1 APKU010004542022
IN THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-CUM-
PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, KURNOOL.
Present: Smt.T.Malleswari, Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Principal Assistant
Sessions Judge, Kurnool.
Monday, the 13th day of April, 2026
CALENDAR CASE No.7/2022
State represented by The Inspector of Police, Banaganapalle Circle. …. Complainant
Versus
1. Nareddy Venkata Rami Reddy, age 62 years, S/o Nareddy Sunki Reddy, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A1)
2. Uppari Maddilety Swamy, age 44 years, S/o Narayana, Resident of H.No.1-12, Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A2)
3. Chakali Nagaraju, age 30 years, S/o Balanna, Resident of H.No.17/55, Sunkulamma turning, Kondapeta, Working as Aadhar Operator in Aadhar Enrollment Center, SBI, Banaganapalli. (A4)
4. Kasireddy Siva Sankar Reddy, age 61 years, S/o Rami Reddy, Resident of H.No.3/16, Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A6)
5. Dudekula Hussaini, age 62 years, S/o Hussaini, Resident of Gokuladinne Village, Owk Mandal. (A7) (Died) 2
6. Dudekula Pakkira, age 62 years, S/o Moulali, Resident of Gokuladinne Village, Owk Mandal. (A8)
7. Chenchu Sivaramudu, age 62 years, S/o Narayanai, Resident of Gokuladinne Village, Owk Mandal. (A9)
8. Madireddy Chandra Sekhar Reddy, age 62 years, S/o Chinna Narayana Reddy, Resident of Raghavarajupuram Village, Owk Mandal. (A10)
9. Pasupula Pullaiah, age 62 years, S/o Maddilety, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A11)
10.Motugadda Prakasham, age 62 years, S/o Prakasham, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A12)
11.Motukatla Yohan, age 62 years, S/o Devadanam, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A13)
12.Rachumallu Bhaskar Reddy, age 62 years, S/o Rami Reddy, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A14) (Died)
13.Gogu Pedda Chennaiah, age 62 years, S/o Pedda Pullanna, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A15)
14.Juturu Bala Vaddi Raju, age 62 years, S/o Pullaiah, Resident of Raghavarajapuram Village, Owk Mandal. (A16)
15.Mangali Nadipi Kambhagiri, age 62 years, S/o Chinna Ramana, Resident of Raghavarajapuram Village, Owk Mandal. (A17)
16.Pasupula Ramudu, age 62 years, S/o Deva Dasu, Resident of Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A18) (Died)
17.Kavali Ramanjaneyulu, age 35 years, S/o Chandra of Gunthakal Town and Mandal, Anantapur District, Adhar Operator, Mee-Seva Centre, Gunthakal Town. (A19)
18.Appal Reddy Amaranath Reddy, age 23 years, S/o Sivarami Reddy of Nandalapadu Village, Tadipatri Mandal, Ananthapur District. The then Aadhar Operator, at SBI Bank, Tadipatri Branch. (A20) 3
19.Mangali Rama Krishna, age 61 years, S/o M.Govindappa, H.No.3- 118, Mangali Street, Banaganapalli Town, Kurnool District. (A21) (Died)
20.Hashavath Maddilety Naik, age 50 years, S/o H.Teresingh Naik, Resident of Chinnarajupalem Village, Banaganapalli Mandal. (A22)
21.Vara Rama Pullaiah, age 60 years, S/o V.Maddilety, Resident of Chinna Rajupalem Village, Banaganapalli Mandal. (A23)
22.Shaik Hussain Sa, age 62 years, S/o Imam Sa, B.C. Colony of Banaganapalli Town and Mandal. (A24)
23.Mulla Mahaboob Basha, age 62 years, S/o M.Kambhagiri, Near Power Station, Banaganapalli Town and Mandal. (A25) (Died)
24.Vara Mahendra, age 29 years, S/o Maddilety Swamy, Resident of Peddarajupalem Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Aadhar Operator, Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, Banaganapalli Branch. (A26) (Died)
25.Poluru Pullaiah, age 52 years, S/o P.V.Kondaiah, Kummari Peta, Panyam Village and Mandal, Aadhar Operator, Mee-Seva Centre, Panyam Town and Mandal. (A27) … Accused
Not charged Accused:-
1. Mahesh, Working in Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank at Tadipatri Town. (A3).
2. Nareddy Siva Sankar Reddy, age 63 years, S/o Sunki Reddy, Resident of H.No.3/137, Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal. (A5)
This case coming on 12-03-2026 for final hearing before me in the presence of Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and of
Sri.G.Krishna Reddy and M.Gouri Chinnamma, Advocates for A1, A2, A4, 4
A6, A8 to A13, A15 toA17, A20, A22 to A24; and Sri.M.Venkoba Rao,
Sri.M.Ramakrishna Murthy and Sri.N.Suresh, Advocates for A19 and
A27; and upon hearing both sides, after perusing the material available on record, and after having stood over for consideration till this day, this
Court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
The Inspector of Police, Banaganapalli Circle filed charge sheet in
Crime No.225/2020 of Owk Police Station against A1, A2, A4, A6 to A27 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120(B)
IPC and Sec.39 of Aadhar Act, 2016.
2. The case of prosecution as set out in charge sheet, in brief, is as follows:-
(a)The defacto complainant/LW.1-Billa Srinivasulu is working as
Panchayath Secretary of Gundlasingavaram Panchayath, Owk Mandal.
LW.2-Katravath Suresh Naik is working as Digital Assistant of
Gundlasingavaram Panchayath, Owk Mandal. LW.3-Dudekula Madeena
Bee is working as Welfare and Educational Assistant of
Gundlasingavaram Panchayath, Owk Mandal. LW.4-Shaik Mukthiyar and
LW.5-Bandi Abbas are residents of Kareem Bagh Street, Banaganapalli
Town and Mandal who acted as Panchayathdars at the time of seizing 5 (1) Laptop, (2) One charger, (3) One Finger Print Scanner of L1
Company, (4) One Irish Scanner of L1 Company, (5) One Web Camera of
Logitech Company, (6) One Scanner and Colour Printer of EPSON-L-380
Company, (7) One Gold colour Samsung Cell Phone of Chakali Nagaraju (A3) and (8) One Gold colour Samsung Cell Phone of Uppari Maddilety
Swamy (A2) under the cover of seizure Panchayathnama, dt.08-10-2020.
(b)Shaik Ikbal (LW6) and Sunni Shakir (LW-7) are residents of
Banaganapalli Town and Mandal who acted as panchayatdars at the time of seizing (1) Laptop, (2) One Charger, (3) One Finger Print Scanner of
SAFRAN Company, (4) One Irish Scanner of Iritech company, (5) One
Web camera of Logitech Company, (6) One scanner and black and white printer of Samsung SCX-3401F company, (7) A Black color AMKETTE company converter under the cover of Seizure Panchayatnama dated 22-10-2020 and sizing of (1) One Laptop, (2) One Charger, (3) One
Finger Print Scanner of SAFRAN company, (4) One Irish Scanner of
Iritech company, (5) One Web camera of Logitech company, (6) One scanner and colour printer of Canon L210 company under the cover of
Seizure Panchayatnama dated 23-10-2020 and also present at the time 6 of arrests of accused A-19 on 24-10-2020 and Accused A-20 on 26-10-2020.
(c)B. Srikanth Reddy Sub-lnspector of Police (LW.8), Owk
Police Station who registered the case. M. Suresh Kumar Reddy (LW.9) then Inspector of Police, Banaganapalli Circle now working in Intelligence department on deputation and investigating officer in this case. B. Subba
Rayudu (LW.10) Inspector of Police, Banaganapalli circle who submitted and obtained orders to delete the names of Accused A-3 and A-5 from the list of accused and filed charge sheet.
(d)On 23-09-2020 at 12.30 hours basing on the written report of the complainant, Sub-Inspector of Police, Owk Police Station (LW-8) registered a case in Cr.No.225/2020 U/sec. 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120
(b) IPC & Sec.39 of Aadhar Act of Owk Police Station and submitted copies of FIRs to all concerned officers and also sent a copy FIR to the then Inspector of Police, Banaganapalli circle (LW-9) for further investigation.
7
(e)During the course of investigation on 23-9-2020 the LW-9 investigating officer examined the Complainant, digital Assistant, Welfare & Educational Assistant of Gundlasingavaram panchayat, Owk as LW.1 to LW.3 and recorded their detailed statements.
(f)On 26-09-2020 LW-9 served notice to the accused A-6
U/Sec. 41 (A) Cr. P.C. to came to know about Aadhar changes in his
Aadhar card and verified his original Aadhar card and found Date of Birth
as 05-10-1959. LW-9 checked Aadhar update history in UIDAI website on
accused A-6 Aadhar card by obtaining OTP from his mobile and found that there was demographic changes in Aadhar card No. 772763359796 and his Date of Birth was changed from 01-04-1971 to 05-10-1958 on 24-08-2020 vide URN 2824020090006320200824134850. Then, LW9 took Print of Aadhar update history of the accused A-6 from the UIDAI.
(g)On 27-09-2020 LW-9 served 41 (A) Cr. P.C. notices on the accused A5 to A11 and he came to know about Aadhar changes in their
Aadhar cards. Then the investigating officer/LW-9 verified original Aadhar card of accused A-7 Dudekula Hussaini and found Date of Birth as 01-02-1958. Then LW-9 checked Aadhar update history in UIDAI website 8 on accused A.7 Aadhar card by obtaining OTP from his mobile and found that there was two demographic changes in Aadhar Card
No.685983641301 and his Date of Birth was changed from 01-01-1968 to 01-02-1958 on 17-12-2019 vide URN 2824020090380220191217160107,
Later LW-9 checked Aadhar update history in UIDAI website on accused
A-8 Aadhar card by obtaining OTP from his mobile and found that there was demographic changes in Aadhar card No. 596203808452 and his
Date of Birth was changed from 01-01-1971 to 02-04-1958 on 17-12-2019 vide URN 2824020090380120191217155613, Later LW-9 checked
Aadhar update history in UIDAI website on accused A-9 Aadhar card by obtaining OTP from his mobile and found that there was two demographic changes in Aadhar card No. 219232884827 and his Date of Birth was changed from 01-01-1981 to 01-01-1958 on 07-09-2019 vide URN 2754800060211620190907141252. Then, LW.9 took print of Aadhar update history of the accused A7 to A9 from the UIDAI Website.
(h)Later LW-9 secured the presence of accused A4-Chakali
Nagaraju and served Notice to him under Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. Then the A4 stated that he is working in SBI, Banaganapalli as Aadhar Operator in
Aadhar Enrollment center as out sourcing employee under Blue3IT 9 solutions and he was given one ID i.e. 02009 and their company code is 2824. The above said ID's provided by UIDAI and also stated that he changed demographic changes in Aadhar cards of accused A-6 to A-8.
Later he stated that the connected changed uploaded documents A-6 to
A-8 are not in his possession. The documents will be available in Aadhar data base as well as Blue3IT solutions data base.
(i)On 30-09-2020 the investing officer/LW-9 served notice to the accused A-5 Nareddy Siva Sankar Reddy U/Sec. 41 (A) Cr. P.C. to know about Aadhar changes in his Aadhar card. Then the investing officer/LW-9 verified original Aadhar card of accused A-5 Nareddy Siva
Sankar Reddy and found Date of Birth as 23-12-1957 and then the investing officer/LW-9 checked Aadhar update history in UIDAI website on accused A-5 Aadhar card by obtaining OTP from his mobile and found that there was only one demographic change in his Aadhar card No.
939432217464on30-09-2020videURN 2824020090051220200928163902 but his Date of Birth was not changed it was same as first enrollment of Aadhar Card on 03-08-2012.
10
(j)On 08-10-2020 the accused A2 & A4 appeared before the investing officer/LW-9 on notices served on them and examined them in the presence of Panchayathdars (LW-4 & 5) and recorded their confession statement and according their confession seized (1) Laptop, (2) One Charger, (3) One Finger Print Scanner L1 company, (4) One Irish
Scanner of L1 company, (5) One Web camera of Logitech company, (6)
One scanner and color printer of EPSON-L-380 company, (7) One gold color Samsung cell phone of Chakali Nagaraju (A 4) and (8) One gold color Samsung cell phone of Uppari Maddilety Swamy (A-2) in the presence of Panchayatdars, pasted slip signed by the Police officers, accused and Panchayatdars under the cover of Seizure Panchayatnama
dated 08-10-2020.
(k)During the course of investigation the investing officer/LW-9 came to know that the accused A12-Motogadda Prakasam, A13-
Motakalla Yohan, A14-Rachamalla Baskar Reddy, A15-Gogu Pedda
Chennaiah, A16-Juturu Balavaddi Raju, A17-Mangali Nadipi Kambhagiri,
A18-Pasupula Ramudu, all resident of Gundla Singavaram village, Owk found age discrepancies in their Aadhaar cards. Hence, on 17-10-2020, LW-9 served Sec. 41 (A) Cr.P.C. notice to accused A12 to 11
A18 to know about Aadhar changes in their Aadhar cards. Then LW-9 found A12 & A13 changed their ages in their Adhar cards with the help of accused A1-Venkata Rami Reddy and A19-Kavali Ramanjaneyulu, accused A14 to A18 changed their Adhar card ages with the help of A1 &
A20-Appalreddy Amarnatha Reddy. Later on 17-10-2020 LW-9 also filed a requisition before this court to add the names of the accused A12 to
A20.
(l)Further the accused A21-Mangalai Ramakrishna of
Banaganapalli town, A22-H.Maddilety Naik of Chinnarajupalam Village,
Banganapalli Mandal, A23-V.Ramapullaih of Chinnaraju pallem village,
Banaganapalli Mandal, A24-Shaik Hussensa of Banaganapalli town and
A25-Mulla Mahboobbasha Banaganapalli town found age discrepancies in their Aadhaar cards. Hence on 19-10-2020, LW-9 served Sec. 41 (A)
Cr. P.C. notice to accused A21 to A25 to know about Aadhar changes in their Aadhar cards. Then LW-9 found 21 & A22 changed their ages in their Adhar cards with the help of accused A1-Venkata Rami Reddy and
A26-Vara Mahendra, accused A23 & A24 changed their Aadhar card ages with the help of A2-Uppari Maddiilety and A-4-Chakali Naga Raju, the accused A-25 changed his Aadhar card age with the help of accused 12
A1 & A27 Poluru Pullaiah. Later on 19-10-2020 LW-9 also filed a requisition before the court to add the names of the accused A21 to A27.
(m)On 22-10-2020 the accused A27-Poluru Pullaiah appeared
before LW-9, later LW-9 served notice on him and examined him in the
presence of Panchayathdars (LW-6 &7) and recorded his confession statement and according his confession and seized (1) Laptop, (2) One
Charger, (3) One Finger Print Scanner of SAFRAN company, (4) One
Irish Scanner of Iritech company, (5) One Web camera of Logitech company, (6) One scanner and black and white printer of Samsung SCX- 3401F company, (7) A Black color AMKETTE company converter in the presence of Panchayatdars pasted slip signed by the Police officers, accused and Panchayatdars under the cover of seizure Panchayatnama
dated 22-10-2020.
(n)On 23-10-2020 the accused A26- Vara Mahendra appeared
before LW-9, later LW-9 served notices on him and examined him in the
presence of Panchayathdars (LW-6 &7) and recorded his confession statement and according his confession seized (1) One Laptop, (2) One Charger, (3) One Finger Print Scanner of SAFRAN company, 13 (4) One Irish Scanner of Iritech company, (5) One Web camera of
Logitech company, (6) One scanner and colour printer of Canon L210 company in the presence of Panchayatdars, pasted slip signed by the
Police officers, accused and Panchayatdars under the cover of Seizure
Panchayatnama dated 23-10-2020.
(o)On 24-10-2020 the accused A19-Kavali Ramanjaneyulu appeared before LW-9, later LW-9 served notices on him examined him in the presence of Panchayathdars (LW-6 &7) and recorded his confession statement and when LW-9 asked him about Laptop, finger print scanner, Irish Scanner web camera and etc, on that he stated that
Putluru Police seized Laptop, finger print scanner, Irish Scanner web camera and etc, at the time of his arrest vide in Cr.No.180/2020 U/sec.
419,420, 467, 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC and Sec 66(c), 66(D), 73 of IT Act of
Putluru P.S.
(p)On 26-10-2020 the accused A20-Appalreddy Amarnatha
Reddy appeared before LW-9, on serving of notice U/Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C., he was examined by the investigating officer (LW-9) in the presence of 14
Panchayathdars (LW-6 & 7) and recorded his confession statement and when LW-9 asked him about Laptop, fingerprint scanner, Irish Scanner web camera and etc. on that he stated that the said articles were handed over to his owner Sudharsan Reddy after he resigned.
(q)On 28-10-2020 at about 10-30 hours the accused A2-Uppari
Maddilety, A-4-Chakali Nagaraju, A-19-Kavali Ramanjaneyulu, A-20-
Appal Reddy Amaranath Reddy, A-26-Vara Mahendra and A-27-Poluru
Pullaiah, came to the circle office and appeared before the investigating officer/LW-9 as to comply the notices served on them. According the confession statements of the accused A2, A4, A19 A20, A26 and A27
dated 08-10-2020, 22-10-2020, 23-10-2020, 24-10-2020 and 26-10-2020
LW-9 seized the laptops, chargers, Finger print scanners and Irish
Scanners and one Web camera of the accused A4, A26 & A27 and cell phones (A2 & A4 only). The Cl arrested the accused A2, A4, A19, A20,
A26 and A27 at 11-30 hours at circle office, Banaganapalli after informing the grounds of arrest and bail position and forwarded to the Court of
Judicial First Class Magistrate, Banaganapalli and they were sent to judicial custody. The Accused A-1-Nareddy Venkatarami Reddy got 15 anticipatory bail vide Crl. M.P. No. 157/2020 dated 23-10-2020 of Hon'ble
III rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nandyal.
(r)According to the confession statements of the accused A2,
A4, A19, A20, A26 and A27 dated 08-10-2020, 22-10-2020, 23-10-2020, 24-10-2020 and 26-10-2020 the role of the alleged accused A-3-Mahesh and A-5- Nareddy Siva Sankar Reddy is not proved in this case.
Accordingly, LW-10 prepared proposals and submitted to the SDPO,
Dhone and the SDPO, Dhone issued Proceeding Vide C.No.
1036/SDPO-D/2021 dated 28-07-2021 that "Permitted the CD file. It is established by the investigating officer that there are no changes made in the date of birth of A-5. Likewise there is no evidence to show that A-3 is involved in this offence. No witnesses or accused stated or confessed against A-3. Hence permission is hereby accorded for deletion of A-3 and
A-5 from the accused column."
(s)The complainant/informant: Billa Srinivasulu (LW-1) was duly informed about not to charge against the alleged accused of A-3 and A-5 by way of serving notice on him. The complainant was further informed to appear before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Banaganapalli, on 16 receipt of notice from the Court and raise objection if any about not to charge against the accused of A-3 and A-5 from this case.
(t)Thus the accused A-1, A-2, A-4, A-6 to A-27 criminally conspired to get benefits of State Govt. Schemes i.e. old age pension in fraudulent manner by changing the ages in their Aadhar Cards to get old age pensions by tampering the Aadhar cards and used forged documents as genuine documents and got old age pensions under Government schemes i.e., AP YSR pension kanuka and there they are liable to be punished U/Sec. 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120 (b) IPC & Sec. 39 of Aadhar
Act. Hence the Charge.
3.Notice on defacto complainant served, the defacto complainant called present and filed a requisition that he has no objection to delete the names of accused No.3 by name Mahesh and accused No.5 by name
Nareddy Siva Sankar Reddy. Perused the record. In view of material on record, this case was taken on file against A1, A2, A4, A6 to A27 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120(B) IPC and Sec.39 of Aadhar Act, 2016 and it was registered as C.C.No.7 of 2022.
17
4. Case against A21 and A26 was abated as died.
5.On appearance of A1, A2, A4 and A6 to A20, A22 to A25 and A27 all the copies of the documents were furnished to A1, A2, A4 and A6 to
A20, A22 to A25 and A27 on which the prosecution relied its case. A1,
A2, A4 and A6 to A20, A22 to A25 and A27 were examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C and charges under Sections 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120 (B)
IPC and Sec.39 of Aadhar Act, 2016 were framed. The contents of the charges were read over and explained to A1, A2, A4, A6 to A20, A22 to
A25 and A27 in Telugu to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6.To prove its case, the prosecution examined PW.1 to PW.8 and got marked Ex.P1 and Ex.P19 and M.O.1 to M.O.21.
7. Case against A7, A14, A18, A25 was abated as died.
8.On the closure of the evidence on the prosecution side, A1, A2, A4,
A6, A8 to A13, A15 to A17, A19, A20, A22 to A24 and A27 were examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C in respect of incriminating evidence 18 found against them and they denied the same as false and reported no defence evidence.
9.Heard both sides. Perused the record.
10.The point for determination is:- “Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of A1, A2, A4,
A6, A8 to A13, A15 to A17, A19, A20, A22 to A24 and A27 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120 (B) IPC and Sec.39 of Aadhar Act, 2016 beyond all reasonable doubt?”
11. POINT:
PW.1 in his evidence stated that he worked as Panchayath
Secretary, Gundlasingavaram Village, Owk Mandal from June 2020 to
February 2023. When the villagers of Gundlasingavaram Village applied for sanction of old age pension with PW.2 (Digital Assistant of
Gundlasingavaram panchayath), PW.2 and PW.3 on enquiry came to know that there are changes in the Aadhar Cards and Ration Cards of the applicants submitted to them and informed the same to him. He cannot say the names of the persons whose Aadhar Cards and Ration Cards are 19 verified by him and found the difference in age shown in Aadhar Cards and Ration Cards. Some of the applicants who have applied for sanction of old age pension themselves stated to him that they have got changed their age in the Aadhar Cards in order to get old age pension. He cannot say the names of the applicants who informed him about the changes in their Aadhar Cards of their age. Some of the contents of his report which stated by him to the police and some of the contents are mentioned by the police on their enquiry. Therefore, the signature of PW.1 on report, dt.23-09-2020 is marked as Ex.P1.
In the cross examination of PW.1 stated that he verified the Aadhar
Cards and Ration Cards of Nareddy Siva Sankar Reddy, A1, A6 to A11 and found difference in their age in the Aadhar cards and Ration cards.
On enquiry, they came to know that through A1 and A2, the other accused i.e., A6 to A11 got changed their age in the Aadhar cards and caused loss to the Government by wrongfully claiming old age pension amount. He cannot identify the accused persons who are present in the
Court hall. He can identify 3 persons i.e., A2, A8 and A10. Three days prior to giving report by him, he came to know about the changes in the age of the applicants in their Aadhar cards. In his report to the police, he 20 did not state that some of the people who are with less age by making changes of their age in their Aadhar cards, getting old age pension. In his report to the police he did not state that he came to know about the changes in the age in the Aadhar cards on the enquiry made by PW.2 and PW.3. In his report, he did not mention the correct ages of A1 and
A11 and the changed ages of them. The age of A6 to A11 even in the charge sheet shown as more that 60 years. He has not given any record/ proof to the police to show the age changes made by A6 to A11 in their
Aadhar cards. His higher officials did not give instructions to him to give report against the accused.
12.PW.2 in his chief examination stated that he worked as Digital
Assistant, Gundlasingavaram village, Owk Mandal from November 2019 to 10-07-2025. On receiving applications from the beneficiaries of old age pension, he will scrutinizing the applications and entered the details in the computer system and thereafter the application will be given to LW.3 for verification. He found age changes in the Aadhar cards when compared to their ages in Ration cards of some of the applicants and he informed the same to PW.1. He cannot say the names of the persons whose
Aadhar cards and Ration cards are verified by him and found the 21 difference in age shown in Aadhar cards and Ration cards. He did not enquire with the accused as to how they got changes in their age in the
Aadhar cards.
In the cross examination of PW.2 stated that he informed to the
PW.1 about the age difference in the Aadhar cards and Ration cards of some of the applicants. Ration cards will be considered only to ascertain whether the applicant is below poverty line or not. He will verify the age of the applicant given in the Ration card and Aadhar card and ascertain the difference in the age shown in the Ration card and Aadhar card. He has not informed to the higher officials about the age difference in the Ration cards and Aadhar cards of the applicants.
13.PW.3 in her evidence stated that she worked as Welfare and
Educational Assistant, Gundlasingavaram Sachivalayam, Owk Mandal from November 2019 to October 2024. Every application for Government
Scheme will go to PW.2 and from him it comes to her through Online, she will verify whether the applicants are eligible for Welfare Schemes by comparing the Online information with the information available in the applications. At the time of verification of applications in the year 2020 22 she found some age difference of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and Ration cards and she informed the age difference of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and Ration cards to PW.1. She cannot say the names of the applicants in whose application she found age difference. She found differences in age in 10 applications and all the 10 applications are pertaining to Gundlasingavaram Gram Panchayath.
In the cross examination of PW.3 stated that she has not given the physical record pertaining to the old age pension applications to PW.2.
She has not given the physical record of the applications to the police.
In the cross examination of PW.8 it is elicited that as per Ex.P13 the Village Secretary of Gundlasingavaram Village B.Srinivasulu (PW.1) who is the complainant gave complaint basing on the endorsement given by M.P.D.O., Mandal Praja Parishad, Owk, Kurnool District in
Dis.No.CAP/2020, dt.23-09-2020. He did not examine the M.P.D.O., Owk
Mandal. He did not file the identity proofs i.e., Aadhar cards of the accused in this case. He did not seize the mobile phones of A24 and A25 when he prepared Ex.P18 and Ex.P19 Confession-Cum-Seizure
Panchanamas. He did not obtain letter from UIDAI with regard to 23 confirmation of changes made in the Aadhar cards of A5 to A11. UIDAI is the Final Authority in India with regard to issue of Aadhar cards and changes in Aadhar cards. He did not receive letter from Blue-3, IT
Solutions company regarding the confirmation for the changes made in the Aadhar cards of A5 to A11. Blue-3, I.T. Solutions is the head of all
Mee-Seva Service Centres. He did not send the information with regard to the changes in the Aadhar cards of other accused except A5 to A11 to
Blue-3, I.T. Solutions. He did not seize the Aadhar cards of the accused persons except A5 to A11. The Aadhar cards of all the accused persons are not filed along with the charge sheet. He did not file the applications of A5 to A11 given for making changes in their age, in this charge sheet.
He did not cite the police of Putlur Police Station in this case as witness to prove the alleged seizure from A17 in Cr.No.180/2020. Ex.P13 report is brought by the complainant B.Srinivasulu (PW.1). Ex.P13 does not show it is brought by the complainant and handed over to the Sub-Inspector of
Police, Owk Police Station.
14. Admittedly, PW.1 is the complainant who gave Ex.P13 report to the S.H.O., Owk Police Station. But, Ex.P13 shows that the report given by PW.1 is forwarded to the S.H.O., Owk Police Station by M.P.D.O., 24
Owk, Kurnool District. As admitted by PW.1 when he has no instructions from his higher officials to give report against the accused under what authority Ex.P13 report was given by PW.1 and how the M.P.D.O. Owk
Mandal forwarded Ex.P13 report to the S.H.O., Owk Police Station, is not explained. When PW.1 to PW.3 found changes in the ages of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and Ration cards, they must be able to say the names of the persons/applicants in whose application they found age difference in the Aadhar cards and Ration cards. But PW.1 to PW.3 did not state the names of the applicants in whose application they found changes in their ages of their Aadhar cards and Ration cards. When
PW.1 to PW.3 found changes in the ages of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and Ration cards, they must submit the proof to the police to show the age difference in the ages of the applicants. But as admitted by PW.1 to PW.3 they did not submit any record to the police to show the alleged age difference in the Aadhar cards and Ration cards of the applicants.
Further PW.1 in his cross examination stated that all the contents of
Ex.P13 report are not stated by him to the police and some of the contents of Ex.P13 are mentioned by the police on their enquiry. The police have no power or authority to make additions in the report on the aspects which are not mentioned/stated by PW.1. Criminal Law sets into 25 motion on the report/complaint of the complainant/victim. Before the
Criminal Law sets into motion, the police have no work to interfere to add the contents into the report of the complainant. Since some of the contents of Ex.P13 report are added by the police on their enquiry, no evidentiary value can be given to Ex.P13 report. If really the PW.1 to
PW.3 found difference in the ages of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and Ration cards, they ought to h ave submit the applications and the other records submitted to them to the police to show the difference in ages of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and Ration cards. But PW.1 to PW.3 in chorus stated that they did not give any record to the police to prove the changes in the age of the applicants in their Aadhar cards and
Ration cards. As admitted by PW.1 and PW.3, the Ration cards will be considered only to know how many members are there in a family and generally the Ration cards will be given to the persons who are below poverty line. Ration card is not pool proof to ascertain the age of a person. Therefore comparing the age of the applicant in his Aadhar cards with that of his age shown in Ration card is not correct measure to know or ascertain the changes in the age of a person in his Aadhar card.
26
Thus lacunas in the case of the prosecution makes the case of the prosecution weak and doubtful.
15. PW.4 to PW.7 are the panchayathdars to the Seizure
Panchanamas i.e., Ex.P15, Ex.P18, Ex.P19 of A2, A25 and A24, dt.08- 10-2020, dt.22-10-2020, 23-10-2020 respectively. PW.4 and PW.5 in their evidence stated that the police obtained their signatures on some written papers and they do not know the contents of the said written papers.
PW.6 and PW.7 in their evidence stated that they have signed on some white papers at the instance of police. Through PW.4 to PW.7 their signatures on Ex.P15, Ex.P18 and Ex.P19 i.e., Confession-Cum-Seizure
Panchanamas are marked as Ex.P3 to Ex.P12.
16.PW.8 who is investigating officer in this case in his evidence stated about receiving typed report of PW.1, dt.23-09-2020 by LW.8-B.Srikanth
Reddy, Sub-Inspector of Police, Owk Police Station, registering a case in
Cr.No.225/2020 under Secs.420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120(B) IPC and
Section 39 of Aadhar Act, issuing F.I.R., and submitting copies of F.I.Rs.
to the concerned officers by LW.8, receiving further investigation in this case by him from LW.8, recording Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statements of PW.1 27 to PW.3, issuing Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. notices to A5 to A11 for cause production of their Aadhar cards, addressing a letter to UIDAI Regional
Office, Hyderabad to know the changes in the Aadhar cards of A5 to A11 and also to the Director, Blue-3, I.T. Solutions namely T.V.S.Suresh to know the changes made in the Aadhar cards of A5 to A11, preparing
Ex.P15 Confession-Cum-Seizure Panchanama of A2 and A4 on the confession made by A2 and A4 and seizure of M.O.1 to M.O.8 under
Ex.P15 in the presence of PW.4 and PW.6, issuing Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C.
notices to A12 to A18, addressing Ex.P16 letter to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Banaganapalli for adding A10 to A18 as accused in this case, issuing Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. notices to A19 to A23 on 19-10-2020, addressing Ex.P17 letter to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Banaganapalli, dt.19-10-2020 for adding the names of A19 to A25, issuing Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. notice to A25, preparing Ex.P18 Confession-
Cum-Seizure of A25 in the presence of PW.5 and PW.7 and seizure of
M.O.9 to M.O.15, issuing Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. notice to A24 on 23-10-2020, preparing Ex.P19 Confession-Cum-Seizure Panchanama of A24 on the confession made by A24 and seizure of M.O.16 to M.O.21 in the presence of PW.5 and PW.7, issuing Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. notice to A17 on 24-10-2020, confession made by A17 of his running Aadhar Service 28
Centre at Putlur Mandal, Anantapur District, his making changes in the
Aadhar Cards relating to the ages by taking money, recording the confession statement of A17 in the presence of PW.5 and PW.7, issuing
Sec.41(A) Cr.P.C. notice to A18 on 26-10-2020, recording the confession statement of A18 in the presence of PW.5 and PW.7, issuing Sec.41(A)
Cr.P.C. notice to A2, A3, A17, A18, A24 and A25 on 28-10-2020 and arresting all the above accused basing on Ex.P15, Ex.P18 and Ex.P19
Confession-Cum-Seizure Panchanamas and sending them to Judicial
Remand and filing of charge sheet by LW.10-B.Subbarayudu, Inspector of Police, Banaganapalli Circle, after completion of further investigation in this case, by deleting the names of Mahesh and Siva Sankar Reddy who are shown as A3 and A5 in Ex.P14 F.I.R.
17.When UIDAI is the final authority to issue Aadhar cards and changes in the Aadhar cards, PW.8 ought to get information from UIDAI to ascertain whether there are changes in the Aadhar cards of A5 to A11 in their ages. Similarly PW.8 did not get any information from Blue-3, I.T.
Solutions company to confirm whether changes have been made in the
Aadhar cards of A5 to A11 in their ages. When PW.8 did not get any information either from UIDAI or from Blue-3, I.T. Solutions company, how 29
PW.8 came to conclusion that there are changes in the ages of Aadhar cards of A5 to A11. Further PW.8 did not file the Aadhar cards of the accused and also the applications given by A5 to A11 for the alleged making changes in their Aadhar cards along with the charge sheet, nor during the trial. When the Aadhar cards of the accused and the applications of A5 to A11 are not filed and marked on behalf of prosecution, there is no basis for the prosecution to say that the changes have been made in the Aadhar cards of A5 to A11. Further PW.4 to PW.7 who are the panchayathdars to the Confession-Cum-Seizure panchanamas for the alleged confession and seizure from A2, A4, A25,
A24 did not support the case of the prosecution. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the alleged confession made by A2, A4, A25 and A24 and seizure of M.O.1 to M.O.21 from A2, A4, A25 and A24.
Thus, the prosecution utterly failed to connect the accused persons with the offences with which they are charged and their involvement in this case and commission of offences by the accused. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, benefit of doubt shall be given to the accused.
30
18. In the result, A1, A2, A4, A6, A8 to A13, A15 to A17, A19, A20,
A22 to A24 and A27 are found not guilty for the offences under Sections 420, 468, 466, 471 r/w 120(B) IPC and Sec.39 of Aadhar Act, 2016.
Accordingly they are acquitted under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. for the charges levelled against them. The bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for a period of six months as per Section 437-A of Cr.P.C.
M.O.1 to M.O.21 are ordered to be auctioned after appeal time is over.
The case against A7, A14, A18, A21, A25 and A26 is dismissed as abated.
Dictated to the stenographer, after transcription, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 13 th day of April, 2026.
Sd/- T.Malleswari
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-CUM-PRINCIPAL
ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, KURNOOL.
Appendix of Evidence
(Witnesses examined)
For Prosecution:
PW.1 :Billa Sreenivasulu.
PW.2:Katravath Suresh Naik.
PW.3:Dudekula Madeena Bee.
31
PW.4:Shaik Mukhthiyar.
PW.5:Shaik Iqbal.
PW.6:Bandi Abbas Vali.
PW.7:Sunni Shakir.
PW.8:M.Suresh Kumar Reddy, Inspector of Police.
For Defence: -None-
Exhibits marked
For Prosecution:
Ex.P.1: Signature of PW.1 in the Complaint, dt.23-09-2020.
Ex.P.2: Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3.
Ex.P.3: Signature of PW.4 on Confession-Cum-Seizure
Panchanama, dt.08-10-2020.
Ex.P.4: Signature of PW.5 on Seizure Panchanama, dt.22-10-2020.
Ex.P.5: Signature of PW.5 on Seizure Panchanama, dt.23-10-2020.
32
Ex.P.6: Signature of PW.5 on Seizure Panchanama, dt.24-10-2020.
Ex.P.7: Signature of PW.5 on Seizure Panchanama, dt.26-10-2020.
Ex.P.8: Signature of PW.6 on Confession-Cum-Seizure
Panchanama, dt.08-10-2020.
Ex.P.9: Signature of PW.7 on Panchanama, dt.22-10-2020.
Ex.P.10: Signature of PW.7 on Panchanama, dt.23-10-2020.
Ex.P.11: Signature of PW.7 on Panchanama, dt.24-10-2020.
Ex.P.12: Signature of PW.7 on Panchanama, dt.26-10-2020.
Ex.P.13: Typed Report given by PW.1, dt.23-09-2020.
Ex.P.14: F.I.R. in Cr.No.225/2020.
Ex.P.15: Confession-Cum-Seizure Panchanama of A2 and A3, dt.08-10-2020.
Ex.P.16: Letter addressed, dt.17-10-2020 to Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Banaganapalli.
Ex.P.17: Letter addressed, dt.19-10-2020 to Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Banaganapalli.
Ex.P.18: Confession-Cum-SeizurePanchanamaofA25, dt.22-10-2020.
Ex.P.19: Confession-Cum-SeizurePanchanamaofA24, dt.23-10-2020.
For Defence: - Nil - 33
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED
M.O.1: One Acer company Gold colour Laptop.
M.O.2: One Charger.
M.O.3: LI Company Finger Print Scanner.
M.O.4: LI Company Iris Scanner.
M.O.5: Logitech Web Camera.
M.O.6: Epson L.380 Company Scanner and colour Printer.
M.O.7: Samsung Company Gold colour Cell Phone of A3.
M.O.8: Samsung Company Gold colour Cell Phone of A2.
M.O.9: Dell Company Laptop.
M.O.10: One Charger.
M.O.11: Safran Company Finger Print Scanner.
M.O.12: Iritech company Iris Scanner.
M.O.13: Logitech Web Camera.
M.O.14: Samsung SCX-3401F Company Scanner and black and white printer.
M.O.15: AMKETTE company converter.
M.O.16: Lenovo company black colour Laptop.
M.O.17: One Charger.
M.O.18: SAFRAN company Finger Print Scanner.
34
M.O.19: IRITECH company Iris Scanner.
M.O.20: Logitech Web Camera.
M.O.21: CANON L210 Scanner and colour Printer.
Sd/- T.Malleswari
CJM-cum-PASJ, KNL.
// True Copy //