Page No.1 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS
JUDGE AT WANAPARTHY
Monday, this the 30th day of September, 2024
Present:-V.Rajani Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy. FAC Addl.Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy.
Sessions Case No.23 of 2024
Preliminarily Registered Case No.9 of 2024, committed by the I- Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Wanaparthy, in Crime No.16 of 2024 of P.S. Pangal, for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC.
Prosecution.: Sri S.Ravinder. Addl.Public Prosecutor. Accused: Nausolla Shekar, S/o Pedda Kistaiah, Age: 43 years, Caste: SC Madiga, Occ: Coolie, R/o. Kethepally Village of Pangal Mandal
Defence counsel: Sri. G.Uttaraiah, Deputy Legal Aid Defence Counsel, for accused.
Offence under Section: 307 of Indian Penal Code.
Plea of the accused: Pleaded not guilty
Finding: Found guilty
Sentence or order: In the result, accused is found guilty of the offence under Section 307 IPC and he is accordingly convicted of the said offence under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C. M.Os.1 and 2 are ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
When the accused is questioned on the quantum of sentence proposed to be imposed against him
Page No.2 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 vide a separate questionnaire, as contemplated under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C, accused stated that he has not committed the offence; that he has wife and he is the sole bread earner of his family. He prayed the Court to take a lenient view while imposing the sentence against him.
Since the offence proved against the accused is under Section 307 IPC, and having regard to the nature of the said offence and also the facts and circumstances of the case and the intention of the accused that P.Ws.1 and 5 should die in his hands, this Court feels that it is not expedient to apply the benefit of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act in favour of the accused. However, considering the circumstances mentioned by the accused, accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of four (4) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only), in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one (1) month for the offence under Section 307 IPC. The period of remand already undergone by the accused from 01.02.2024 till date is given set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C.
The accused is informed of his right to prefer an appeal against this judgment and conviction. He is also apprised that he is entitled to get free legal aid, if he has no capacity to engage counsel in preferring the appeal, as per the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act. Office shall furnish immediately a copy of this judgment to the accused, free of cost.
* * *
This case came up for final hearing and upon perusing the oral and documentary evidence on record, upon hearing the arguments, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-
Page No.3 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
JUDGMENT
The Sub-Inspector of Police PS Pangal filed charge sheet against the accused in crime No.16 of 2024, for the offence under Section 307 of IPC.
2.The case of the prosecution in brief is that:
L.W.1/GaligallaMuniswamy,hiswife/L.W.5/Galigalla
Maibusamma, L.Ws.2 to 4/Nausolla Priyanka, Galigalla Nagamma,
Galigalla Devamma and the accused all hail from Kethepally Village of
Pangal Mandal. Accused is neighbour of L.Ws.1 and 5. Since a few days prior to the incident, accused started frequently quarrelling with L.Ws.1 and 5 on the issue of drainage canal, which is situated in between their houses. So many times, accused warned L.Ws.1 and 5 that he would kill both of them on one day. Keeping the said grudge in his mind, on 01.02.2024, in the morning hours at about 6.30 am, accused started quarelling with L.Ws.1 and 5 on the issue of drainage canal. He beat
L.Ws.1 and 5 with a stick. He further went inside his house stating that
L.Ws.1 and 5 would not die with a stick, and brought out an axe, with an intention to kill L.Ws.1 and 5. He axed L.W.5 on her head. As a result of which, she received bleeding injury on her head and also injuries on other parts of her body. L.W.1, when tried to rescue L.W.5, accused attacked
Page No.4 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
L.W.1 also with the axe. As a result of which, L.W.1 sustained bleeding injury on his right hand. On seeing the incident, L.Ws.2 to 4 and some others rushed to the spot. Then the accused fled away from the spot. Thus, the accused had committed the offence punishable under Section 307 of
IPC.
3. The learned I-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Wanaparthy has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian
Penal Code against the accused and numbered the case as PRC No.9 of 2024.
4. On production of the accused, copies of documents were furnished to him under Section 207 of Criminal procedure Code and the case has been committed to the Hon’ble Sessions Court, Wanaparthy and it was registered as SC No.23 of 2024 and was made over to this Court for trial and disposal, according to law.
5. On production of the accused from jail, before this Court, charge for the offence under Section 307 IPC has been framed against him, read over and explained to him in Telugu language, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
Page No.5 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
6. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined P.Ws.1 to 9 and marked Exs.P1 to P6 and M.Os.1 and 2. P.W.1 is the de facto complainant and the injured. P.Ws.2 to 4 are the eye witnesses. P.W.5 is the wife of P.W.1 and also injured. P.W.6 is the witness for the scene of offence panchanama. P.W.7 is the witness for the confession-cum-seizure panchanama. P.W.8 is the doctor, who treated P.Ws.1 and 5 and issued the medical certificates. P.W.9 is the investigating officer.
7.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C explaining the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, for which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.
8. The point that arises for determination in this case is:- “Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence under Section 307 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?”
9.Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned counsel for the accused. I have gone through the material available on record.
10.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 is corroborating with each other and their
Page No.6 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 evidence clearly shows that the accused has committed the offence. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further contended that the medical evidence shows that P.Ws.1 and 5 received grievous injuries on vital parts of the body, and the same shows the intention of the accused to kill
P.Ws.1 and 5. He further contended that the prosecution established guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and therefore, accused is liable to be convicted.
11.On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused contended that P.Ws.2 to 4 are relatives of P.Ws.1 and 5; no independent witness is examined; that the houses of P.Ws.2 to 4 are on the backside of house of
P.W.1 and there is no possibility of their witnessing the alleged incident; that there are variations in the evidence of P.Ws.2 to 4 and except the medical certificates, there is no other medical record before this Court and that the very lodging of report by P.W.1 is doubtful. He, accordingly, submitted that the accused is entitled to be acquitted and the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
12.POINT:- The case of the prosecution is that accused used to quarrel with P.Ws.1 and 5 in respect of a drainage canal issue which is located in between their houses. On 01.02.2024, in the morning hours, accused
Page No.7 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 picked up quarrel with P.Ws.1 and 5, beat them with stick and later, stating that they would not die with stick, brought an axe and attacked them with the axe, resulting grievous injuries to P.W.1 on his hand and
P.W.5 on her head and other parts of the body.
13.P.W.1, in his evidence deposed that P.W.5/Maibusamma is his wife.
He knows the accused. That the accused used to quarrel with him and his wife in respect of drainage issue. On 01.02.2024, at about 6.00 a.m., when he was filling water from tap, accused went there and quarrelled with him on the ground that the water was flowing towards his house and beat him and P.W.5/his wife with stick. That the accused stating that they did not die with stick, went inside his house and brought an axe and attacked his wife with the axe on her head. When he intervened, accused also attacked him with the axe and he got bleeding injury on his right hand. His wife sustained bleeding injury on her head. Then, P.Ws.2 to 4 came to their rescue. On seeing them, accused fled away from the scene. Thereafter, they were taken to Government Hospital, Wanaparthy. He lodged report/Ex.P1 with the police. He further stated that the accused with an intention to kill him and his wife, attacked them with stick and axe.
Page No.8 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
14.P.Ws.2 and 3, in their evidence, in chief, deposed that on 01.02.2024, at about 6.30 am., when P.W.1 was filling water from tap, accused went there and quarrelled with P.W.1 on the ground that the water was flowing towards his house and beat P.W.1 and his wife with stick.
They further stated that the accused stating that P.W.1 and his wife did not die with stick, went inside his house and brought one axe and attacked
P.W.5 with the axe on her head. When P.W.1 intervened, the accused also attacked him with the axe and P.W.1 got bleeding injury on his right hand.
P.W.5 sustained bleeding injury on her head. They and P.W.4 went to the rescue of P.Ws.1 and 5. On seeing them, accused fled away from the scene. P.Ws.1 and 5 were shifted to Government Hospital, Wanaparthy for treatment. They stated that the accused, with an intention to kill P.Ws.1 and 5, attacked them with the axe.
15.P.W.4, in her evidence, in chief, deposed that about six months back, on one day, at about 6.00 am., when P.W.1 was filling water from tap, in front of his house, on the road, then the accused went there and quarrelled with P.W.1 on the ground that the water was flowing towards his house and beat P.W.1 and his wife with stick. The accused stating that P.W.1 and his wife did not die with stick, went inside his house and brought one axe
Page No.9 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 and attacked P.W.5 with the axe on her head. When P.W.1 intervened, accused also attacked him with the axe and he got bleeding injury on his left hand. P.W.5 sustained bleeding injury on her head. She, P.Ws.2 and 3 went to the rescue of P.Ws.1 and 5. On seeing them, accused fled away from the scene. P.Ws.1 and 5 were shifted to Government Hospital,
Wanaparthy for treatment. The accused, with an intention to kill P.Ws.1 and 5, attacked them with the axe and there were previous quarrels in between them in respect of drainage.
16.P.W.5, in her evidence, in chief, deposed that P.W.1 is her husband.
About eight months back, on one day, at about 6.00 am or 6.30 am., when
P.W.1 was filling water from tap, in front of their house, on the road, then accused came there and quarrelled with P.W.1 on the ground that the water is flowing towards his house and accused beat her and P.W.1 with stick. The accused stating that she and P.W.1 would not die with stick, went inside his house and brought one axe and attacked her with the axe on her head. When P.W.1 intervened, accused also attacked him with the axe and he got bleeding injury on his right hand. She sustained bleeding injury on her head. P.Ws.2 to 4 came to their rescue. On seeing them, accused fled away from the scene. She and P.W.1 were shifted to
Page No.10 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
Government Hospital, Wanaparthy for treatment and thereafter, they were shifted to a hospital at Hyderabad for further treatment. Her statement was recorded in NIMS hospital by one Judge, on the next day of the incident.
The accused, with an intention to kill her and P.W.1, attacked them with the axe and there were previous quarrels in between them in respect of drainage.
17.P.W.6, in his evidence, in chief, deposed that on 01.02.2024, at about 10.30 a.m., the police Pangal conducted scene of offence panchanama at the CC road in front of the house of P.W.1 in connection with the incident that took place at the said place and also the police drawn rough sketch of the scene in his presence and in the presence of
L.W.7/Arekanti Shekar. The police seized one stick of about 3 feet from the scene of offence and they collected bloodstains from the said stick with cotton. He signed on the scene of offence panchanama/Ex.P2.
18.P.W.7, in his evidence, in chief, deposed that on 01.02.2024, in the afternoon hours, the police Pangal summoned him and Ramakrishna (L.W.9) to the house of the accused at Kethepally village, where the
Page No.11 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 accused was present. On their enquiry, accused confessed to have committed the offence. The police drafted the confession statement of the accused and the accused brought an axe/M.O.1 from inside his house and produced the same before them. The axe is in the length of a stick of 3 feet having iron knife of 5 x 4 inches with bloodstains. The police seized the said axe from the accused and obtained signatures of him and L.W.9 on the chits and affixed the chits to the axe. He and L.W.9 signed on the confession-cum-recovery panchanama (the relevant portion of which is marked as Ex.P3).
19.P.W.8, in his evidence, in chief, deposed that he worked as Assistant
Professor at Government General Hospital, Wanaparthy from October, 2021 to July, 2024. He stated that on 01.02.2024, at 7.10 am, he examined
Galigalla Muniswamy S/o. Naganna (P.W.1) and found laceration ad measuring 1.2 x 1 cm over the right hand, which is simple in nature and might have been inflicted with a blunt object. He issued the wound certificate (Ex.P4) of P.W.1. On the same day at 7.20 am, he examined
Galigalla Maibusamma W/o Muniswamy (P.W.5) and found fracture over parietal bone right side ad measuring 0.5 x 0.9 cms, fracture over right frontal bone ad measuring 0.6 x 0.8 cms, laceration on the left occipital
Page No.12 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 region ad measuring 0.5 x 0.5 cms and laceration over the right wrist ad measuring 0.8 x 0.9 cms. That injury Nos.1 and 2 are grievous in nature and injury Nos.3 and 4 are simple in nature and might have been caused by a blunt object. He issued wound certificate (Ex.P5) of P.W.5.
20.P.W.9, in his evidence, in chief, deposed that he worked as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Pangal PS from 03.08.2023 to 30.07.2024. On 01.02.2024, at 10.00 a.m., he received a report from L.W.1/P.W.1. Based on the said report, he registered a case in crime No.16 of 2024 for the offence under Section 307 IPC and took up investigation. He issued
FIR/Ex.P6. He examined and recorded the statement of L.W.1/P.W.1.
Thereafter, he visited the scene of offence, which is located in front of house of P.W.1 at Kethepally Village of Pangal Mandal. He secured the presence of P.W.6 and L.W.7/Arekanti Shekar. In the presence of the above mediators, he conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn the rough sketch of the scene (Ex.P2). He recovered a stick/M.O.2 at the scene of offence and he also collected bloodstained earth and control earth from the scene of offence. Later, he examined and recorded the statements of P.Ws.2 to 4. He enquired and came to know that the injured/P.W.5 was shifted from Wanaparthy to Hyderabad for better treatment.
Page No.13 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
21.P.W.9, further deposed that on 01.02.2024, he apprehended the accused. He secured the presence of P.W.7 and L.W.9/Anmagalla
Ramakrishna and the accused confessed his guilt to the said mediators. He recorded the confession of the accused and at the instance of the accused, he recovered an axe/M.O.1 from the accused under cover of confession- cum-seizure panchanama. He effected the arrest of the accused and sent the accused to Court for judicial custody. On 02.02.2024, he got recorded the dying declaration of P.W.5 through L.W.11/I-Addl.Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. He examined and recorded the
statement of L.W.5/P.W.5 on 02.03.2024 at Kethepally Village. He collected the medical certificates of P.Ws.1 and 5 from P.W.8. After completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC.
22.In the cross-examination of P.W.1, by the learned counsel for the accused, it is elicited from him that on 01.02.2024, he lodged report with the police orally and on 02.02.2024, at about 11.00 a.m., he went to the police station and gave report and that P.Ws.2 to 4 accompanied him to the police station. He denied the suggestion that the accused never attacked him and his wife with axe and he sustained injuries by falling
Page No.14 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 from his bike. He stated that Ex.P1 was scribed on his dictation. He denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsehood against the accused as they both are in inimical terms.
23.In the cross-examination of P.W.9, it is elicited from him that he received report from P.W.1 on 01.02.2024 and he recorded the statement of P.W.1 on the same date of the report. He stated that he cannot exactly give the time of recording of the statement of P.W.1. He further stated that on the same date of report, he visited the scene of offence at about 11.00 am. He denied the suggestion that the rough sketch map of the scene is not a correct one and the mediators for the scene of offence panchanama are stock witnesses. He further denied the suggestion that on 01.02.2024, the report was not lodged with him and it is subsequently created and M.O.1 is planted in the case. He further denied the suggestion that Exs.P4 and P5 are created documents and pertain to some other injured and he did not record the statements of the witnesses and P.W.1 never lodged report with him. He further denied the suggestion that P.Ws.2 to 4 are planted witnesses.
24.The learned counsel for the accused contended that as per the evidence of P.W.1, the report was lodged on 02.02.2024 and on
Page No.15 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 01.02.2024, he did not lodge report with the police and thus Ex.P1 is cre- ated subsequently.
25.The evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 shows that on 01.02.2024, the ac- cused attacked P.Ws.1 and 5 with stick and axe, with an intention to kill them and caused them grievous injuries. The evidence of Doctor/P.W.8 coupled with the medical certificates/Exs.P4 and P5 show that P.W.1 received laceration over the right hand and it might be inflicted with a blunt object and P.W.5 received grievous injuries i.e., fracture over parietal bone and frontal bone, apart from laceration on the left occipital region and over the right wrist. This evidence of P.W.8 is corroborating with the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 as to the parts of the body where P.Ws.1 and 5 received injuries and also the nature of the weapon used by the accused. In the cross-examination of P.W.8, he stated that the injured sustained the injuries on the same day of their examination. He stated that
P.W.1 was treated and discharged on the same day, but P.W.5 was re- ferred for further examinations and she was advised to take CT scan to brain. In the cross-examination of P.W.5, it is suggested to her that the ac- cused did not attack them with sticks and axe and she and P.W.1 sus- tained injuries as they fell down from bike. Thus the suggestions given to
P.Ws.1 and 5 that they received injuries by falling down from bike is con-
Page No.16 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 trary to the information elicited from P.W.8 that the injuries are caused with a blunt object. Thus the medical evidence is consistent with the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 on all aspects.
26.As per the evidence of P.W.8, P.W.1 was treated as an outpatient.
Ex.P1/report shows that on 01.02.2024 at about 10:00 am the report was lodged by P.W.1 with the police. The statement of P.W.1 was recorded on 01.02.2024 and the accused was also arrested on 01.02.2024, as per the evidence of the investigating officer/P.W.9. The FIR/Ex.P6 also shows that it was issued on 01.02.2024 and the Court also received it on 01.02.2024. Thus it is evident that P.W.1 lodged the report on 01.02.2024 only and not on 02.02.2024.
27.In the cross-examination of P.W.2, she denied that she did not see any incident as her house is located on the backside of the house of the accused and that there are family disputes in between her family and family of the accused. P.W.2 categorically stated that though her house is on the backside of the house of the accused but as the incident took place on the road, she witnessed the said incident.
Page No.17 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
28.In the cross-examination of P.W.3, it is elicited from her that her house is located on the backside of the house of P.W.1 and she cannot see as to what is happening inside the house of P.W.1. But she stated that on hearing the hue and cry of P.W.1, she went to the scene of offence. It is elicited from her that there are no talking terms in between her and the accused and the accused once quarrelled with her also. She stated that
P.W.1 is her brother-in-law. In view of this evidence, the learned counsel
for the accused contended that as P.W.3 is relative to P.W.1, she deposed
against the accused.
29.It is to be seen that the evidence of P.W.3 given in her chief could not be shaken by the accused, in her cross-examination except the fact that she is a relative of P.W.1. It is also to be taken note of that the evidence of the other witnesses i.e., P.Ws.2 and 4 supports the case of the prosecution and their evidence is consistent with the evidence of P.W.3. Merely because P.W.3 is relative of P.W.1, her evidence cannot be discarded on that ground as her evidence is consistent with the case of the prosecution and it could not be disturbed in her cross-examination.
30.In the cross-examination of P.W.6, he denied the suggestion that he signed on the prepared panchanama and that police did not draw the rough
Page No.18 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 sketch of the scene in his presence and he did not go to the scene of offence. Similarly P.W.7 denied the suggestion in his cross-examination that M.O.1 has no connection with the accused and he is in the habit of visiting Pangal police station.
31.The evidence of P.W.6 shows that police conducted scene of offence panchanama on 01.02.2024 and M.O.1/stick was recovered from the scene. As already seen above, except suggesting to P.W.6 that his signatures were obtained on the prepared panchanama, nothing contrary could be elicited from P.W.6. Similarly the evidence of P.W.7 is intact, and his evidence shows that M.O.2/axe was seized from the possession of the accused at the instance of the accused.
32.The evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 coupled with the medical evidence shows that accused attacked P.Ws.1 and 5 with blunt object i.e., axe and also beat them with stick/M.O.1 with an intention to kill them. The evidence of P.Ws.7 and 8 clearly shows that M.O.1/stick was recovered at the scene of offence and M.O.2/axe was seized from the accused at his instance. Thus the evidence of prosecution witnesses coupled with the medical evidence would go to show that the prosecution has proved the
Page No.19 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024 guilt of the accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence the accused is liable to be convicted of the said offence.
33.In the result, accused is found guilty of the offence under Section 307 IPC and he is accordingly convicted of the said offence under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C. M.Os.1 and 2 are ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
-Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 30th day of September, 2024.
Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy. FAC Addl.Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy.
34.When the accused is questioned on the quantum of sentence proposed to be imposed against him vide a separate questionnaire, as contemplated under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C, accused stated that he has not committed the offence; that he has wife and he is the sole bread earner of his family. He prayed the Court to take a lenient view while imposing the sentence against him.
Page No.20 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
35.Since the offence proved against the accused is under Section 307
IPC, and having regard to the nature of the said offence and also the facts and circumstances of the case and the intention of the accused that P.Ws.1 and 5 should die in his hands, this Court feels that it is not expedient to apply the benefit of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act in favour of the accused. However, considering the circumstances mentioned by the accused, accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of four (4) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only), in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one (1) month for the offence under Section 307 IPC. The period of remand already undergone by the accused from 01.02.2024 till date is given set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C.
36.The accused is informed of his right to prefer an appeal against this judgment and conviction. He is also apprised that he is entitled to get free legal aid, if he has no capacity to engage counsel in preferring the appeal, as per the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act. Office shall furnish immediately a copy of this judgment to the accused, free of cost.
-Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 30th day of September, 2024.
Page No.21 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy. FAC Addl.Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE: P.W.1:G.Muniswamy -None- P.W.2:N.Priyanka P.W.3:G.Nagamma P.W.4:G.Devamma P.W.5:G.Maibusamma P.W.6:H.Nagarjuna P.W.7:V.Shiva Kumar P.W.8:Dr.Kotla Harish Sagar P.W.9:M.Venu
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR PROSECUTION: Ex.P1:Report lodged by P.W.1 dated 01.02.2024. Ex.P2:Crime Details Form Ex.P3: The relevant portion of the confession-cum-seizure panchanama. Ex.P4:Medical certificate of P.W.1, issued by P.W.8 dated 01.02.2024. Ex.P5: Medical certificate of P.W.5, issued by P.W.8 dated 01.02.2024. Ex.P6: FIR issued by P.W.9 dated 01.02.2024.
FOR DEFENCE: -Nil -
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED
M.O.1: Axe
Page No.22 of 21 SC No.23 of 2024
M.O.2: Stick
Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy. FAC Addl.Assistant Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy.