moguram	26 Mar 2026	Other	—
OS/45/2025	Anumala Srinivas vs Anumala Sagar	25 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/73/2024	Bairi Srinivas (SHO PS DHARMARAM) vs A1.Bairi Bharathi @ Padma	24 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
CC/431/2023	State of Telangana vs Vsmerugu suresh	24 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
OS/39/2023	Devi Govardhan vs Gummadi Vikram	23 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/320/2023	Madipelly Laxminarayana vs Gurram Suresh	23 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/170/2023	Eru Pochavva vs Chimmalla Nadipi Rajamma	17 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/65/2023	Perumandla Bharathi vs Anupuram Mondaiah	16 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/108/2023	Sonnaila rajamallu vs Thodeti Rajalingaiah	16 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/369/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Eagam Sridhar	16 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/103/2025	State of Telangana vs Nagaraju Naragoni	13 Mar 2026	Lokadalath Award	—
OS/28/2025	Sirimalla Rajesham vs Bathula Naresh	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/29/2024	Gouda Narsingam vs Gouda Nambaiah	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/93/2023	State of Telangana vs Eluvaka narayana	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/360/2023	Bale Shirisha vs Manthani Ramu	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/496/2023	Sayaveni Pedda Mallaiah vs Gandam Mahendar	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/538/2023	State of Telangana PS Dharmaram vs Bekkam Narsaiah	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
STC.NI/6/2025	Velpula Thirupathi vs Doddipatla Satyanarayana	11 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/54/2023	Vennam Ramesh vs Kunarapu Laxman	09 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/46/2025	Prohibition and Excise Station vs Azmeera Sharada	02 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/55/2024	Boddu Maheshwari vs Boddu Lachaiah	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/237/2023	Mohammed Yakhub Khan vs Bommagani Satish	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/298/2023	Siripuram Manikyam vs Mamidipalli Anasurya	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/85/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram State of Telangana vs Paka Venkatesham	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/117/2025	State through Proh. and Excise Station vs Maddela Chukka Narsaiah	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/127/2025	State through Proh. and Excise Station vs Pallepu Rajesham	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/149/2023	Singireddy Jyothi @ Hema vs Gangam Chitti @ Parijatham	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/310/2023	SHO PS Dharmaram vs Mangarapu Rajalingu	27 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
EP/6/2023	Mula Venkataswamy, vs Sangati Anjaiah,	26 Feb 2026	Order	—
CC/462/2023	SHO PS DHARMARAM vs A1. BURRA SRINIVAS AND ANOTHER	26 Feb 2026	Order	—
CC/676/2023	Vodnala Shankaraiah vs MANACHIT FUND IND. P.LTD. REP.Nandala Pochaiah	25 Feb 2026	Order	—
OS/79/2023	Nafees Sulthana vs Kampelli Chandra Shekar	24 Feb 2026	Order	—
EP/3/2025	Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd., Karimnagar, Rep. by its Branch Manager Foreman K. Suresh Babu vs Neelam Jyothi	23 Feb 2026	Order	—
OS/117/2023	Bodakunta Devendramma vs Thammishetti Amruthamma	23 Feb 2026	Order	—
OS/269/2023	Sri Siraboina Mallaiah @ Kanukuntla vs Saganti Posamma	23 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/50/2025	Jaina Rajamouli vs Ellala Malla Reddy	10 Feb 2026	Order	—
OS/287/2023	Aedamala Lalitha Kumari @ Geetha vs Baddam Laxma Reddy	04 Feb 2026	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 389 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		17
Apr 2026		31
Mar 2026		35
Feb 2026		24
Jan 2026		22
Dec 2025		49
Nov 2025		24
Oct 2025		29
Sep 2025		53
Aug 2025		23
Jul 2025		42
Jun 2025		34

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Mrs. SARITHA MATTA handled?

Mrs. SARITHA MATTA has handled 392 court orders since 2025 at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 184 orders per month.

What types of cases does Mrs. SARITHA MATTA hear?

Based on available records, Mrs. SARITHA MATTA primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases, Domestic Violence Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex.

Where is Mrs. SARITHA MATTA currently posted?

Mrs. SARITHA MATTA is posted as Prl. Junior Civil Judge at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex, Peddapalli, Telangana.

Are judgments by Mrs. SARITHA MATTA available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Mrs. SARITHA MATTA are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Mrs. SARITHA MATTA dispose cases?

Mrs. SARITHA MATTA disposes approximately 184 cases per month, based on 392 orders handled over their tenure at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex.

Since when is Mrs. SARITHA MATTA serving?

Mrs. SARITHA MATTA has been serving at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex since 2025.

Case Types

CC 60%

OS 30%

DVC 3%

STC 3%

EP 2%

MC 1%

PRC 1%

Posting History

Jun 2025 — Jul 2025

Prl. Junior Civil Judge
Jun 2025 — Jul 2025

Prl Junior Civil Judge
Jun 2025 — Jul 2025

Addl. Junior Civil Judge · 1 orders
Apr 2025 — Present

Junior Civil Judge · 391 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 4

Other Judges at this Court

Nallala Venkat Sachin Reddy

Prl. Junior Civil Judge

517 orders

Ms. R. Swarika

Ist Addl. Junior Civil Judge

89 orders

Ms. Srinija Kohirkar

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge

68 orders

← View all judges at Godavarikhani - JCJ Court Complex