Smt.V.UshaKranthi

1

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE COURT, RANGA

REDDY DISTRICT AT: LB. NAGAR.

DATED THIS THE 15 th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

PRESENT:- Smt.V.USHA KRANTHI, IX AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM. At Hastinapuram

C.C. No. 3284 OF 2018 .

BETWEEN:- The State of Telangana Rep. by P.S. Uppal. … Complainant

AND

A-1 Vempati Rahul S/o V. Venkatesh, aged 19 years, Occ: Student, Caste: SC Madiga, R/o Ramakrishnapuram, Alkapuri, Kothapet, Hyderabad.

A-2 Gadapa Sai Charan S/o G. Om Prakash, aged 20 years, Occ: Student, Caste: Bestha, R/o near Mahankali temple, Amberpet, N/o Tower circle, Karimnagar district.

A-3 Asami Rithik Reddy S/o A. Krupakar Reddy, aged 19 years, Occ: Student, Caste: OC-Reddy, R/o Anand Nagar, Bandlaguda, LB Nagar, RR District. … Accused 1 to 3

This case coming before me on 15-03-2022 for fnal hearing in the presence of the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the complainant and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Uppal fled charge sheet in

Crime No. 230 /2018 for the ofence punishable Under Section.392 of

Indian Penal Code against the Accused 1 to 3.

This is a case of “Robbery” which occurred on 04.03.2018 at about 0200 hours at in front of Sri Krishna Chemical company,

Ramanthapur, Uppal, where in the accused persons A-1. Vempati

Rahul, A-2. Gadapa Sai Charan, A-3. Asami Rithik Reddy along with A-4

Rohit (Absconding) have robbed the gold chain from the neck of LW-1.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

2

Facts of the case are that on 04-03-2018 at 0300 hours, received a written petition from Sri Gundeti Ramesh, S/o Siddi Ramulu, age 31 years, Occ: Private Employee, Caste: Padmasali, R/o Church Colony,

Ramanthapur, Uppal, Medchal district with the contentsthat on 04-03- 2018 at about 0200 hours he was proceeding towards his residence i.e.

Church Colony, Ramanthapur side from Meerpet on his Splendor Plus

Motor cycle bearing No. AP24 AH 1627 via Beside Nagole Metro Depot to IDA Uppal Road, while on the way, he reached near Krishna

Chemicals, meantime four unknown persons age between 20-22 years came on a white colour Activa bearing No. TS 11 EC 2610 and grey colour Activa without having any number obstructed his vehicle and pushed down him, due to which he fell down along with his vehicle and while lifting up his vehicle meantime the white colour pillion rider snatched his 11 grams gold chain from his neck and fed away on their vehicles from there, hence the complainant requested for necessary action.

Basing on the above petition Lw-6 registered a case in Cr.No.

230/2018 U/s 392 IPC and investigation entrusted to LW-7.

During the course of investigation, LW-7 examined and recorded statement of LW-1. Later visited the Scene of ofence near M/s

Krishna Chemical Pvt. Ltd., IDA Uppal and secured the presence of two mediators Lws-2 & 3, conducted Scene of ofence Panchanama and drawn rough Sketch of Scene.

During investigation on 05.03.2018 at 0700 hours while the crime ID party men were doing patrolling on Uppal main road towards

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

3

Nagole road, mean time they found two vehicles moving suspiciously and stopped the vehicles and asked their details, vehicle documents and their presence at the place, but they did not revealed anything and tried to escape from the place by leaving the motor cycles, then the said police personal apprehended them and checked their pockets and found one gold chain in one Sai Charan pocket and brought them to police station along with the Activa white colour and Activa grey colour motor cycle without registration and also with the gold chain and produced before LW-7. The LW-7 interrogated them throughly, while interrogation they revealed their names as 1) Vempati Rahul S/o

V. Venkatesh, aged 19 years, Occ: Student, Caste: SC Madiga, R/o

Ramakrishnapuram, Alkapuri, Kothapet, Hyderabad, 2) Gadapa Sai

Charan S/o G. Om Prakash, aged 20 years, Occ: Student, Caste:

Bestha, R/o near Mahankali temple, Amberpet, N/o Tower circle,

Karimnagar district, 3) Asami Rithik Reddy S/o A. Krupakar Reddy, aged 19 years, Occ: Student, Caste: OC-Reddy, R/o Anand Nagar,

Bandlaguda, LB Nagar, RR District and voluntarily they confessed the ofence reported in this case vide Cr. No. 230/2018 U/s 392 IPC of

Uppal PS along with A-4 Rohit who is absconding. Then, LW-7 secured the presence of two mediators Lws-4 & 5 and recorded their confessional statement.

While recording the confessional statements of the accused persons, they confessed the ofence reported as follow:

On the late night hours of 03.03.2018, the accused A-1 Rahul along with A-2 Sai Charan, A-3 Rithik Reddy and A-4 Rohit (Absconding) came to Uppal area on their motor cylces i.e., Activa white colour

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

4

Br.No. TS 11 EC 2610 belongs to A-1’s cousin Rajashekar and Activa

Grey colour without registration with Chasis No. ME40F507FHT360917 belongs to A-3 Rithik Reddy to commit theft of any property ofence and on searching to commit theft of any property ofence, mean time they found one person coming in one vehicles from Uppal main road towards KCR Nagar side and taking the opportunity, A-1 stopped the vehicle and A-2 Sai Charan robbed the gold chain from the neck of the said person where A-3 Rithik Reddy and A-4 Rohit were on other Activa motor cycle by observing whether anyone coming and they was kept with A-2 Sai Charan for later disposal.

On 05.03.2018 in the morning hours, the accused person A-1

Rahul along with A-2 Sai Charan, A-3Rithik Reddy came to Uppal area on their Activa white colour and Activa grey colour motor cycles to dispose the robbed gold chain for selling to some unknown by road passer and were moving on Uppal main road towards Nagole side, mean time the mufti police personal stopped their vehicles and asked about their details and vehicle documents, but they could not reply anything and tried to escape from the place by leaving the motor cycles, then the said mufti police personal apprehended them and brought to police station along with the Activa white colour Br.No. TS 11 EC 2610 belongs to A-1’s cousin Rajashekar and Activa Grey colour without registration with Chasis No. ME40F507FHT360917 belongs to

A-3 Rithik Reddy and checked their pockets and found one gold chain robbed on the previous day in A-2 Sai Charan pocket.

Confessing so, that the said accused A-1 Vempati Rahul produced one Activa white colour motor cycle Br.No. TS 11 EC 2610

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

5 which is in the name of his cousin by name Rajashekar, A-2 Gadapa Sai

Charan produced one robbed gold chain and A-3 Asami Rithik Reddy produced Activa grey colour motor cycle without registration and with

Chasis No. ME40F507FHT360917 from their possessions and the same were seized from their possessions under a cover of confession cum recovery panchanam before the mediators Lws-4 & 5.

Further the accused persons stated that, if the panchas and police will follow them, they will show the scene of ofence.

After completion of confession cum recovery panchanama of the accused persons, issued notice U/s 41(A) Cr.P.C. to the accused persons A-1) Vempati Rahul, A-2) Gadapa Sai Charan and A-3) Asami

Rithik Reddy and obtained explanations from them, but not satisfed with the explanations submitted by the accused persons, on 05.03.2018 at 1100 hours issued arrest memo against the accused persons after informing the grounds of their arrest to them and to their blood relatives.

Investigation done so far it is revealed that, on 04.03.2018 at about 0200 hours the complainant LW-1 was returning back to his house on his Splendor motor cycle Br.No. AP 24 AH 1627 and while on the way when he reached IDA Uppal, mean time the accused persons

A-1) Vempati Rahul, A-2) Gadapa Sai Charan, A-3) Asami Rithik Reddy and A-4 Rohit ( absconding) whose details are mentioned in Col.No. 12 of this charge sheet came to the LW-1 in opposite direction on their motor cycles and stopped the vehicle and A-2 robbed the gold chain from the neck of the LW-1, while A-1 and A-3 were riding their motor

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

6 cycles, where A-3 and A-4 on Grey colour Activa motor cycle without registration riding by A-3 were observing whether anyone coming and after robbing the gold chain, they all fed away from there on their motor cycles with the gold chain. The robbed gold chain weighing about 11 grams was kept with the accused A-2 Sai Charan for later disposal and the same was seized from the possesion of A-2 under a cover of confession cum recovery panchanama CPR NO. 154/2018.

Thus, the accused persons A-1) Vempati Rahul, A-2) Gadapa Sai

Charan and A-3) Asami Rithik Reddy along with A-4 Rohit who is absconding have committed an ofence punishable U/s 392 IPC.

A separate charge sheet will be fled against the absconding accused A-4 Rohit whenever he is apprehended.

This Court took cognizance for the ofence u/sec 392 IPC against accused A1 to A3. On appearance of the accused the copies of the documents were furnished to them as required u/sec 207 Cr.P.C, A1 to

A3 are examined u/sec 239 of Cr.P.C, the charge sheet allegations levelled against the accused 1 to 3, for which accused 1 to 3 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried for the ofence u/sec 392 of IPC.

On behalf of prosecution, they examined Pw1 and 2 and got marked Ex. P1 to P3 and the learned APP closed the evidence of Lw3 to

Lw7. As there is no incriminating evidence sec 313 of Cr.P.C is despensed with point: -

1. Point:- Whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt for the ofence punishable u/sec 392 IPC against

Accused.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

7

2.Pw1 is Defacto complainant and he deposed that he knows Lw2

Vinod Kumar, he is his friend. So also Lw3 and Lw4 punchas Marri

Kumar and Krishnaiah Goud. He deposed that, he never lodged petition before police but in the year 2018 March, police obtained his signatures on some white papers. Ex.P1 is Portion of signature, he deposed that police did not examine him and recorded his statement.

He further deposed that he received his stolen gold chain from this

Court vide Crl.MP. NO. /2018 as interim custody. MOI is gold chain.

3.Pw-2 is confessional-cum-recovery panchanama and he deposed that he do not know the other co-punch Krishnaiah Goud Lw4. He said that, he do not know any facts of this case. He further stated that, none confessed before him, but in the year 2018 police obtained his signatures on some written papers but he do not know the contents of the same Ex.P3 is portion of signature on confession and recovery of panchanama. Though the Pw2 cross examined by learned APP at deepth, nothing could be illicited by the prosecution.

4.Basing the evidence of Pw1 and Pw2 the learned APP given up the list of witness 2 to 5, as such the APP given up prosecution witness and memo fled by Police reporting Lw4 were abouts not known this court, did not found incriminating evidence against accused, Hence dispensed with the Sec 313 CrPC.

5.So, on considering the evidence of Pw1 and Pw2 as there is no evidence placed by prosecution against accused 1 to 3 to connect the charge u/sec 392 of IPC and the hostile evidence is pressing this court not to lay its hands on the accused more particularly on the charge

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

8 levelled against them and as the prosecution failed to prove the charges. There is no iota of evidence to connect the accused A-1 to A- 3 for the charges, this hold, that they are entitled for beneft of doubt.

6.In the result the accused are found not guilty for the ofence u/sec 392 accordingly they are acquitted u/sec 248 (1) CrPC. The bail bonds of the accused 1 to 3 shall be canceled the MOI which was given as interim custody vide Crl MP no. /2018 its true owner shall be made absolute and the unmarked case property vide Crl MP NO. / 2018 2 bikes bearing No. TS 11 NTR 2807 and TS 11 EC 2016 which was given as interim custody to its true owner shall be made absolute after its appeal time and the unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over. The material object shall be returned to its true owner.

Typed to my diction by typist, correct and pronounced by me in the open court on this 15th March, 2022.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF)

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: PW-1: - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: Ex.P-1: Portion of signature,-Nil -

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

9

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION:- -NIL- FOR ACCUSED: -NIL-

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

CALANDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF THE IX AJCJ-cum-XXIX AMM, RANGA REDDY

DISTRICT, AT HASTHINAPURAM.

C.C. No. 3284 OF 2018 .

1. Complainant : State, SI of Police, P.S. Uppal.

2. Cr.No. & Nature of Ofence : Cr.No. 230/2018 U/s. 392 of IPC.

3. Name of the accused :

A-1 Vempati Rahul S/o V. Venkatesh, aged 19 years, Occ: Student, Caste: SC Madiga, R/o Ramakrishnapuram, Alkapuri, Kothapet, Hyderabad.

A-2 Gadapa Sai Charan S/o G. Om Prakash, aged 20 years, Occ: Student, Caste: Bestha, R/o near Mahankali temple, Amberpet, N/o Tower circle, Karimnagar district.

A-3 Asami Rithik Reddy S/o A. Krupakar Reddy, aged 19 years, Occ: Student, Caste: OC-Reddy, R/o Anand Nagar, Bandlaguda, LB Nagar, RR District. D A T E S:

4.OFFENCE392 of IPC

5.COMPLAINTSri. Gundeti Ramesh

6.APPREHENSION OF ACCUSED

7.COMMENCEMENT OF TRIAL

8.CLOSURE OF TRIAL

9.JUDGMENT

10.PLEA OF THE ACCUSED

11.SENTENCE OR ORDER : In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the ofence U/s. 392 of IPC. Accordingly, they are acquitted U/ s. 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be cancelled.

The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

10

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

To:

The Hon’ble District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District. Dis. No.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

1

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE COURT, RANGA

REDDY DISTRICT AT: LB. NAGAR.

DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF MARCH, 2022

PRESENT:- Smt.V.USHA KRANTHI, IX AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM. At Hastinapuram

C.C. No. 6535 OF 2018 .

BETWEEN:- The State of Telangana Rep. by P.S. Uppal. … Complainant

AND

A- Kuthubuddin S/o Shabuddin, aged 55 years, case Muslim, Occ: Driver of Crime vehicle bearing No. AP 29 V 2089, r/o H.NO. 2-11- 130/47/1, Opp. Srinivasa High School, Srinagar Colony, Uppal.

… Accused

This case coming before me on 31-03-2022 for fnal hearing in the presence of the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the complainant and Sir B. Ramesh Kumar counsel for accused and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Uppal fled charge sheet in

Crime No. 1011 /2018 for the ofence punishable Under Section.304-A of Indian Penal Code against the Accused.

2.The brief allegations in the charge sheet are as follows:-

That on 26-10-2018 the complainant from S. G. Naresh R/o

Ramanthapur with the facts that on the same day at about 09.00 am his elder brother by name Nagesh age 25 years, Occ: Mason left home for work, on the way near the bus stop, in front of the King Church

School at Ramanthapur, Uppal, his elder brother while crossing road, meanwhile the oil tanker driver vehicle bearing No. AP 29 V 2089 which was proceeding from Uppal cross roads, drove his tanker in rash and negligent manner and dashed his brother G. Nagesh, as a result

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

2 his brothers right leg thigh to waist was crushed and received bleeding fracture and injuries all over the parts of body. Late his brother was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad in an ambulance for treatment.

3.As per the contents of the above petition the Station House

Officer Uppal PS Lw13 Sri P. Venkateshwarlu, registered a case in crime No. 1011/2018 and examined Lw1 and Lw2 later visited scene of ofence and secured the presence of mediators Lw 6

Dudla Sai Kiran and Lw 7 Pundhaamala Sunil and drafted scene and rough sketch.

4.On 29-10-2018 at 02.00 pm the deceased succumbed to accident. Later the dead body was shifted to mortuary at Gandhi

Hospital, Secunderabad Post Mortem Examination to know the actual cause of death. Altered section of law from Sec 338 of IPC to 304-A of

IPC.

5.Lw 13 visited Gandhi Hospital and secured Lw4 and Lw5 examined and recorded their statement over the dead body and was sent for PME Lw11 conducted Post Mortem Examination. After completion of PME dead body was handed over to relatives/ family.

6.On 31-10-2018 Lw13 issued 41-A Cr.P.C. Notice to accused and collected PME report from Lw11/ Dr. B. Vasanth Nayak, oil tanker vehicle was sent to Motor Vehicle Inspector for inspection, he opined that the accident was not due to mechanical defects of the vehicle.

After completion of investigation Lw 13 N. Jayaram laid charge sheet against accused U/Sec 304-A of IPC.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

3

7.This Court took cognizance for the ofence u/sec 304-A of IPC against accused. After appearance of the accused, the copies of the documents were furnished to him as required u/sec 207 Cr.P.C, and he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

8.In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution got examined 4 witnesses, ie., Pw1 to 4 and got marked as Ex.P1 to P7 and given up Lw4 to 12.

9.After closure of prosecution side evidence, the accused was examined u/sec 313 of Cr.P.C. For the incriminating material voiced against him to which he leaded not guilty and reported no defense evidence.

10.Heard, the arguments from both sides and perused the case record.

11.Now the point for determination is :-

Whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond

reasonable doubt for the ofence punishable u/sec 304-A of

IPC.

Pw1 (G. Naresh), deposed that Lw2 Nagamani is his sister and deceased Nagesh is his brother and Lw3 Muthyalamma is his mother.

About 3 years back his brother used to work as mason and as usually he went out from the house at about 08.00 am and when he was at

Shamshabad to attend his work. Mean time, he received a telephonic message from Uppal Police station that his brother met with an accident and he immediately rushed to Gandhi Hospital and found

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

4 deceased brother at mortuary. He further deposed that, he came to know that one petrol tanker driver hit his brother who was crossing the road at bus stop near Ramanthapur. He lodged petition before police uppal. He stated that, police examined him and recorded his statement. Ex. P1 is petition.

Pw2 (Smt. Muthyalamma), she deposed that, has two sons. Pw1 is younger son and deceased Nagesh is elder son and Lw2 is her daughter. She deposed that, about 3 years back her elder son went out to labor work, at about 10.00 am she received telephonic information from Uppal police station that her son met with an accident and he was shifted to Gandhi Hospital. Upon information immediately she rushed to the Gandhi Hospital and notice her son was in ICU with grievous injuries on lower abdomen, she stated that he survived 4 days and there after he succumbed to injuries. She further deposed that, one petrol tanker was responsible for her son's accident and driver escaped from the scene, later she noticed the petrol tanker at the police station premises. She stated that, she do not know the driver of petrol tanker. She further deposed that, police examined her and recorded her statement.

Pw3 (Smt. Nagamani), deposed that Pw1 is her brother and deceased

Nagesh is my elder brother and is her mother. She deposed that, about 3 years back her brother used to work as mason and as usual he left home for work. Pw3 stated that, she received a telephonic message from Uppal PS station that her brother met with an accident.

She immediately rushed to the hospital and found deceased Nagesh his brother in ICU he survived for 4 days and he succumbed injuries.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

5

She further stated that, she came to know that one petrol tanker driver hit her brother who was crossing the road at bus stop near

Ramanthapur. They lodged petition before police Uppal.

Pw4 (Sri. N. Jayaram), deposed that, he is working at SHO Uppal as SI of Poilce Uppal from August, 2018 onwards. Lw12 C.I. Of police received petition from Pw1 G. Naresh basing on the petition Lw12 CI of police registered a case in Crime No. 1011/2018 U/Sec 304-A of IPC and issued FIR under Ex.P2 and handed over investigation to him. He deposed that, he examined the witness of Pw1 and Pw3 later visited scene of ofence, drawn rough sketch in the presence of Lw6 and Lw7

Ex.P3 is scene of ofence panchanama. Ex.P4 is rough sketch. On 29- 10-2018 the injured succumbed to death. He deposed that, he have altered the section of law from 337 to 304-A IPC. On the next day he have recorded the statement of Pw3 and Lw5 Srinivas Rao, He rushed to Gandhi Hospital and secured the presence Lw8 Srinivas, Lw9

Hidayathtulla in their presence conducted inquest over the dead body

Ex.P5 inquest panchanama. After conducting inquest over the dead body Ex.P5 inquest panchanama. After conducting inquest panchanama he sent corpse to medical officer Lw11 to conduct autopsy. Lw11 medical officer Vasanth Nayak conducted PME on the dead body and issued report Ex.P6 is PME report. He deposed that, after PME he handed over the dead body to the relatives on 31-10- 2018, he secured the presence of accused issued 41-A notice to him, collected PME report he have also sent requisition motor vehicle inspector Lw10 Sri Suresh to inspect the crime vehicle accordingly he inspected the crime vehicle and issued opinion ExP7 MVI report. After completion of investigation he laid charge sheet against the accused.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

6

LW13 Sri Venkateswarlu is his superior officer and he can identify his signature he issued FIR.

Out of the witnesses examined as Pw1 to Pw3 are circumstantial witnesses, Pw4 is investigating officer.

The Pw1 to Pw3 who are the circumstantial witnesses/ hearsay witnesses. Their evidence is only speaking about knowing of the suferance of accident and though Pw1 to 3 stated that the driver of the crime vehicle is oil tanker driver, could not speak anything to constitute rashness or negligence and there is no material to connect that accused was the driver of the crime vehicle in their evidence.

They failed to say about the identifcation of accused and crime vehicle number.

The evidence of Pw4 I.O is showing about registering FIR and observation of scene of ofence and preparation of crime details from, inquest Panchanama MVI report marked under EX.P2 to P12. Ex.P6 is

Post Mortem Examination report issued by Lw11 Dr. Vasanth Nayak, who conducted postmortem on the corpse opined that the deceased died due to “Blunt injury on Abdomen”.

To sum up, the factum of suferance of injuries, the death of deceased G. Nagesh and the evidence of Pw4 I/o and documents

Ex.P4, P6 and P7 are along not sufficient to prove guilt of accused unless, there is any substantial evidence forth, coming to prove that the crime vehicle was proceeded in rash and negligent manner being driven by accused and due to such rashness and negligence on the part of the accused, the accident was caused.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

7

Therefore, this Court is of view that the evidence of Pw1 to Pw4 are not sufficient to convict the accused, more so, the PW 4 have not examined any independent eye witness to the accident, when the accident occurred during the broad day light at 09.00 AM, to the best reasons known to him. In the absence of the independent eye witnesses evidence, wherein the accident occurred in a busy area, It appears that the I/o Pw4 conducted perfunctory investigation. More so, the prosecution must prove that the crime vehicle was proceeded in rash and negligent manner, driven by the accused at the time of incident, which is condition sine qua non to prove the ofence u/sec 304-A of IPC. In the view of the above, this court hold absolutely the evidence of I/o and Ex.P4 to P6 are not helpful to prosecution.

Having regard to all the above, the hearsay testimonies of Pw1 to Pw3, is creating suspicion and doubtful circumstances and the evidence sufers infrmities, further there is no identifcation, that the accused was the driver of oil tanker bearing number AP 29 V 2089 at the time of incident. Who have driven rash and negligent manner and due to such rashness and negligence on the part of the accused, the accident was caused, resulting death of deceased G. Nagesh. This

Court hold that the evidence on record is not sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused for an ofence u/sec 304-A of IPC and thus accused is entitled to acquittal.

In the result the accused is found not guilty for the ofence u/sec 304-A of IPC accordingly, he is acquitted u/sec 255 (1) CrPC. The bail bonds of the accused shall be canceled. The unmarked case property

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

8 if any shall be destroyed after expiring of appeal time.

Typed to my diction by typist, correct and pronounced by me in the open court on this 31st March, 2022.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF)

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: PW-1:Godugu Naresh - None - PW-2:Smt Godugu Muthayalamma PW-3:Smt Arthikeri Nagamani PW-4:Godugu Shekar

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: Ex. P1: Petition by Pw1 Ex. P2: FIR Ex. P3: Scene of ofence Ex. P4: Rough Sketch Ex. P5: Inquest Panchanama Ex. P6: PME reported Ex. P7: MVI

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION:- FOR ACCUSED:

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

9

CALANDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF THE IX AJCJ-cum-XXIX AMM, RANGA REDDY

DISTRICT, AT HASTHINAPURAM.

C.C. No. 6535 OF 2018 .

1. Complainant : State, SI of Police, P.S. Uppal.

2. Cr.No. & Nature of Ofence : Cr.No. 1011/2019 U/s. 304-A of IPC.

3. Name of the accused :Kuthubuddin S/o Shabuddin, aged 55 years, case Muslim, Occ: Driver of Crime vehicle bearing No. AP 29 V 2089, r/o H.NO. 2-11-130/47/1, Opp. Srinivasa High School, Srinagar Colony, Uppal.

D A T E S:

4.OFFENCE304-A of IPC

5.COMPLAINTGodugu Naresh

6.APPREHENSION OF ACCUSED

7.COMMENCEMENT OF TRIAL

8.CLOSURE OF TRIAL

9.JUDGMENT

10.PLEA OF THE ACCUSED

11.SENTENCE OR ORDER : In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the ofence U/s. 304-A of IPC. Accordingly, they are acquitted

U/s. 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be cancelled.

The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

1

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE COURT, RANGA

REDDY DISTRICT AT: LB. NAGAR.

DATED THIS THE 30 th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

PRESENT:- Smt.V.USHA KRANTHI, IX AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM. At Hastinapuram

C.C. No. 9214 OF 2021 .

BETWEEN:- The State of Telangana Rep. by P.S. Uppal. … Complainant

AND

A-1 Sujjivarapu Ajji Suresh Kumar S/o Late Bala Subramanyam, Aged 50 years, caste: Naidu, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o Srinivas Heights Auto Adda, Chilukanagar, Uppal, N/o Mettuguda, Secunderabad. … Accused

This case coming before me on 30-03-2022 for fnal hearing in the presence of the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the complainant and the legal aid counsel for the accused Sri. Naresh Kumar the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Uppal fled charge sheet in CC

No. 9214 /2021 for the ofence punishable Under Section. 498(A), 323 of Indian Penal Code against the Accused.

2.The brief facts of the case are that 20 years ago, the complainant got married to Sujjivarapu Ajji Suresh Kumar, which was a look cum arranged marriage. And in their married life they had two children ie., 15 year old daughter and 14 year old son. Thereafter, her husband was harassing her both mentally and physically by consuming alcohol, and also suspecting the complainant and her daughter’s character. And on 17-04-2021 when the complainant was at her ofce her husband called her over phone and asked her to come home immediately. When she reached at home her husband started abusing

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

2 her and her daughter in flthy language and beaten them. In this regard they approached police and lodged a petition before the Station

House Ofcer. The Station House Ofcer of PS Uppal registered the case in Crime No. 354 /2021 and recorded statements of Lw1 to and thereafter fled charge sheet.

3.This Court took cognizance for the ofences U/sec 498-A, 323 of

IPC against accused. On appearance of the accused the copies of the documents were furnished to him as required U/Sec 207 of Cr.P.C., accused is examined u/sec 313 of Cr.P.C., the charge sheet allegations levelled against the accused, for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried for the ofences u/s 498-A, 323 of IPC.

4. Prosecution examine Pw1 to Pw4 and marked Ex.P1 and 2. After closure of prosecution evidence the Accused was examined Under

Section 313 Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating evidence appeared against the Accused for which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

5. Heard the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the Accused and perused the material on record.

6.On behalf of prosecution, they examined Pw’s 1 to 4 got marked

Ex.P1 and P2.

7. Point:- Whether the prosecution has proved its case

beyond reasonable doubt for the ofence punishable U/Sec

498-A, 323 of IPC against accused.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

3

8.On behalf of prosecution, they examined Pw’s 1 to 4 got marked

Ex.P1 and P2. Pw1 is Defacto complainant and she deposed that,

Accused is her husband, and also deposed that her marriage with the accused is love cum arranged marriage. And during their marital life they were blessed with 2 children. She further deposed that, her husband used to do some private work but he was unemployed most of the time. Due to which she used to take care of all house hold responsibilities. She further deposed that, her husband had a habit of consuming alcohol and stated that, her husband used to beat her and also her daughter. In the month April, 2021 her husband called her over phone and requested her to come home immediately, accordingly she went home, her husband beaten her and her daughter with out any reason. Thereafter having no alternative she lodged petition with

SHO PS Uppal Ex.P1 is petition. She deposed that, Police examined and recorded her statement.

9.Pw-2 is eye witness and she deposed that accused is her father,

Pw1 is her mother and Lw3 is her brother. She further deposed that, on 17-04-2021 while she was at her home, her father asked her to cook rice, as per his instructions she went to shop and bought rice and she returned home, a boy was standing inside the her house. She questioned the boy that, as to why was he standing in her house.

Mean while her father came and admonished her and called her mother over phone and asked her to return home immediately. After her mother came home, her father bet her mother and her. And having no alternative they fled a petition before Station House Ofcer

PS Uppal. She deposed that, police examined and recorded her

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

4 statement.

9.Pw-3 is eye witness and he deposed that accused is his father and Pw1 and Pw2 are his mother and sister. He deposed that, his father is habituated to alcohol and he regularly beats his mother and sister. In the month of April, 2021 his father beat his mother. In this regard they approached police. Thereafter police gave counseling to his parents. And he deposed that, in this regard police examined and recorded his statement.

10.Pw-4 who is Investigation Ofcer and he deposed that on 17-04- 2021 he received a written application from Pw1 basing on the said application he registered case in Crime No. 354/2021 and issued FIR

Ex.P2. He further deposed that, he examined and recorded the statements of Pw1 to Pw3 at police station. After completion of his investigation he fled the charge sheet against the accused.

11.The frst charge is framed U/Sec 498-A of IPC. As seen from oral and documentary evidence. In order to prove the charge U/Sec 498-A of IPC the prosecution must prove that accused harassed Pw1 and because of harassment the Pw1 was likely to commit suicide. With regard to the physical and mental torture of Pw-1 by the accused, none of the prosecution witness stated that due to harassment of the accused Pw-1 lost her interest in life and a circumstances were created by the accused due to which the complainant fell under a state as under which likely to commit suicide due to continuous harassment of the accused,that was not spoken by any of the witness which is the most essential condition to prove the charge U/s. 498-A of IPC.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

5

12. According to the explanation of cruelty it should be a continuous process in Mohd. Hosham Vs. State of A.P. (2002) (7) SCC 414, the

Hon’ble Supreme Court held that continuous teasing or

taunting amounts to cruelty and if we see the evidence of Pw1 she never spoken about any continuous harassment towards her.

13.If we apply the above said authority to the case on hand,even

Pw-2 and 3 did not stated that there was a continuous harassment of

Pw1 by the accused and the neighboring persons also was not examined by police, Pw-1 do not know the exact nature of harassment met by Pw-1 and even though she stated that since accused used to consume alcohol and beat her, she never approached police and gave petition before them. Pw1 stayed some other place without giving any report to the police. What are the reasons for not approaching the police in time if she was an aggrieved person at that time is not clarifed by her and also by her daughter Pw-2 and son Pw3.

14.So, culmination of the above said facts clearly shows that there is no proper evidence placed by the prosecution against Accused to connect him for the charge U/s 498-A, of IPC and the evidence of Pw1 to 3 sufers from infrmities and the doubtful circumstances created by them while giving the evidence is pressing this court not to lay its hands on the accused more particularly on the charges leveled against him and when there be a legible doubt in the mind of the Judge the beneft of it shall be given to accused. Accordingly,in this case also,

Accused is entitled for beneft of the doubt.

15.Therefore, to sum up, on cumulation of To sum up, in view of the

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

6 above observations as the independent eye witnesses not examined by the police and the evidence of Pw1 to 3 sufers in infrmities and it is found that the evidence on record. is not convining in nature. This court hold that the prosecution miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused for an ofence U/s 498-A IPC. And he is entitled for acquittal.

16.Now the second charge is framed u/s 323 of IPC, though the Pw1 and 2 deposed that accused have beaten them, but they have not approached doctor. During the course of cross examination of Pw1 to 3 it was illicited by the counsel for accused that when the accused reached home on 17-04-2021, he noticed his daughter Pw2 was with one boy in the house, the door was closed.

17.In ordinary course of human nature when a father notices his daughter with a boy, naturally the father gets angry and there is every possibility of beating the daughter Pw2. And admonishes Pw1 mother.

Therefore,. The evidence on record is not sufcient to convict the accused for the ofence he is charged. More particularly when the evidence of Pw1 to 4 he is not inspiring confdence and, even the Pw4 investigation ofcer appears that he conducted perfunctory, not examined any eye witness who witnessed the incident.

18.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the ofence U/ sec 498-A, 323 of IPC. Accordingly, they are acquitted U/s 248(1) of

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be canceled and the un- marked case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

7

Typed to my diction by typist, correct and pronounced by me in the open court on this 30th March, 2022.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF)

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED:

PW-1: Smt. Anitha Kumari - None -

PW-2: Kum. Harshitha

PW-3: Lalitha Kumar

PW-4: Sri S.K. Mybelly

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED:

Ex.P-1: Petition with SHO of Pw1-Nil -

Ex.P-2: FIR Ex.P2

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

8

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION:- -NIL- FOR ACCUSED: -NIL-

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

CALANDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF THE IX AJCJ-cum-XXIX AMM, RANGA REDDY

DISTRICT, AT HASTHINAPURAM.

C.C. No. 9214 OF 2021 .

1. Complainant : State, SI of Police, P.S. Uppal.

2. Cr.No. & Nature of Ofence : Cr.No. 345/2021 U/s. 498-A, 323 of IPC.

3. Name of the accused :

A-1 Sujjivarapu Ajji Suresh Kumar S/o Late Bala Subramanyam, Aged 50 years, caste: Naidu, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o Srinivas Heights Auto

Adda, Chilukanagar, Uppal, N/o Mettuguda, Secunderabad.

D A T E S:

1.OFFENCE498-A, 323 of IPC

2.COMPLAINTSmt. Anitha Kumari

3.APPREHENSION OF ACCUSED

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

9

4.COMMENCEMENT OF TRIAL

5.CLOSURE OF TRIAL

6.JUDGMENT

7.PLEA OF THE ACCUSED

19.SENTENCE OR ORDER : In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the ofence U/s. 498-A, 323 of IPC. Accordingly, they are acquitted U/s. 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be cancelled. The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

To:

The Hon’ble District and Sessions Judge,

Ranga Reddy District.

Dis. No.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

AT: GADWAL.

DATED THIS THE 08 th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

PRESENT:- Smt.V.USHA KRANTHI, IX AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM. At Hastinapuram

C.C. No. 456 OF 2021 .

BETWEEN:- The State of Telangana Rep. by P.S. Uppal. … Complainant

AND

Aakoji Devi Kumar s/o Late. A. Vasantha Rao, age: 30 years, occ: NTPC job, Caste: Kamsali, r/o H.No. 34-15-18, Ciril Street Gnanapuram, Waltair, R.S. Vishakapatnam, AP. Ph. No. 9014988573. … Accused.

This case coming before me on 08-03-2022 for fnal hearing in the presence of the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the complainant and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Uppal fled charge sheet in

Crime No. 16 /2021 for the ofence punishable Under Section.354-A of

Indian Penal Code against the Accused.

This is a case of “Outraging the modesty of a Women” in which the accused Aakoji Devi Kumar s/o Late A. Vasantha Rao, Age: 30 years, Occ: NTPC job, Caste: Kamsali, r/o H No 34-15-18, Ciril Street

Gnanapuram, Waltair, R.S. Vishakapatnam harassed the Lw1/Defacto complainant by sending messages forcing to love him. The place of ofence falls under the limits of Uppal PS, Rachakonda within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 05.01.2021 at 1300 hours a Telugu written petition was lodged at Uppal PS by Smt Narakurti

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

2

Niveditha w/o Praveen Kumar, age: 31 years, Occ: House wife, Caste

SC Madiga, r/o H No 3-13-105/6/A, Srinivaspuram, Ramanthapur stating that one person namely Aakoji Devi Kumar resident of NTPC,

Ramagundam is her classmate from childhood in school date. She created a school face book group in 2014 and she sent friend request to all of her childhood friends. Since then Aakoji Devi Kumar started calling her and mentioned that he was loving her, from fve years he proposed her but every time she used to reject him stating that both were married and having families. He started emotionally threatening her that if she doesn’t agree he will commit suicide. Till 2018, she rejected him, but he emotionally threatened her and lured her in the pretext of helping her in getting government job. Later he forced her to have sex with him, if she doesn’t agree he used to tell that he will commit suicide. And he is to record all acts of complainant and kept with him i.e., photos and videos and her certifcates. He had her photos and her videos kept with him, and he and his family call her husband and said they had her photos, for that she got into depression. She need to live happily with her family. If in case, of her photos comes out, she and her family commits suicide. Hence, she requested to take necessary action on Aakoji Devi Kumar and handover her certifcates to her and delete her photos from him.

As per the contents of the above petition Lw-5 the Station House

Officer registered a case in Crime No. 16/2021 u/sec 354-A IPC and took up the investigation.

During the course of investigation, the Lw-5/ SHO examined and recorded the statements of Lws 1 and 2 and their detailed statements

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

3 are incorporated part II CDs. On 08-01-2021 the accused Aakoji Devi

Kumar s/o Late A. Vasantha Rao, age: 30 years, Occ: NTPC Job, Caste :

Kamsali, r/o H No 34-15-18, Ciril Street Gnanapuram, Waltair, R.S.

Vishakapatnam appeared before Lw3. On questioning the accused admitted to have committed the ofence reported in this case. Lw5 secured the presence of two panchayathdars Lws 3 and 4 and recorded the confession of the accused. In pursuance to the confession of the accused his 1 plus blue colour cell phone was seized from his possession under the cover of confession cum seizure panchanama. The accused submitted FDR for Rs. 5000/- vide FDR No 176784 as surety as such he was released on bail with instructions to attend the court as and when he receives summons from the Court.

This Court took cognizance for the ofence u/sec 354-A IPC against accused. On appearance of the accused the copies of the documents were furnished to them as required u/sec 207 Cr.P.C, he is examined u/sec 239 of Cr.P.C, the charge sheet allegations levelled against the accused, for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried for the ofence u/sec 354-A of IPC.

On behalf of prosecution, they examined Lw1 as Pw1 and got marked Ex. A1 and the learned APP closed the evidence of Lw2 to Lw5.

As there is no incriminating evidence sec 313 of Cr.P.C is despensed with point: -

1. Point:- Whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt for the ofence punishable u/sec 354-A IPC against

Accused.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

4

2.Pw1 is Defacto complainant and she deposed that she do not any facts of the case, and in the year 2021 police obtained her signatures on some white papers and that police have not examined her and portion signature of Pw1 is marked as Ex.P1. marked.

3.Basing the evidence of Pw1, the learned APP given up the list of witness 2 to 5, as such the APP given up prosecution witness, this court, did not found incriminating evidence against accused, Hence dispensed with the Sec 313 CrPC.

4.So, on considering the evidence of Pw1 as there is no evidence placed by prosecution against accused to connect the charge u/sec 354-A and the hostile evidence is pressing this court not to lay its hands on the accused more particularly on the charges levelled against him and as the prosecution failed to prove the charges. He is entitled for beneft of doubt.

5.In the result the accused is found not guilty for the ofence u/sec 354-A accordingly he is acquitted u/sec 248 (1) CrPC. The bail bonds of the accused shall be canceled and the unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over. The cell phone/ material object shall be returned to its true owner.

Typed to my diction by typist, correct and pronounced by me in the open court on this 8th March, 2022.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

5

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF)

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: PW-1: - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: Ex.P-1: Portuion of signature,-Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION:- -NIL- FOR ACCUSED: -NIL-

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

CALANDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF THE IX AJCJ-cum-XXIX AMM, RANGA REDDY

DISTRICT, AT HASTHINAPURAM.

C.C. No. 456 OF 2021 .

1. Complainant : State, SI of Police, P.S. Uppal.

2. Cr.No. & Nature of Ofence : Cr.No. /20 U/s. 345-A of IPC.

3. Name of the accused :

Aakoji Devi Kumar s/o Late. A. Vasantha Rao, age: 30 years, occ: NTPC job, Caste: Kamsali, r/o H.No. 34-15-18, Ciril Street Gnanapuram, Waltair, R.S. Vishakapatnam, AP. D A T E S:

4.OFFENCE354-A of IPC

5.COMPLAINTSmt. Narakurti Niveditha

6.APPREHENSION OF ACCUSED

7.COMMENCEMENT OF TRIAL02-03-2022

8.CLOSURE OF TRIAL02-03-2022

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

6

9.JUDGMENT08-03-2022

10.PLEA OF THE ACCUSEDNot Guilty

11.SENTENCE OR ORDER : In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the ofence U/s. 354-A of IPC. Accordingly, he is acquitted

U/s. 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be cancelled.

The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. The cell phone/ material object shall be returned to its true owner.

12.REMARKS : -Nil-

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

To:

The Hon’ble District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District. Dis. No.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

1

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE COURT, RANGA

REDDY DISTRICT AT: LB. NAGAR.

DATED THIS THE 15 th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

PRESENT:- Smt.V.USHA KRANTHI, IX AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM. At Hastinapuram

C.C. No. 390 OF 2022 .

BETWEEN:- The State of Telangana Rep. by P.S. Uppal. … Complainant

AND

A-1 Sm.t Mounika W/o N. Sandeep, Aged 20 years, Occ: Housewife, Caste: SC Mala, R/o H.No. 21-3, near Bodrai, Chiluka Nagar, Uppal, Medchal district. … Accused

This case coming before me on 17-03-2022 for fnal hearing in the presence of the learned Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the complainant and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Uppal fled charge sheet in

Crime No. 896 /2021 for the ofence punishable Under Section.380 of

Indian Penal Code against the Accused.

The sub inspector of police fled charge sheet against the accused for the ofence u/s 379 of IPC. The brief facts of the case are that on 26.10.2021 the Station House ofcer of police received a petition from B. Nagamani W/o Shiva Kumar, R/o Chilukanagar, Uppal with the contents that on 03-10-2021 at 09.00 o’ clock when she was in her house, she removed her gold pustela thaadu and kept the same in the cup board and went to take bath, after completion of bath she noticed that her gold pustela thaadu went missing, and later on she went to Warangal returned to Police station and lodged a petition

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

2

before them. Basing on the petition the Station House Ofcer/ Lw-8

Mybelly recorded the statement of LW’s 1 and 2 visited scene of ofence situated at Chilukanagar, Uppal, secured the presence of Lw’s 3 and 4 drawn rough sketch of scene of ofence.

While so on 28.10.2021 on receipt of credible information about the accused at Chilkanagar the Station House Ofcer of police debuted the

Id party with the instructions to apprehend the accused. Lw-8 went to the house of accused got apprehended him and on interrogation accused /Mounika confessed that she committed theft of gold chain.

The Station House Ofcer of police immediately secured Lw’s 6 and 7and conducted confession panchanama and seized gold chain from her possession. There after Lw-8 issued 41-A Cr.P.C. notice to the accused deposited case property before this court. And after completion of investigation SHO of police laid charge sheet against the accused.

This Court took cognizance for the ofence u/sec 380 of IPC against accused. On appearance of the accused the copies of the documents were furnished to her as required u/sec 207 Cr.P.C, accused is examined u/sec 239 of Cr.P.C, the charge sheet allegations levelled against the accused, for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried for the ofence u/sec 380 of IPC.

On behalf of prosecution, they examined Pw’s 1 and 2 and got marked Ex. P1 to P3 and the learned APP closed the evidence of Lw3 to

Lw7. As there is no incriminating evidence sec 313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with point: -

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

3

1. Point:- Whether the prosecution has proved its case

beyond reasonable doubt for the ofence punishable u/sec 380

IPC against Accused.

2.Pw1 is Defacto complainant and she deposed that she knows the accused herein as she is her nephew. She further deposed that she know Lw 2 Vijayalaxmi as she is her sister. On 26-10-2021 some unknown ofender have committed theft of her gold ornaments of weighing 3 tulas. In this regard she approached police and lodged petition having suspicion on her nephew accused. Later on police reported that they seized gold ornaments / material object and she have obtained interim custody of gold ornaments vide C.PR No. 6 /2022 from this court. She further deposed that police obtained her signature on some white papers and Police did not examined and recorded her statement Ex.P1 is portion of signature of Pw1. Material

Object is gold chain.

3.Pw-2 is Circumstantial witness and she deposed that she knows the accused herein as she is her nephew. She further deposed that she knows Pw1 Nagamani who is her younger sister. Sh deposed that on 26-10-2021 some unknown ofender have committed theft of Pw1 gold ornament of weighing 3 tulas. In this regard Pw1 approached police and lodged petition having suspicion of her nephew accused.

Later on police seized gold ornament / material object and Pw1 have obtained interim custody of gold ornament vide C.P. R. No. 6 /2022 from this court.

4.Basing the evidence of Pw1 and Pw2 the learned APP given up the list of witness 2 to 5, as such the APP given up prosecution witness

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

4 and memo fled by Police reporting Lw4 were abouts not known this court, did not found incriminating evidence against accused, Hence dispensed with the Sec 313 CrPC.

5.So, on considering the evidence of Pw1 and Pw2 as there is no evidence placed by prosecution against accused to connect the charge u/sec 380 of IPC and the hostile evidence is pressing this court not to lay its hands on the accused more particularly on the charge levelled against her and as the prosecution failed to prove the charges. There is no iota of evidence to connect the accused for the charges, this court hold, that accused is entitled for beneft of doubt.

6.In the result the accused is found not guilty for the ofence u/sec 380 accordingly she is acquitted u/sec 248 (1) CrPC. The bail bonds of the accused shall be canceled the MOI which was given as interim custody vide Crl MP no. 6 /2022 its true owner shall be made absolute and the unmarked case property vide Crl MP NO. 6/ 2022 gold ornaments which was given as interim custody to its true owner shall be made absolute after its appeal time and the unmarked case property if any shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.

Typed to my diction by typist, correct and pronounced by me in the open court on this 17th March, 2022.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF)

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: PW-1:

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

5

PW-2:- None -

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR ACCUSED: Ex.P-1: Portion of signature,-Nil -

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION:- FOR ACCUSED:

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

CALANDAR AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF THE IX AJCJ-cum-XXIX AMM, RANGA REDDY

DISTRICT, AT HASTHINAPURAM.

C.C. No. 3284 OF 2018 .

1. Complainant : State, SI of Police, P.S. Uppal.

2. Cr.No. & Nature of Ofence : Cr.No. 896/2021 U/s. 380 of IPC.

3. Name of the accused :Sm.t Mounika W/o N. Sandeep, Aged 20 years, Occ: Housewife, Caste: SC Mala, R/o H.No. 21-3, near Bodrai, Chiluka Nagar, Uppal, Medchal district.

D A T E S:

4.OFFENCE380 of IPC

5.COMPLAINTSmt Dandrolu Nagamani

6.APPREHENSION OF ACCUSED

7.COMMENCEMENT OF TRIAL

8.CLOSURE OF TRIAL

9.JUDGMENT

10.PLEA OF THE ACCUSED

11.SENTENCE OR ORDER : In the result, the Accused is found not guilty for the ofence U/s. 380 of IPC. Accordingly, they are acquitted U/

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI

6 s. 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be cancelled.

The unmarked case property shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

XI AJCJ-cum- XXIX ADDL. MM

R.R., HASTINAPURAM.

To:

The Hon’ble District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District. Dis. No.

SMT. V.USHA KRANTHI