V.raghunath

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

ATMAKUR

PRESENT: Sri V. Raghunath,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Atmakur

Thursday, the 16 th day of February, 2023

CALENDAR CASE No.524/2016

Between:

State: Represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Velgode Police Station. . . . Complainant

A N D

1. Chennupalli Ambedkar Chaithanya Kumar S/o C. Ananda Rao, age 31 years.

2. Chennupalli Anandarao, S/o C. Venkateswarlu Age 58 years, working in Andhra Bank, Assistant Manager.

3. Chennupalli Chennamma, W/o Anandarao, Age 53 years.

A1 is native of Guntur town and District. Presently residing At Velugode village and Mandal. A2 and A3 are residents of Guntur District. . . . Accused

This case came before me on 14-02-2023 for final hearing in the presence of learned A.P.P. for the prosecution and of Sri P.V. Narasimhudu, Advocate for the Accused and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration, and having perused the material on record, this Court delivered the following:

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

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Velgode P.S., has filed charge sheet in

Cr.No.129/2016 for the offences punishable Under Sections 324, 498-A r/w 34 IPC and Under Section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the

Accused Nos. 1 to 3.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:

The LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi is a native of Chilakaluru peta, Guntur

District. On 27-04-2016 her marriage was performed with Accused no.1.

Her parents presented cash of Rs.15,00,000/- and 15 thulas of gold ornaments as dowry to the Accused no.1. Accused no.1 deposited 9,00,000/- in a bank on her name out of Rs.15,00,000/-. Accused no.1 is working as Assistant Manager in Syndicate Bank, Velgode. On 04-08-2016 2

LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi came to Velgode for family life. Ever since of the marriage, accused nos. 1 to 3 harassed LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi both physically and mentally and to write the house site on their names and forced to put signature for withdrawing of Rs.9,00,000/- from the deposit amount in her account. LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi went to her parents home. On 26-10-2016 LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi came to velgode to lead family life, lead happy life for one week only. Every day accused no.1 came with drunken state and forced her to put the signature.

On 16-11-2016 night about 11:00 hours accused no.1 came to LW-1

Chennupally Ashajyothi with drunken state and forced her to put the signature for withdrawal of amount and beat LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi by keeping high sound of Television, caught hold her hair and hit the head to the walls of the house and also beat with belt and caused bleeding injury on her forehead.

3. Basing on the report of L.W.1, L.W.7-SI of Velgode Police registered a case in crime No.129/2016 of Velgode P.S. During course of investigation, he examined and recorded the statements of the witnesses. On 18-11- 2016, he arrested the accused no.1 and sent for remand. On 19-11-2016 he served Section 41-A Criminal Procedure Code notice to the accused nos.

2 and 3 and released them on bail on sufficient sureties. On completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet in this case.

4. After perusal of charge sheet and other connected documents, this case was taken on file against Accused nos. 1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A of Indian Penal Code and under section 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act.

3

5. On appearance of the accused nos.1 to 3, copies of all the documents on which, the prosecution relied were supplied to the accused nos. 1 to 3 as contemplated under Section 207 of Criminal Procedure code.

6.The accused nos.1 to 3 were examined Under Section 239 of Criminal

Procedure code. The contents of Charge sheet read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which, they denied the offence, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.Charge Under Sections 324, 498-A r/w 34 of Indian

Penal Code and under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act have been framed against Accused nos.1 to 3.

7.During the course of trial, prosecution filed death certificate of LW-1

Chennupally Ashajyothi on 01-11-2021 and the evidence of LW-1

Chennupally Ashajyothi is closed. The prosecution examined LW4- N. Ratna

Kumari, LW-5 N. Subba Rao and LW-6 Dr. Venkata Ramana as P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 and got marked Exs.P1 to P3. The evidence of L.W.2-Vadde

Venkataiah, L.W.3-Vadde Subbamma and L.W.7-Sri Y. Praveen Kumar Reddy are given up by learned APP as material witnesses did not support the case of the prosecution as they compromised.

8.Accused Nos. 1 to 3 examined under section 313 of Criminal

Procedure Code and they denied the evidence of PW-3 i.e. Dr. Venkata

Ramana and stated there is no evidence on their behalf.

9. Heard arguments on both sides. Perused the record. Considered the evidence of P.W.s 1 to 3 coupled with Exs.P1 to P3 and other material on record.

10. Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the prosecution could able to prove the guilt of the

accused nos.1 to 3 for the offences punishable Under Sections 324,

498-A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 4 of

Dowry Prohibition Act beyond reasonable doubt”?

POINT:

4

11. The case of the prosecution is that the Accused No.1 is the husband of LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi and Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are in-laws of the victim by name Chennupally Ashajyothi and they used to harass the defacto-complainant/LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi by way of physically and mentally for dowry. It is not in a dispute about the relationship of the accused no.1 with defacto-complainant/LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi during the course of trail the public prosecutor filed a memo stating that LW-1

Chennupally Ashajyothi is died and the evidence of LW-1 Chennupally

Ashajyothi is closed.

12.In order to prove the case of the prosecution they examined parents of LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi as PW1 and PW2. PW1 and PW2 deposed in their evidence that LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi is their daughter and they do not know anything about this case and they are not an eye witness to this case and also stated police never examined them and never recorded their statements. Both the witness turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and prosecution examined the LW-6 Dr. Venkata Ramana who treated the LW-1 Chennupally Ashajyothi as PW3 and got marked wound certificate as Ex.P3. Since PW1 and PW2 are not supporting the case of prosecution the prosecution given up the evidence of remaining witnesses cited in the charge sheet including the evidence of Investigating Officer i.e.

LW-7 Praveen Kumar Reddy.

13.Since the evidence of PW1 and PW2 not supporting the case of prosecution and the defacto complainant died during the course of trail it is unsafe to convict the accused nos. 1 to 3 on the basis of evidence of the

PW-3/Dr. Venkata Ramana who treated the defacto complainant. Therefore the prosecution failed to prove the charges under sections 324, 498-A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused nos. 1 to 3 beyond reasonable doubt.

5

14.In the result, Accused nos. 1 to 3 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 324, 498-A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and they are acquitted of the same under Section 248 (1) of Criminal Procedure Code. The bail bonds and surety bonds of accused shall remain in force for further period of six months as per section 437-A of Criminal Procedure Code.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by him, Corrected

and pronounced by me in open court, this the 16th day of February, 2023.

Sd/-Sri V. Raghunath

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Atmakur

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED:

PW1 :Nukuthoti Rathnakumari None

PW2 : Nukuthoti Subba Rao

PW3 : Dr. S. Venkata Ramana

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1 : 161 Cr.PC statement of PW1.

Ex.P2 : 161 Cr.PC statement of PW2.

Ex.P3 : Wound Certificate of PW3.

FOR ACCUSED:

Nil

M.Os. MARKED

Nil

Sd/-Sri V. Raghunath

JFMC,ATK

// True Copy //

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Atmakur 6

CALENDAR & JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

ATMAKUR.

CALENDER CASE NO.524/2016

1. Date of offence prior to: 17-11-2016

2. Date of complaint or report: 17-11-2016

3. Date of apprehension of Accused : 18-11-2016 (A1) : 19-11-2016 A2 & A3 (41-A Cr.PC Notices)

4. Date of release on bail of Accused : 19-11-2016

5. Date of commencement of trial: 07-02-2023

6. Date of close of trial: 07-02-2023

7. Date of sentence or Order: 16-02-2023

8. Explanation of delay if any: Police failed to produce the witnesses in time.

COMPLAINANT:

State: Represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Velgode P.S., in Crime No.129/2016

ACCUSED:

1. Chennupalli Ambedkar Chaithanya Kumar S/o C. Ananda Rao, age 31 years.

2. Chennupalli Anandarao, S/o C. Venkateswarlu Age 58 years, working in Andhra Bank, Assistant Manager.

3. Chennupalli Chennamma, W/o Anandarao, Age 53 years.

A1 is native of Guntur town and District. Presently residing At Velugode village and Mandal. A2 and A3 are residents of Guntur District. All are r/o H.No.3-68-2, Vengotigeri, Pylakurthy Village, Kodumur Mandal.

Nature of Law :- Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means; Punishment for subjecting a married woman to cruelty; presenting dowry; demanding additional dowry

Section of Law :- 324 & 498-A of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.

Finding of Court :- Found not guilty.

Sentence/Order:

In the result, Accused nos. 1 to 3 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 324, 498-A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and they are acquitted of the same under Section 248 (1) of Criminal Procedure Code. The bail bonds and surety bonds of accused shall remain in force for further period of six months as per section 437-A of Criminal Procedure Code.

7

Sd/-Sri V. Raghunath

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,

Atmakur.

Copy submitted to the Hon’ble Principal Asst. Sessions Judge, Kurnool in Dis. No. ________Dated________.

// True Copy //

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Atmakur.

8 9

J.Dr counsel filed a memo stating that the exparte judgment which was passed in the main suit dated 27-07- 2022 is set aside by this court on 25- 01-2023 in vide i.A.No.617/2022 of

OS.No.101/2022 and the main suit is

restored. Therefore this execution petition is dismissed. the attachment affected is raised