Ms. Swarupa Kaatam

1 C.C.No. 339/2021

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT YELLANDU.

Thursday, the 14th day of May, 2026

Present: Ms.Swarupa Kaatam Prl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Yellandu

C.C.No. 339 of 2021

Between: The State represented through The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Tekulapally.

...Complainant.

A N D

Deeti Swarna, W/o.M.Ramesh, Age:26 years, Occu:GDSBP of Tadikalapudi of Tekulapally Mandal, R/o.H.No.9-341/1, Prasanthi Nagar,

Laxmidevipally Mandal. ...Accused.

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of learned A.P.P on behalf of the State and of Sri.T.Maheswara Rao, learned counsel on behalf of the sole accused, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

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

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Tekulapally has filed charge sheet against

Accused herein in Cr.No.75/2020 for the offence punishable U/Sec.409 of IPC.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 11.06.2020 at about 20.00 hours the complainant/M.Shyamsundar lodged a complaint in which he stated to take action against Deeti Swarna, S/o.M.Ramesh, Age:26 years, by stating that on behalf of post officers, Khammam vide Lr.No.F4-4/15-16 Dt:11.06.2020 in which he stated that the following report along with connected original/attested copies of records is submitted herewith through Sri.M.Shyam Sundar Inspector posts,

Yellandu Sub-Division in favour of information and with a request to register the 2 C.C.No. 339/2021 police case against Smt.D.Swarna, W/o.M.Ramesh, Occu:GDSBPM (off duty),

R/o.Tadikalapudi branch post office in account with Karepalli sub-post office who committed fraud in recurring deposit accounts and rural post life insurance policy and arrange to initiate the FIR No. Date of registering the case etc., to the said

Inspector posts at earliest possible. Smt.D.Swarna, W/o.M.Ramesh, Age:26 years,

R/o.Tadikalapudi village worked as Gramina Dak Sevak Branch Post Master,

Tadikalapudi branch post office in account with Karepalli Sub-post office for the period from 16.03.2009 to 26.08.2015. As a Gramina dak Sevak branch postmaster,

Tadikalapudi branch post office, it is one of her foremost duty to accept deposit amounts along with deposit forms (pay-in-slips) and pass books tendered by the depositors in respect of the various categories of accounts like savings bank, recurring deposit, time deposit Sukanya Samrudhi Yojana etc., Rural Postal Life insurance policies opened at Tadikalapudi branch post office by strictly following the rules and regulations laid down for the purpose and for which she was appointed.

3.On 05.08.2015 on the report made by the then mail overseer-II of

Kothagudem Sub-Division and by getting confirmed on enquiry with the concerned depositors in writing and submitted to the undersigned for further course of action as laid down in the Rules prescribed for the purpose. The said Smt.D.Swarna has been kept under off-duty w.e.f 26.08.2015 for the irregularities committed. The departmental action has been initiated against the said Smt.D.Swarna which is under progress. As per the departmental rules on the subject suitable action is to be initiated against the GDS who committed grave irregularities in nature by taking some of the documents i.e., accounts/policies out of the total involved and finalize the action initiated. It is also one of the aspect to be attended by the undersigned that some of the documents are to be taken out of the remaining but not entire records and be submitted to the concerned police authority with the report along 3 C.C.No. 339/2021 with connected records to get registered the police case against the Gramina Dak

Sevak, who committed fraud to prove the criminal attitude of the Gramina Dak

Sevak, Hence this report is submitted herewith. Having Here is the typed content from the second image: who committed fraud to prove the criminal attitude of the

Gramina Dak Sevak. Hence this report is submitted herewith. Having receipt of the above petition of the defacto complainant (LW-1), the LW-14 Sub-Inspector of Police,

Tekulapalli PS has registered a case in Crime No.75/2020 U/Sec 409 IPC, issued

FIR and took up the investigation.

4.As per the contents of the above petition, Lw.14 has registered a case in

Cr.No.75/2020 for the offence Punishable U/Sec.409 of IPC and took up the investigation.

5.During the course of investigation Lw.14 examined and recorded the statement of LW-1 in part II CD. Later the Lw-14 visited the scene of offence and secured the presence of the mediators Lws.12 and 13 and observed the scene of offence duly drawing the rough sketch of the scene of offence and depicting all physical features of the scene of offences. Further secured the witnesses i.e. Lws.2 to 10 who were victimized from the hands of the accused, examined and recorded their statements in detail and incorporated in part - II CDs. Later Lw.14 has examined and recorded their statements. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

6.On appearance of the accused, the Copies of documents were furnished as required Under Sec.207 Cr.P.C.

7. The accused person was examined Under Section.239 of Cr.P.C., and the charges for the offence Under Section.409 of IPC., was framed, read over and explained to her in the vernacular language, to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4 C.C.No. 339/2021

8. In pursuance of the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined

Pws.1 to 10 only and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.38.

9. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the accused examined Under

Section.313 Cr.P.C explaining the incriminating evidence appearing against her and when questioned, the accused denied the evidence and did not choose to examine any defence witnesses.

10. The learned Asst.Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted to deliver the judgment basing on the available material.

» Now the point that arises for determination is whether the prosecution

could prove the guilt of accused for the alleged offence Under Section.409 of

IPC?

11.In order to make out the case against the accused, the prosecution examined Lw.1 who is complainant as Pw.1 and he stated that he worked as

Inspector of Posts Yellandu Sub division from 30.10.2018 to 14.11.2020.

Thadikalaapudi post office is one of the branch post office under Yellandu sub division. One K.Shivaji/LW-11 was the then incharge of Thadikalaapudi post office.

The over all administrative control vests with Superintendent of Post office,

Khammam division. Accused worked as Thadikalaapudi branch post master from 16.03.2009 to 26.08.2015. The duty of branch post master is to collect the deposits from the account holders and she need to enter the deposits into the branch office accounts and at the end of the day the branch post master must submit the day to day account details to Karepally sub post office. Lws.4 and 9 along with some other account holder deposited amounts into their respective accounts in Thadikalapudi branch post office. Accused being the branch post master received the amounts from LW-4, LW-9 and some other account holders and she entered the details into the branch office accounts but she failed to remit the amounts into the Government 5 C.C.No. 339/2021 accounts. There will be mailoverseer (who inspects every branch office in the sub division quarterly) as a part of inspection one K.Srinivas who is the then mailoverseer inspected Thadikalaapudi Branch post office and found irregularities in the account statements of the branch office. The mailoverseer intimated to Lw.11 who is the superior to him and reporting officer to mailoverseer. LW-11 conducted enquiry and found that accused had committed fraud in 68 recurring deposit accounts amounting to Rs.34,400/- and also in one rural postal life insurance account amounting to Rs.11,000/-. Immediately accused is placed under off-duty as she is GDSBPM employee. Subsequently departmental enquiry was conducted against accused and she was found guilty and she was removed from services.

Accused utilized those amounts for her personal gains. Lw.11 got transferred as such he was placed as the incharge Inspector of Posts from October, 2018 to

November, 2020. He further stated that he received instructions from superintendent of post office, Khammam division to file Police report against accused. Upon receiving the instructions I lodged report before PS.Tekulapally.

Ex.P.1 is the report received from Office of superintendent of post office. Khammam division lodging report against accused through LW-1.

12.The prosecution examined Lws.2 to 6 are the eye witnesses and Lws.12 and 13 are the panch for scene of offence as Pws.2 to 6, 7 and 8 and they are turned hostile before the court. They further stated that they do not know anything about this case. The evidences of Lws.7, 8 and 10 are closed as they are reported to be died and their death certificates are filed before the court. The learned APP declared the witnesses Pws.2 to 6, 7 and 8 as hostile witnesses.

13. The prosecution examined Lw.11 who is as Pw.9 conducted departmental enquiry and collected the passbook from the victims and examined our statements he stated that he is working at present as Superintendent of Post office at 6 C.C.No. 339/2021 Karimnagar since 2023. Previously he worked as Asst.Superintendent of post office

Kothagudem Sub division from 2012 to 2016. He further stated that he know accused as she worked as Branch post mater at Thadikalapudi post office during my tenure. She worked from 2009 to 2015. In the month of August 2015. One

Krishnaiah who is mail overseer visited Thadikalapudi post office for conducting regular inspection. During his inspection he found some irregularities in RD accounts and he informed to him through phone call. There is misappropriation of amounts in RD accounts by accused/Branch port master of Thadikalapudi post office. Upon receiving information he visited the post of offence and verified all the accounts and he found that some amounts deposited by the depositors were not credited in to the government accounts even though pass book entries were made in the pass books of respective depositors. Pws.2 to 5 and Lws.7, 9 and 10 are the depositors who paid amounts monthly into their RD account at Thadikalapudi post office and accused made entries in their pass book but she did not credited those amounts into government accounts. Accused committed misappropriation of amounts by placing the amounts in unclassified receipt. She had placed

Rs.30,000/- as unclassified receipt and Rs.11.000/- in Rural postal life insurance scheme without crediting the amounts of depositors into government accounts.

Later accused repaid all the amounts belonging to depositors and the amounts were paid to the depositors by Superintendent of post office.

14.The prosecution examined Lw.14 who is Investigation officer as Pw.10 and he stated that on 11.06.2020 at 20.00 hours. He received Ex.P1/report from

PW-1. Basing on the report he issued FIR by registering a case in Cr.No.75/2020 for the offence U/Sec.409 IPC. Ex.P37 is the FIR. During the course of Investigation he examined and the recorded the statement of PW-1 at PS. On the next day he proceeded to scene of offence situated at Thadikalapudi branch post office and 7 C.C.No. 339/2021 drafted CDF in the presence of Pws.7 and 8. Ex.P.38 is the CDF. Dt.12.06.2020.

Later he examined and recorded the statements of Pws.2 to 5 and Lws.7 to 10. On 26.03.2021 accused obtained anticipatory bail orders from Hon'ble High court and accused surrendered before SHO. As per the directions of High court accused is released on personal bond. He further stated that on completion of investigation he filed charge sheet before the court.

Point:-

15.Coming to the appreciation of the evidence of material on record, the prosecution altogether cited 14 witnesses and examined only 10 witnesses. The evidences of Lws.7, 8, 9 and 10 are closed by this court by recording reason. Pw.1 is complainant, Pws.2 to 6 are victim and eye witnesses. Pws.7 and 8 are panch witnesses for CDF. Pw.9 who conduct departmental enquiry and Pw.10 is

Investigation Officer in this case.

16.Upon perusal of material on record and also the evidence, Pws.9 and 10 supports the version of Pw.1 but they did not state properly as to witnessing of the incident in the present case and even the circumstantial witnesses i.e., Pws.2 and 6 failed to state properly about the commission of the act by the accused towards the complainant and even during the course of cross examination Pw1, Pws.9 and 10 nothing was elicited from the mouth of witnesses to connect the accused to the present case. Except the evidence of Pw1, Pws.9 and 10 there is nothing on record to show about the commission of act by the accused in the present case. Even

Pw.10 was an investigating officer failed to say properly about commission of the offence by the accused towards the complainant. As such the present case is not supported by documentary evidence by the police to establish the case without which this court cannot draw any opinion as to the particulars of the present case.

And even there is no proper explanation Pw1, Pws.9 and 10 regarding the act of the 8 C.C.No. 339/2021 accused person as stated in the present case. Even there are several contradictory statements of Pw1, Pws.9 and 10 and during the course of their cross examination pertaining to present case for which this court cannot drawn any conclusion about the commission of the offence by the accused and Pws.7 and 8 have turned hostile by stating that they do not know anything about the panchanama stated to be conducted in their presence in this case. The only testimony of Pw1, Pws.9 and 10 whose evidence was not supported by any documentary evidence cannot be taken into consideration and cannot be appreciated to prove the guilt of the accused persons. The only testimony of Pw1, Pws.9 and 10 without proper evidence for establishing the offence committed by the accused cannot be taken into consideration to prove the guilt of the accused.

17.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the material on record and in view of above appreciation of the evidence, it can be said that the evidence on record appears that there is no corroboration, consistency and trustworthy of evidence of Pws.1, 9 and 10 without material evidence is not sufficient to establish the offence U/Sec.409 of IPC. The point is answered accordingly in favour of the accused and against the prosecution.

18.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences U/Sec-409 of IPC., and accordingly she is acquitted under Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall remained in force for a period of 06 months under Sec.437(A)

Cr.P.C. Since no property produced. Hence no order with regard to property.

Typed to my dictation to Stenographer transcribed by him corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 14th day of May, 2026.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

9 C.C.No. 339/2021

:: Appendix of Evidence ::

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution : Pw.01 : M.Shyamsundher Pw.02 : J.Bujji Pw.03 : L.Mothi Pw.04 : B.Booli Pw.05 : B.Gowtham Pw.06 : A.Showri Pw.07 : B.Laxman Naik Pw.08 : B.Rambabu Pw.09 : K.Shivaji Pw.10 : E.Raj Kumar For Defence : -None-

:: Exhibits marked ::

For Prosecution : Ex.P.01 : Report by Pw.1. Ex.P.02 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.2. Ex.P.03 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.3. Ex.P.04 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.4. Ex.P.05 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.6. Ex.P.06 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.5. Ex.P.07 : Signature on Crime Detail Form by Pw.7 Dt:12.06.2020. Ex.P.08 : Signature on Crime Detail Form by Pw.8 Dt:12.06.2020. Ex.P.09 : Passbook of Pw.2 with RD account No.978390. Ex.P.10 : Passbook of Pw.3 with RD account No.979302. Ex.P.11 : Passbook of Pw.4 with RD account No.980076. Ex.P.12 : Passbook of Pw.6 with RD account No.981217. Ex.P.13 : Passbook of Pw.5 with RD account No.981292. Ex.P.14 : Passbook of Lw.7 with RD account No.982672. Ex.P.15 : Passbook of Lw.10 with RD account No.987664. Ex.P.16 : Passbook of Lw.9 with RD account No.987503. Ex.P.17 : Passbook of Lw.8 with RD account No.988420. Ex.P.18 : Statement of Pw.2 recorded by me. Ex.P.19 : Statement of Pw.3 recorded by me. Ex.P.20 : Statement of Pw.4 recorded by me. Ex.P.21 : Statement of Pw.6 recorded by me. Ex.P.22 : Statement of Pw. 5 recorded by me. Ex.P.23 : Statement of Lw.7 recorded by me. Ex.P.24 : Statement of Lw.8 recorded by me. Ex.P.25 : Statement of Lw.9 recorded by me. Ex.P.26 : Statement of Lw.10 recorded by me. Ex.P.27 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.28 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.29 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.30 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.31 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.32 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.33 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.34 : Statements of accused.

10 C.C.No. 339/2021 Ex.P.35 : Statements of accused. Ex.P.36 : Branch office account of Thadikalapudi branch office pertaining to the period 01.07.2014 to 31.07.2015. Ex.P.37 : First Information Report by Pw.10. Ex.P.38 : Crime Detail Form, Dt:12.06.2020 by Pw.10. For Defence : .. Nil.,

:: Material objects marked ::

- Nil –

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

11 C.C.No. 339/2021

FORM No.73

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL FIRST

CLASS MAGISTRATE AT YELLANDU.

Calendar and Judgment in C.C.No. 339 of 2021 on the file of the PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE AT YELLANDU.

1.Name of Complainant The State represented through, The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Tekulapally. Defacto Complainant Lw.1/M.Shyamsundher,

2.Names of AccusedDeeti Swarna, S/o.M.Ramesh, Age:26 years, Occu:GDSBP of Tadikalapudi of Tekulapally Mandal, R/o.H.No.9-341/1, Prasanthi Nagar, Laxmidevipally Mandal.

3.Nature of offenceUnder Sec.409 of IPC.

4.Date of offence11.06.2020

5.Date of Report11.06.2020

6.Date of Apprehension of the - accused

7.Date of Release on bail -

8.Date of Commencement of 24.06.2024 trial

9.Date of Close of trial 01.04.2026

10. Date of Judgment14.05.2026

11. Plea of accusedNot guilty

12. Finding of the courtNot guilty

13. Sentence or Order In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence under Sec-409 of IPC and accordingly he is entitled for acquittal under Sec-248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused if any shall stands cancelled after the expiry of appeal time. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after the lapse of appeal time.

14. Explanation of delay Due to non-production of witnesses promptly.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

12 C.C.No. 339/2021

1

CC.No. 24 of 2021

N IN THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, YELLANDU

Monday, the 18th day of May, 2026

Present: Ms.Swarupa Kaatam Prl.Junior Civil Judge -cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Yellandu

C.C.No. 24 of 2021

BETWEEN: The State represented through The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Tekulapally.

….Complainant. A N D 1.Bommerla Ganesh, S/o.Rajaiah, Age:36 years, Occu:Agriculture, 2.Bommerla Prasad, S/o.Rajaiah, Age:46 years, Occu:Agriculture, 3.Bandi Srisailam, S/o.Muthaiah, Age:34 years, Occu:Agriculture, 4.Burri Venkatesh, S/o.Gopal, Age:32 years, Occu:Agriculture, 5.Nalamasa Narender, S/o.Threjamu, Age:34 years, Occu:Agriculture, 6.Naramdasu Sathesh, S/o.Bixmaiah, Age:20 years, Occu:Agriculture, 7.Kokkera Suresh, S/o.Sarangapani, Age:20 years, Occu:Agriculture, 8.Bandi Rambabu, S/o.Rajaiah, Age:34 years, Occu:Agriculture, 9.Nalamasa Vinay, S/o.Shankar, Age:21 years, Occu:Agriculture, All are R/o.Bommanapally village, Tekulapally Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

...Accused No.1 to 9.

2

CC.No. 24 of 2021

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of learned A.P.P on behalf of the State and of Sri.P.Yakaiah, learned counsel on behalf of the accused No.1 to 9, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

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

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Tekulapally has filed charge sheet against

Accused Nos.1 to 9, herein in Cr.No.113/2019 for the offences punishable

U/Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 13.09.2019 at about 00.45 hours the de-facto complainant/G.Praveen Kumar lodged a report in which he stated that on the same day as per instructions of the CI of Police, the complainant and his staff HC 2040, PCS.738, 2600 went to Bommanapally village for Ganesh idols immersion B/B duty with patrolling, at about 00:45 hours while he was conducting road patrolling at Bommanapally village, the same villagers found dancing on the public road while Ganesh idol procession was going on with DJ Sound system, then the complainant said them “no permission of DJ sound system, please stop the sound system” on that the Bommerla Ganesh, S/o.Rajaiah, R/o.Bommanapally villager abused him in filthy language and beat to him with hands, then while the remaining the police force tried to stop them, but the villagers Bommerla Prasad,

S/o.Rajaiah, Bandi Srisailam, S/o.Muthaiah, Burri Venkatesh, S/o.Gopal, Nalamasa

Narender, S/o.Threjamu, Naramdasu Sathesh, S/o.Bixmaiah, Kokkera Suresh, S/o

Sarangapani, and Bandi Rambabu, S/o.Rajaiah, Nalamasa Vinay, S/o.Shankar, and some others came over there and forcibly pushed the police and abused them and obstructed their legitimated duties and requested for necessary action against them.

3. As per the contents of the above petition, Lw.15 has registered a case in

Cr.No.113/2019 for the offences U/Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC., and he 3

CC.No. 24 of 2021

took up the investigation.

4. During the course of investigation, Lw.15 examined and recorded the statement of defacto complainant/Lw.1 and Lws.2 to 4 in part II CD in detail. Later he visited scene of offence and incorporated the scene and sketch in Crime Detail

Form before the mediators Lws.5 and 6. On 02.01.2020 Lw.16 served Sec.41A

Cr.P.C., notice to accused No.1 to 9 and obtained sureties from them.

5.On appearance of the accused No.1 to 9 the Copies of documents were furnished as required Under Sec.207 Cr.P.C.

6. The accused No.1 to 9 were examined U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C., and the charges for the offence U/Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC., was framed, read over and explained to them in their vernacular language, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. In pursuance of the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined

Pws.1 to 13 only and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.10.

8. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the accused No.1 to 9 examined

U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C., explaining the incriminating evidence appearing against them and when questioned, the accused denied the evidence and did not choose to examine any defence witnesses.

9. The learned Asst.Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted to deliver the judgment basing on the available material.

Now the point that arises for determination is whether the prosecution

could prove the guilt of accused for the alleged offences U/Sec. 143, 332,

294(b) R/W.149 of IPC .,?

10.In order to make out the case against the accused No.1 to 9, the prosecution examined Lw1 who is complainant as Pw.1 and he stated that on 13.09.2019, he along with Lws.2 to 4 proceeded to Bommanapalli village as a part of their 4

CC.No. 24 of 2021

patrolling duty during Ganesh Idol immersion. They heard some DJ sounds at

Bommanapalli village, as such they proceeded to the village. Accused

No.1/Bommerla Ganesh is present at that place. So he asked A-1 whether he is having permission to use DJ boxes. A-1 replied that he is not having any permission. A.1 also abused him in filthy language and stated to him that he can do what ever he want. A-1 even tried to beat him. He stated that then Lws.2 to 4 tried to stop A-1. In the mean time A-2 to A-9 attacked Lws.2 to 4 and all of them caused obstruction to them while discharging their legitimate duties. He further stated that they proceeded to P.S.Tekulapally after completing our patrolling duty and he lodged report before LW-15 who is placed as SHO. Ex.P.1 is the report

dt:13.09.2019.

11.The prosecution examined Lw.2 who is eye witness as Pw.2 and he stated that he know PW1 and LW3 and LW4. He further stated that he do not know LW4 to

LW11 and A1 and A2 and he do not Know A3 to A9. On 13.09.2019 he along with

PW1 and LW3 and LW4 proceeded to vehicle checking duty at Bommanapally village as Ganesh idol immersion is going on. They proceeded during midnight hours.

While they were proceeding through the village they found that A1, A2, A4, A8 and

A9 and along with some others were dancing on the road by playing loud music through DJ sound boxes. PW1 proceeded to them and asked them to stop the loud music and PW1 questioned as to who gave permission to them to use DJ sound boxes. In the meantime A1 abused PW1 in filthy language and he pushed PW1. He and LW3 and LW4 went to rescue PW1. Accused No.2 intervened and him pushed all of them. Accused No.1,2,4,8 and 9 along with some other persons obstructed them from discharging their legitimate duties. All accused escaped from the spot.

5

CC.No. 24 of 2021

They stopped the DJ sound boxes and they came from the spot. After completion of their patrolling duty PW1 came to PS and lodged a report against accused.

12.The evidence of Lw.3 is closed as he is reported to be died and his death certificate is filed before the court. The evidence of Lw.4 is closed by this court as police failed to summon him inspite of giving several chances.

13.The prosecution examined Lws.5 to 11 who are eye witnesses as Pws.3 to 9 and they stated they do not know each other and also the accused No.1 to 9.

They further stated that they do not know anything about the case. They further stated that they never witness anything in their presence. Exs.P.2 to P.8 are 161

Cr.P.C., statements of Lws.5 to 11.

14.The prosecution examined Lw.13 who is panch witness for CDF as Pw.10 and he stated that he know Lw.12. He stated that he do not know anything about the case. He further stated that police never held CDF in their presence. About 6 or 7 years ago one day police came to his village and they obtained his signature on some white papers. He affixed his signature on those papers upon the insistence of police. Ex.P.9 is the Signature on CDF by Pw.3 dt:14.06.2020.

15.The prosecution examined Lw.14 who treated Lw.1 and issued report as

Pw.11 and he stated that on 13.09.2019 Pw.1/G.Praveen kumar came to government hospital Yellandu with contusion on left cheek. He observed the injury and found that the contusion is of 2 x 5 cms caused by blunt objection and the injury is simple in nature. He issued medical certificate of Pw.1 on the request of the police P.S.Tekulapalli. Ex.P10 is the MC of Pw.1. Dt.13.09.2019.

16.The prosecution examined Lw.15 who is 1st Investigation Officer as Pw.12 and he stated on 13.09.2019, at 02.30 hours, he received Ex.P.1 report from PW-1.

Basing on the report he issued FIR by registering a Crime in Cr.No.113/2019 for 6

CC.No. 24 of 2021

the offences U/Sec.353 of IPC. Ex.P.11 is the FIR. During the course of investigation he examined and the recorded the statement of PW-1, Pw.2, Lw.3 and 4 at PS. Later he visited scene of offence and drafted CDF dt:13.09.2019/Ex.P.12 in the presence of PW-10 and Lw.12. Basing on the statements of Pw.2 and Lw.3 and 4 he had altered section of law from 353 of IPC to 332, 294(b) IPC. On 02.10.2019 at 08.00 hours on reliable information he apprehended A1/B.Ganesh. He affected his arrest and produced before the court for judicial remand. On 04.10.2019 A2 to

A6 and A8 obtained anticipatory bail from the then V Additional Session Judge

Kothagudem as such they were released by obtaining sureties. Later Lw.16 took up the CD file for further investigation.

17.The prosecution examined Lw.17 who is 02nd Investigation Officer as

Pw.13 and he stated Lw.16/K.Anjaiah SI of Police P.S.Allapalli took up further investigation from Pw.12/ASI on 05.10.2019 and Lw.16 verified the investigation conducted by Pw.12 and found it in proper lines. Lw.16 examined and recorded the statements of Pws.3 to 9. On 19.10.2019 A7/K.Suresh obtained anticipatory bail orders from V Additional Session Judge Kothagudem as such A7 is not arrested.

Later he took up further investigation in this case and he verified the investigation conducted by Lw.16 and found it in proper lines. On 02.01.2020 he served 41-A

Cr.P.C., notice to A9/N.Vinay. He collected MC of Pw.1/Ex.P10 from Pw.11. On completion of investigation he filed charge sheet before the court.

Point:-

18.Coming to the appreciation of the evidence of material on record, the prosecution altogether cited 17 witnesses and examined only 13 witnesses and the evidences of Lw.4 was closed by this court as police failed to summon them before this court to adduce their evidence. Pw.1 is the defacto complainant, Pws.2 to 9 are 7

CC.No. 24 of 2021

the eye witnesses, Pw.10 acted as panch witness for CDF. Pw.11 who is Medical

Officer, Pws.12 and 13 are the Investigation Officers in this case.

19.On perusal of material on record and also the evidence, even though Pws.1, 2, 12 and 13 narrated the act done by accused No.1 to 9 on the day of incident the testimony of Pws.1, 2, 12 and 13 is lack of documentary evidence pertaining to the act done by the accused No.1 to 9 as stated by them and even the eye witnesses i.e.

Pws.3 to 9 and panch witness i.e. Pw.10 turned hostile without deposing anything

before this court against the accused and did not support the version of Pws.1, 2,

12 and 13 in this case. Even the evidence of Pw.11 did not disclose the act was done by accused No.1 to 9 towards Pw.1. It was only the opinion given by him regarding the injury and nothing was elicited from his mouth to connect the accused No.1 to 9 to the present case. The only testimony of Pws.12 and 13 who are police officials cannot be taken into consideration to assume act as stated by

Pw.1 and even there is lack of proper evidence in the present case filed by Pw.1 and also there are several contradictory statements made by Pws.1, 2, 12 and 13 during the course of cross examination pertaining to the present case for which this court cannot draw any conclusion for about commission of the offence by the accused and even the act was not properly narrated specifically by Pw.1 to the police at the time of lodging report as to who committed the act for which this court cannot believe the same act was done by the accused No.1 to 9 as stated by Pw.1. The only testimony of Pws.1, 2, 12 and 13 whose evidence was not supported by any documentary evidence cannot be taken into consideration and cannot be appreciated to prove guilt of accused No.1 to 9.

20.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the material on record and in view of above appreciation of the evidence, it can be said that the 8

CC.No. 24 of 2021

evidence on record appears that there is no corroboration, consistency and trustworthy of evidence of Pws.1, 2, 12 and 13 without material evidence is not sufficient to establish the offence U/Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC.. The point is answered accordingly in favour of the accused and against the prosecution.

21.In the result, the accused No.1 to 9 are found not guilty for the offences

U/Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC., and accordingly they are acquitted under

Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused No.1 to 9 shall remained in force for a period of 06 months under Sec.437(a) Cr.P.C. Since no property produced.

Hence no order with regard to property.

Typed to my dictation to Stenographer transcribed by him corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 18th day of May, 2026.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

::Appendix of evidence::

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution: For Defence: Pw.01 : G.Praveen Kumar -None- Pw.02 : V.Nageswar Rao Pw.03 : N.Bikshamaiah Pw.04 : M.Brahmachary Pw.05 : N.Rajanna Pw.06 : D.Bayyamma Pw.07 : Y.Kamalamma Pw.08 : G.Vijayalaxmi Pw.09 : B.Thara Pw.10 : K.Suman Pw.11 : Dr.D.Kishore Pw.12 : V.Bheelya Pw.13 : E.Raj Kumar 9

CC.No. 24 of 2021

:: Exhibits marked ::

For Prosecution : For Defence:

Ex-P.01 : Report by Pw.1 Dt:13.09.2019. -Nil- Ex.P.02 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.5. Ex.P.03 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.6. Ex.P.04 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.7. Ex.P.05 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.8. Ex.P.06 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.9. Ex.P.07 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.10. Ex.P.08 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.11. Ex.P.09 : Signature on CDF by Pw.10 dt:13.09.2019. Ex.P.10 : Medical certificate of Pw.1 Dt:13.09.2019. Ex.P.11 : First Information Report by Pw.12. Ex.P.12 : CDF dt:13.09.2019 by Pw.12.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

10

CC.No. 24 of 2021

FORM No.73

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL FIRST

CLASS MAGISTRATE AT YELLANDU.

Calendar and Judgment in C.C.No. 24 of 2021 on the file of the PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE AT YELLANDU.

1.Name of Complainant The State represented through, The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Tekulapalli.

Defacto Complainant Lw.1/G.Praveen Kumar .

2.Names of Accused1.Bommerla Ganesh, S/o.Rajaiah, Age:36 years, Occu:Agriculture, 2.Bommerla Prasad, S/o.Rajaiah, Age:46 years, Occu:Agriculture, 3.Bandi Srisailam, S/o.Muthaiah, Age:34 years, Occu:Agriculture, 4.Burri Venkatesh, S/o.Gopal, Age:32 years, Occu:Agriculture, 5.Nalamasa Narender, S/o.Threjamu, Age:34 years, Occu:Agriculture, 6.Naramdasu Sathesh, S/o.Bixmaiah, Age:20 years, Occu:Agriculture, 7.Kokkera Suresh, S/o.Sarangapani, Age:20 years, Occu:Agriculture, 8.Bandi Rambabu, S/o.Rajaiah, Age:34 years, Occu:Agriculture, 9.Nalamasa Vinay, S/o.Shankar, Age:21 years, Occu:Agriculture, All are R/o.Bommanapally village, Tekulapally Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

3.Nature of offenceUnder Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC.

4.Date of offence13.09.2019

5.Date of Report13.09.2019

6.Date of Apprehension of the - accused

7.Date of Release on bail -

8.Date of Commencement of 30.08.2022 trial

9.Date of Close of trial 26.03.2026

10. Date of Judgment18.05.2026

11. Plea of accusedNot guilty

12. Finding of the courtNot guilty 11

CC.No. 24 of 2021

13. Sentence or Order In the result, the accused No.1 to 9 are found not guilty for the offences U/Sec.143, 332, 294(b) R/W.149 of IPC., and accordingly they are acquitted under Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused No.1 to 9 shall remained in force for a period of 06 months under Sec.437(a) Cr.P.C. Since no property produced. Hence no order with regard to property.

14. Explanation of delay Due to non-production of witnesses promptly.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

1

CC.No. 217 of 2020

N IN THE COURT OF THE PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, YELLANDU

Thursday, the 14th day of May, 2026

Present: Ms.Swarupa Kaatam Prl.Junior Civil Judge -cum

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Yellandu

C.C.No. 217 of 2020

BETWEEN: The State represented through The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Tekulapally.

….Complainant. A N D 1.Avunuri Madhu, S/o.Ramulu, Age:47 years, Occu:CPI ML ND – 1 State Leader, R/o.Komararam of Yellandu Mandal.

2.Sk.Jaleel (Died Abated).

3.Kalthi Venkateswarlu, S/o.Pothaiah, Age:47 years, Occu:CPI ML ND – 1 Tekulapally Mandal Leader, R/o.Tekulapally Mandal.

4.Guguloth Ramachandu, S/o.Raju, Age:48 years, Occu:CPI ML ND – 1 Tekulapally Mandal Leader, R/o.09th Mile Thanda of Tekulapally Mandal.

5.Jarpula Sunder, S/o.Hamu, Age:41 years, Occu:Agriculture, CPI ML ND – 1 Tekulapally Mandal Leader, R/o.Kondangaulabodu of Tekulapally Mandal.

6.Thalluri Krishna, S/o.Venkata Ramaiah, Age:55 years, Occu:CPM Party Secretary of Yellandu Mandal, R/o.Yellandu Mandal.

7.Jade Seetharamaiah, S/o.Nagaiah, Age:51 years, R/o.J.K Colony Yellandu.

...Accused No.1 to 7.

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of learned A.P.P on behalf of the State and of Sri.N.Mallikarjuna Rao, learned counsel on behalf of the accused No.1 to 7, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:- 2

CC.No. 217 of 2020

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

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Tekulapally has filed charge sheet against

Accused Nos.1 to 7, herein in Cr.No.81/2020 for the offences punishable

U/Sec.353, 506, 188, 143 R/W.149 of IPC, Sec.3 of Epidemic Deceases Act.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 14.06.2020 at about 13.00 hours the de-facto complainant/Sri.V.Bheelya lodged a report in which he stated that on the same day at about 09.00 hours as per west directions, as the lock down being in force, without wearing masks and without ensuring social distance, the CPI ML (ND-

1) Party members1.Avunuri Madhu, 2.Sk.Jaleel Pasha. 3.Kalthi Venkateswarlu, 4.Guguloth Ramachandru, 5.Jarpula Sunder, 6.Thalluri Krishna, 7.Jade

Seetharamaiah, all together were going to conduct Jala Deeksha at Rollapadu cheruvu, he along with his staff tried to stop them but, they pulled and threatened us, stating that if we intervened into this issue they will see our end, and the Madhu threatened that he went to Dalam and see our end and attacks on us and obstructed our duties. They entered into the pond by holding flags and raised slogans against to the Government. Hence he requested to take action against them.

3. As per the contents of the above petition, LW.8 has registered a case in

Cr.No.81/2020 for the offences U/Sec.353, 506, 188, 143 r/w 149 IPC, Sec.3 of

Epidemic Deceases At, 51(b) of National Disaster Management Act and he took up the investigation.

4. During the course of investigation, Lw.8 examined and recorded the statement of Lw.1 in part II CD under Sec.161(3) Cr.P.C., at police station. Later he visited scene of offence and examined and recorded the statements of Lws.2 to 5 and later he secured the presence of two mediators i.e. Lws.6 and 7 and conducted 3

CC.No. 217 of 2020

scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch on CDF. On 01.07.2020 he served Sec.41A Cr.P.C., notice to accused No.1 to 7 and obtained sureties from them.

5.On appearance of the accused No.1 to 7 the Copies of documents were furnished as required Under Sec.207 Cr.P.C.

6. The case against accused No.2 stood abated as per the docket order

Dt:27.02.2024. The accused No.1 and 3 to 7 were examined U/Sec.251 of Cr.P.C.,

and the charges for the offence U/Sec.353, 506, 188, 143 r/w 149 of IPC., Sec.3 of

Epidemic Deceases Act, was framed, read over and explained to them in their vernacular language, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. In pursuance of the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined

Pws.1 to 5 only and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.6.

8. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the accused No.1, 3 to 7 examined U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C., explaining the incriminating evidence appearing against them and when questioned, the accused denied the evidence and did not choose to examine any defence witnesses.

9. The learned Asst.Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted to deliver the judgment basing on the available material.

Now the point that arises for determination is whether the prosecution

could prove the guilt of accused for the alleged offences U/Sec.353, 506, 188,

143 r/w 149 of IPC., Sec.3 of Epidemic Deceases Act.,?

10.In order to make out the case against the accused No.1 to 7, the prosecution examined Lw1 who is complainant as Pw.1 and he stated that on 14.06.2020 he along with Lws.2 and 3 are conducting patrolling duty at 09.00 am at Rollapadu area. Then he has seen A.1 along with 6 other members trying to enter into the pond at Rollapadu in order to show their protest against delay in constructing 4

CC.No. 217 of 2020

Seetharama Project. When they restricted A1 and 6 other members from entering into the pond in view of Covid-19 restrictions, all of them refused their instructions.

He further stated that they pushed them and entered into the pond. Then they intimated to Lw.8, upon the instructions of Lw.8 they shifted A1 along with 6 other members to the PS. Ex.P1 is the report. Police examined him and recorded his statement.

11.The prosecution examined Lw.5 who is panch for scene of offence as Pw.2 and he stated that he do not know Lw.4 and also the accused No.1 to 7. He further stated that he do not know anything about the case. He further stated that he never witness anything in his presence. ExP.2 is 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.5.

12.The prosecution examined Lws.6 and 7 who are panch witnesses as for scene of offence as Pws.3 and 4 and they stated that they know Lw.7. They stated that they do not know anything about the case. They further stated that police never held CDF in their presence. In the year 2020 one day when they were in their fields at Rollapadu and then police approached them and asked them to affix their signatures on some white papers. They further stated that they affixed their signatures on those papers upon the insistence of police. Exs.P3 and P.4 are the signatures of them on CDF.

13.The prosecution examined Lw.8 who is Investigation Officer as Pw.5 and he stated that on 14.06.2020 at 13.00 hours, he received Ex.P.1/Report from PW-1 and registered a case in crime No.81/2020 for the offence punishable U/Sec.353, 506, 188, 143 R/W 149 of IPC and Sec.3 of ED Act, Sec.51(B) of DM Act-2005.

Ex.P5. is the FIR. He further stated that he examined and recorded the statement of PW-1 at PS and on the same day he proceeded to scene of offence situated at

Rollapadu cheruvu and drafted CDF in the presence of Pws.3 and 4. Ex.P6 is the 5

CC.No. 217 of 2020

CDF, Dt.14.06.2020. He further stated that he has examined and recorded the statements of Lws.2 to 4 and Pw.2. Later he further stated that On 01.07.2020 he served 41-A Cr.PC notices to the accused No.1 to A.7 and after completion of investigation he laid charge sheet before this court against accused No.1 to 7.

14.The evidences of Lws.2 to 4 were closed by this court as police failed to summon them inspite of giving several chances.

Point:-

15.Coming to the appreciation of the evidence of material on record, the prosecution altogether cited 8 witnesses and examined only 5 witnesses and the evidences of Lws.2 to 4 were closed by this court as police failed to summon them

before this court to adduce their evidences. Pw.1 is the defacto complainant, Pw.2 is

the eye witness, Pws.3 and 4 acted as panch witnesses for scene of offence. Pw.5 who is Investigation Officer in this case.

16.Pw.1 i.e. V.Bheelya deposed before this court stating that on 14.06.2020 he along with Lws.2 and 3 are conducting patrolling duty at 09.00 am at Rollapadu area. Then he has seen A.1 along with 6 other members trying to enter into the pond at Rollapadu in order to show their protest against delay in constructing

Seetharama Project. When they restricted A1 and 6 other members from entering into the pond in view of Covid-19 restrictions, all of them refused their instructions.

He further stated that they pushed them and entered into the pond. Then they intimated to Lw.8, upon the instructions of Lw.8 they shifted A1 along with 6 other members to the PS. Ex.P.1 is the earliest form of information about the commission of the offence. Whereas Pw.2 deposed before this court stating that that he do not know Lw.4 and also the accused No.1 to 7. He further stated that he do not know anything about the case. He further stated that he never witness anything in his 6

CC.No. 217 of 2020

presence. ExP.2 is 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.5. Whereas Pws.3 and 4 deposed

before this court stating that they stated that they know Lw.7. They stated that

they do not know anything about the case. They further stated that police never held CDF in their presence. In the year 2020 one day when they were in their fields at Rollapadu and then police approached them and asked them to affix their signatures on some white papers. They further stated that they affixed their signatures on those papers upon the insistence of police. Exs.P3 and P.4 are the signatures of them on CDF. Pw.2 who is the eye witness and Pw.3 and 4 who acted as panch witnesses for scene of offence in this case did not depose anything about the case of prosecution and they have turned hostile. Whereas Pw.5 who acted as

Investigation Officer in this case deposed about conducting of investigation after he registering the crime.

17.On perusal of material on record and also the evidence, even though Pws.1 and Pw.5 narrated the act done by accused No.1 to 7 on the day of incident the testimony of Pw.1 and Pw.5 is lack of documentary evidence pertaining to the act done by the accused No.1 to 7 as stated by them and even the eye witness i.e. Pw.2 and panch witnesses i.e. Pws.3 and 4 turned hostile without deposing anything

before this court against the accused and did not support the version of Pws.1 and

5 in this case. The only testimony of Pws.1 and 5 who are police officials cannot be taken into consideration to assume act as stated by Pw.1 and even there is lack of proper evidence in the present case filed by Pw.1 and also there are several contradictory statements made by Pws.1 and 5 during the course of cross examination pertaining to the present case for which this court cannot draw any conclusion for about commission of the offence by the accused and even the act was not properly narrated specifically by Pw.1 to the police at the time of lodging report 7

CC.No. 217 of 2020

as to who committed the act for which this court cannot believe the same act was done by the accused No.1 to 7 as stated by Pw.1. The only testimony of Pw.1 and 5 whose evidence was not supported by any documentary evidence cannot be taken into consideration and cannot be appreciated to prove guilt of accused No.1 to 7.

18.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the material on record and in view of above appreciation of the evidence, it can be said that the evidence on record appears that there is no corroboration, consistency and trustworthy of evidence of Pws.1 and 5 without material evidence is not sufficient to establish the offence U/Sec.353, 506, 188, 143 R/W.149 of IPC, Sec.3 of Epidemic

Deceases Act. The point is answered accordingly in favour of the accused and against the prosecution.

19.In the result, the accused No.1, 3 to 7 are found not guilty for the offences

U/Sec-353, 506, 188, 143 r/w 149 of IPC., Sec.3 of Epidemic Deceases Act, 51(b) of

National Disaster Management Act., and accordingly they are acquitted under

Sec.255(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused No.1, 3 to 7 shall remained in force for a period of 06 months under Sec.437(a) Cr.P.C. Since no property produced.

Hence no order with regard to property.

Typed to my dictation to Stenographer transcribed by him corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 14th day of May, 2026.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

::Appendix of evidence::

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution: For Defence: PW1 : V.Bheelya -None- PW2 : Ch.Laxminarayana PW3 : J.Vishnu PW4 : Ch.Laxminarayana PW5 : E.Raj Kumar 8

CC.No. 217 of 2020

:: Exhibits marked ::

For Prosecution : For Defence:

Ex-P1 : Report by Pw.1 Dt:14.06.2020. -None- Ex.P2 : 161 Cr.P.C., statement of Lw.5. Ex.P3 : Signature on CDF by Pw.3 dt:14.06.2020. Ex.P4 : Signature on CDF by Pw.4 dt:14.06.2020. Ex.P5 : First Information Report by Pw.5. Ex.P6 : CDF dt:14.06.2020 by Pw.5.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

9

CC.No. 217 of 2020

FORM No.73

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL FIRST

CLASS MAGISTRATE AT YELLANDU.

Calendar and Judgment in C.C.No. 217 of 2020 on the file of the PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE AT YELLANDU.

1.Name of Complainant The State represented through, The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S.Tekulapalli.

Defacto Complainant Lw.1/V.Bheelya.

2.Names of Accused1.Avunuri Madhu, S/o.Ramulu, Age:47 years, Occu:CPI ML ND – 1 State Leader, R/o.Komararam of Yellandu Mandal. 2.Sk.Jaleel (Died Abated). 3.Kalthi Venkateswarlu, S/o.Pothaiah, Age:47 years, Occu:CPI ML ND – 1 Tekulapally Mandal Leader, R/o.Tekulapally Mandal. 4.Guguloth Ramachandu, S/o.Raju, Age:48 years, Occu:CPI ML ND – 1 Tekulapally Mandal Leader, R/o.09th Mile Thanda of Tekulapally Mandal. 5.Jarpula Sunder, S/o.Hamu, Age:41 years, Occu:Agriculture, CPI ML ND – 1, Tekulapally Mandal Leader, R/o.Kondangaulabodu of Tekulapally Mandal. 6.Thalluri Krishna, S/o.Venkata Ramaiah, Age:55 years, Occu:CPM Party Secretary of Yellandu Mandal, R/o.Yellandu Mandal. 7.Jade Seetharamaiah, S/o.Nagaiah, Age:51 years, R/o.J.K Colony Yellandu.

3.Nature of offenceUnder Sec.353, 506, 188, 143 r/w 149 of IPC., Sec.3 of Epidemic Deceases Act of IPC

4.Date of offence14.06.2020

5.Date of Report14.06.2020

6.Date of Apprehension of the - accused

7.Date of Release on bail -

8.Date of Commencement of 25.08.2025 trial

9.Date of Close of trial 31.03.2026

10. Date of Judgment14.05.2026

11. Plea of accusedNot guilty 10

CC.No. 217 of 2020

12. Finding of the courtNot guilty

13. Sentence or Order In the result, the accused No.1, 3 to 7 are found not guilty for the offences U/Sec-353, 506, 188, 143 r/w 149 of IPC., Sec.3 of Epidemic Deceases Act, 51(b) of National Disaster Management Act., and accordingly they are acquitted under Sec.255(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused No.1, 3 to 7 shall remained in force for a period of 06 months under Sec.437(a) Cr.P.C. Since no property produced. Hence no order with regard to property.

14. Explanation of delay Due to non-production of witnesses promptly.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

YELLANDU.

TSBK030004262026

Presented on : 14-05-2026 Registered on : 14-05-2026 Decided on : 14-05-2026 Duration : 0 years, 0 months, 0 days

IN THE COURT OF

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu.

AT ,Bhadradri Kothagudem (Presided Over by Ms. SWARUPA KAATAM)

CRLMP.BAIL/25/2026 Between:

ESAM SRINU

Through Police Station Officer , .Raigudem v Allapalli Mandal,Bhadradri Kothagudem District. Bhadradri Kothagudem

VERSUS

SHO OF PS ALLAPALLY

Age: 0 Occupation :

SHO OF PS ALLAPALLY

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: KEERTHI KARTHIK, Advocate for appearing for SHO OF PS ALLAPALLY Advocate appearing for , respectively. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Offence punishable under : 480 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,

ORDER

(Delivered on 14-05-2026)

This is an application filed Under Section.480 of BNSS, seeking to enlarge accused on bail who is alleged to have committed the offences punishable Under Section.324 of IPC. Notice issued Lr.APP and he opposed the petition. Heard both sides. It is the contention of Lr.Counsel for the petitioner that accused is remanded to judicial custody on 04.05.2026 by executing NBW against accused. He further submitted that on 08.04.2026 due to the sudden demise of the close relative of the petitioner/accused, as such he could not appear before the court. Hence this court is pleased to issue NBW against accused on 08.04.2026. Subsequently NBW was executed and he was remanded to judicial custody and he was detained in Jail. He further submitted that accused is the sole breadwinner of the family and because of his detention his entire family is facing starvation. Hence he prayed the court to take lenient view and enlarge accused on bail. On the other hand Lr.APP opposed the petition and contended that accused is of absconding nature and if at all he is enlarged on bail there is every chance of him to escape from the jurisdiction of this court. He may not cooperate for the trail. Hence he prayed the court to dismiss the bail petition. On perusing record, it is evident that accused is remanded to judicial custody on 04.05.2026 on execution of NBW and since then he is in jail. From the submission of Lr.Counsel for the petitioner, that the petitioner/accused not appeared before the court due to sudden demise of his close relative. Considering the submission and the remand period of accused this court is inclined to take a lenient view and enlarge petitioner/accused on bail subject to following conditions. In the result this petition is allowed and petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail on furnishing two sureties for Rs.10,000/- each for the like sum to the satisfaction of this court along with personal bond. On such release the petitioner/accused shall appear before the court on each and every date of appearing without fail.

Date : 14-05-2026 (Ms.SWARUPA KAATAM)

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu.

TSBK030004232026

Presented on : 11-05-2026 Registered on : 11-05-2026 Decided on : 11-05-2026 Duration : 0 years, 0 months, 0 days

IN THE COURT OF

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu.

AT ,Bhadradri Kothagudem (Presided Over by Ms. SWARUPA KAATAM)

CRLMP.BAIL/24/2026 Between: Lanjapalli Rambabu Through Police Station Officer , H.No.4-2-204/2,Basthi, Yellandu Town and Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District. Bhadradri Kothagudem

VERSUS

PS Yellandu Age: 0 Occupation : PS Yellandu Bhadradri Kothagudem ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: UMAMAHESWARARAO KAMEPALLI, Advocate for appearing for PS Yellandu Advocate appearing for , respectively. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Offence punishable under : 303(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,

ORDER

(Delivered on 11-05-2026)

This is the 1st bail petition filed Under Section.480 of BNS by petitioner/accused No.1 with a prayer to grant bail. The offence involved Under Section.303(2) of BNS, and remanded to the judicial custody before this court on 28.04.2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.1 submitted that the accused person is no way concerned with the alleged offence, he never committed any such offence. Further submitted that the accused No.1 is a sole bread earner of his family member. Further submitted that the entire investigation of the case has been completed except filing of charge sheet. Further submitted that he is ready to furnish the sufficient sureties as ordered by this Honourable court. Hence, the petition. Learned APP received notice and filed counter stating that he is the person is released on bail there is every possibility to tamper the witnesses or evidence. Hence, dismiss the petition. Heard on both sides. Perusal of the case record, reveals that the petitioner/accused No.1 is remanded to the Judicial custody on 28.04.2026. The offence involved is U/Sec.303(2) of BNS. Heard both sides. Perused the record. Perused the record.

The Petitioner/Accused No.1 was remanded to judicial custody on 28.04.2026. However, in this case, investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and detention of accused person in judicial custody, this court is of the view that, the Petitioner/Accused No.1 can be enlarged on bail. In the result, Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be released on bail on his executing personal bond for sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of this court.

Date : 11-05-2026 (Ms. SWARUPA KAATAM)

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu.