Sri. Venkatesh Korugu

1/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL

Monday, this the 16th day of May, 2022.

Present:- Sri K.Venkatesh, II-Addl. Asst. Sessions Judge, Warangal.

Sessions Case No.642 OF 2011.

(PRC No.38/2010 on the file of IV- Addl.Judicial First Class Magistrate, Warangal – Crime No.143 of 2010 of W.P.S, Warangal against the Accused No’s.1 to 5).

(The case against Accused No.3 is abated as he died)

1Name and description of:The State of Telangana through the Sub the complainantInspector of Police, W.P.S, Warangal. 2Name and description of:A-1) Gaddameedi Ganesh, S/o: Gattaiah, the accusedAged: 30 years, Caste: Yadava, Occu: Private Job (Service Engineer), R/o: Rachapalli Village of Jammikunta Mandal.

A-2) Gaddameedi Lachamma, W/o: Gattaiah, Aged: 55 years, Caste: Yadava, Occu: House wife, R/o: Rachapalli village of Jammikunta Mandal.

A-3) Gaddameedi Gattaiah, Aged: 58 years, Caste: Yadava, Occu: Coolie, R/o: Rachapalli village of Jammikunta Mandal.(Died)

A-4) Gaddameedi Kumara Swamy, S/o: Gattaiah, Aged: 34 years, Caste: Yadava, R/o: Rachapalli Village of Jammikunta Mandal.

A-5) Gaddameedi Srinivas, S/o: Gattaiah, Aged: 28 years, Caste: Yadava, Occu: CMO, Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad (Doctor), R/o: Kukatpally, Hyderabad, N/o: Rachapalli Village of Jammikunta Mandal. 3Offences with which :Under Section.498-A, 307 of IPC, Sec.3 and charged4 of D.P. Act. 4Counsel for the :Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. P.P. Prosecution 5Counsel for the Accused:Sri M.Sahodar Reddy, Advocate. 6Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty. 7Finding of the Court:Found not guilty. 8Sentence or Order:Accused is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

2/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

This Sessions Case is coming on 13.05.2022 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Shaik Abdul Nabi, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri M.Sahodar Reddy, Learned Counsel for the accused and after hearing the arguments of both the sides and the matter having stood over for consideration till date, this Court made the following:

JUDGMENT

1)The Sub Inspector of Police, W.P.S, Warangal filed charge sheet against the accused in crime No.143 of 2010 for the offence under

Section.498-A, 307 of IPC, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act against the accused

No’s.1 to 5.

2)The brief allegations of the prosecution are that the marriage of

P.W-1/Gaddameedi Manjula was settled in the month of November, 2003 with the mediation of L.W-7/Maram Laxman and at the time of marriage,

Accused No’s.1 and 5 visited the house of P.W.1, L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2 ie.,

Gaddemeedi Manjula, Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas respectively at Vishnupuri, Kazipet and settled the marriage and they have demanded Rs.4,00,000/- towards dowry and later, L.Ws.2/Dadi

Ilaiah, L.W-3/Dadi Ilamma and P.W-2 have performed the marriage of

P.W-1/Gaddameedi Manjula with the accused No.1 on 17.12.2003 at their house at Kazipet in the presence of the marriage elders ie., L.Ws.5 to 7 ie., Kolla Anand Kumar, Battu Raji Reddy and Maram Laxman respectively and handed over net cash of Rs.4,00,000/-, 6 tulas of gold and articles worth Rs.1,00,000/- to the accused No’s.1 to 5 as demanded by them and that after the marriage of P.W-1, she joined the conjugal society of the accused No.1 at the house of the Accused No’s.1 to 5 at

Rachapally Village of Jammikunta, Karimnagar District and the accused

No’s.1 to 3 looked after P.W-1/Gaddameedi Manjula happily for about 3/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

three months and later the accused No’s.4 and 5 started visiting their house at Jammikunta and the accused No’s.1 to 5 started harassing

P.W-1 physically and mentally for additional dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- from her parent’s house. That the P.W-1 disclosed the inability of L.Ws.2/Dadi

Ilaiah, L.W-3/Dadi Ilamma and P.W-2 for additional dowry, for which the accused No’s.1 to 5 continued harassing the P.W-1 and that in the meanwhile, P.W-1 got conceived and she narrated about the harassment of the accused No’s.1 to 5 to her parents, on which her parents disclosed the same to L.Ws.5 to 7 ie., Kolla Anand Kumar, Battu Raji Reddy and

Maram Laxman respectively and they convinced the in-Laws of L.W-1 and requested them to give some time to fulfull their demand and requested to look after P.W-1 happily and the accused No’s.1 to 5 accepted the same. Later, the accused No’s.1 to 5 have shifted their residence to Housing Board Colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal into a rented house and have sent away P.W-1/Gaddameedi Manjula to her parent’s house for delivery and they threatened P.W-1 to bring the

additional dowry and warned her not to return to their house without the

additional dowry. That on 14.10.2005, P.W-1 was blessed with a male

child at Kazipet and P.W.1, L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2 ie., Gaddemeedi Manjula,

Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas respectively informed about the birth of a male child to the Accused No’s.1 to 5, but they did not turn up to see the baby of L.W-1 and the accused No.1 and that the P.W.1,

L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2 ie., Gaddemeedi Manjula, Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas respectively looked after P.W-1 for about five months and later they approached the accused No’s.1 to 3 at Housing Board

Colony, Hanamkonda and handed over Rs.1,00,000/- additional dowry to them in the presence of L.Ws.5 and 6 ie., Kolla Anand Kumar and Battu 4/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

Raji Reddy and requested them not to harass P.W-1 and sent to her to the conjugal society at the house of A-1 to A-3. After receiving the

additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- from P.W.1, L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2 ie.,

Gaddemeedi Manjula, Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas respectively, the accused No’s.1 to 5 looked after P.W-1 happily for only a few days and subsequently the accused No’s.1 to 5 shifted their residences to different places and later, A-2 and A-3 came to know that

L.W-2/Dadi Ilaiah is going to retire from his service and that the accused

No’s.1 to 5 have increased harassing P.W-1 for additional dowry, on which she bore their harassment for about one year with a fond hope that they would change their attitude, but the accused continued harassing P.W-1 both mentally and physically. That in the year 2007,

P.W-1 was again conceived and the accused No’s.1 to 5 have sent her to her parents house with a warning to bring additional dowry and that on 02.07.2007, P.W-1 gave birth to her second son and even after the birth of second son, the accused did not turn up to see her child, upon which

L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2 ie., Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas respectively have handed over the remaining additional dowry of

Rs.1,00,000/- to her in-Laws in the presence of L.W-5/Kolla Anand Kumar and L.W-6/Battu Raji Reddy and sent her to conjugal society, but still the accused No’s.1 to 3 continued harassing P.W-1 mentally and physically and that the accused No.4 and 5 used to visit the house of P.W-1 at

Vishnupuri, Kazipet and instigated A-1 to A-3 to kill P.W-1, so as to perform another marriage to the accused No.1 and to get heavy amount of dowry and beat P.W-1 indiscriminately. That P.W-1 narrated about the beating of the accused No’s.1 to 3 to her parents, who inturn approached the L.Ws.5 to 7 ie., Kolla Anand Kumar, Battu Raji Reddy and 5/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

Maram Laxman respectively and convened panchayaths on 31.10.2009 near Dolphin Hotel, Hanamkonda and at the Municipal Guest House,

Hanamkonda on 04.07.2010 and instructed the accused No’s.1 to 5 not to harass P.W-1 for additional dowry in future and that the accused

No’s.1 to 5 promised the elders that they will look after P.W-1 happily, but they continued harassing P.W-1, upon which P.W-1 approached

Woman Police Station, Subedari, who summoned the accused No’s.1 to 3 and advised the Accused No’s.1 to 3 as well as Accused No’s.4 and 5 took look after P.W-1 and her children happily for which they agreed for the same and continued their harassment towards P.W-1. That on 06.08.2010 at 12.00 noon, the accused No.1 picked up a quarrel with

P.W-1 and on seeing the quarrel, the accused No’s.2 to 5 instigated the accused No.1 stating that “Uttiga godava Paduthunnavemiraa”, Danni

Champeyyali” and by saying so, the accused No.2 caught hold of the hairs of P.W-1, dragged her to a distance and the accused No’s.1, 3 to 5 fisted and kicked P.W-1 in her stomach indiscriminately stating as “Chaavave Thondaraga” and the accused No’s.1 to 5 have attempted to kill P.W-1 due to which P.W-1 raised hue and cries and requested the accused No’s.1 to 5 not to beat her and that the accused No’s.1 to 5 on observing the critical condition stated that “Idi Intlo chaste Kashtam, darilonaina, davakhanalo naina chavali” by stating so, the accused

No’s.1 to 5 dargged P.W-1 and dropped her in Gandhi Hospital and that the accused No.5 who was working as Medical officer used his influence and falsely got recorded that P.W-1 has fallen on ground accidentally and they left her in Hospital as an orphan and the accused No’s.1 to 5 left from the Hospital. Later, P.W-1 made a telephone call to L.W-2, L.W.3,

P.W-2 ie., Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas respectively 6/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

through one unknown person and informed about her presence in the hospital, on which they rushed to the hospital and got CT scan done to

P.W-1 and since the condition of P.W-1 was serious, she undergone operation at Gandhi Hospital and after getting treatment to P.W-1, the

L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2, L.W-5 ie., Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi

Srinivas, Kolla Anand Kumar took her from the hospital on 21.08.2010 and since the P.W-1 remained at her parents house and hence P.W-1 approached the police and requested to take action against the accused.

3)On receipt of the complaint from P.W-1/Gaddameedi Manjula, L.W- 10/D.Srilaxmi, Sub-Inspector of Police, Women P.S, Warangal registered a case as in Cr.No.143/2010, U/sec.498(A), 307 of Indian Penal Code, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act, issued F.I.R and despatched the copies to all the concerned and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, she examined and recorded the statements of P.W-1, L.W-2, L.W.3, P.W-2,

L.W-5, L.W-6, L.W-7 ie., Gaddameedi Manjula, Dadi Ilaiah, Dadi Ilamma and Dadi Srinivas, Kolla Anand Kumar, Battu Raji Reddy and Maram

Laxman and submitted a requisition to the Medical officer at Gandhi

Hospital, Secunderabad with a request to issue Medical Certificate of

P.W-1/Victim and made efforts to apprehend the accused No’s.1 to 5. On 03.09.2010, Accused No’s.2 to 5 have obtained Anticipatory Bail from the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide Crl.Petition No.8872/2010 and as per the directions of the Hon’ble High Court, the accused No’s.2 to 5 surrendered before L.W-11/D.Srilaxmi on 17.09.2010 and were released on bail on the same day. L.W-8/Dr.Srikanth, CMO, Gandhi

Hospital, Secunderabad who treated the injured and issued Medical certificate opined that there are no external injuries and L.W-9/Jaya

Krishna is the Civil Assistant Surgeon, Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad 7/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

has issued expert opinion opining that the injured/P.W-1 has sustained injuries that are grievous in nature. On completion of investigation, L.W- 18/L.Jeevan Reddy/Inspector of Police, P.S, Matwada filed charge Sheet against the accused No’s.1 to 5 for the offences punishable

U/sec.498(A), 307 of IPC, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act.

4)The case was taken on file by the learned IV-Addl. Judicial First

Class Magistrate, Warangal against the accused No’s.1 to 5 for the offences punishable U/sec.U/sec.498(A), 307 of IPC, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act.

5)On appearance of the accused, the learned Magistrate furnished the copies of case documents to the accused No’s.1 to 5 as required under Sec.207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.). As the offence U/sec.307 of IPC, registered against the accused No’s.1 to 5 is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate after compliance of Sec.209 Cr.P.C., committed the case vide P.R.C.

No.306/2019 to the Hon'ble Principal Sessions Court, Warangal.

6)The Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal, assigned the

Sessions Case No.642 of 2011 and made over to this Court for disposal

according to law.

7)Upon hearing both sides, charges Under Sections.498(A), 307 of

IPC, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act was framed against the accused No’s.1 to 5, read over and explained to them in Telugu, to which the accused No’s.1 to 5 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the Court fixed the trial schedule and issued summons to the witnesses to record their evidence. Subsequently, the accused No.3 died, hence, the case against the accused No.3 is abated.

8/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

8)During the course of trial, Pws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-3 were marked.

9)As the material witnesses i.e.,L.W’s.1, 4, (P.Ws.1 and 2) not supported the prosecution case, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.3, 5 to 11 and reported that the prosecution evidence was closed.

10)As there are no incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of Pws.1 and 2, the examination of the accused under Sec.313 Cr.P.C., is dispensed with.

11)Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the defence.

12)Perused the record.

13)Now the point for determination is, “whether the prosecution

proved the guilt of the accused No’s.1, 2, 4 and 5 for the charge

punishable Under Sections.498(A), 307 of IPC, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P

Act of Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt?”

14)POINT: It is the case of the prosecution that the accused No’s.1 to 5 harassed P.W-1 both mentally and physically demanding additional dowry since 17.03.2004, inspite of receiving Rs.4,00,000/- dowry, 6 Tulas of Gold and articles worth Rs.1,00,000/- at the time of the marriage of the accused No.1 with P.W-1 and did not change their attitude inspite of holding several panchayaths, due to which the P.W-1 lodged a complaint in the W.P.S, Warangal.

9/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

15)In this regard, P.W-1/Gaddameedhi Manjula, de-facto complainant has set the criminal law into motion by way of submitting a complaint to the police. While filing the charge sheet, though the investigating agency cited total 11 witnesses, PWs.1 and 2 who are the material witnesses in this case are alone examined and the evidence of official witnesses and Panchayath elder were given up by the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor since the material witnesses in this case i.e., P.Ws.1 and 2 not supported the prosecution case.

16)On perusal of the evidence on record, PW.1/Gaddameedhi

Manjula/Victim deposed that about 11 years back, some disputes arose in between her and the accused and in that regard, she went to P.S,

Subedari, where the police obtained Ex.P-1/her signature on some written documents and she does not know the contents of the report and that police not examined and recorded her statement.

17)P.W-2 is the brother of P.W-1 and he too deposed more or less on the similar lines as that of P.W-1.

18) Though the Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has cross examined the witnesses ie., P.Ws.1 and 2 by suggesting that they stated before the police as in Exs.P-2 and P-3/161 Cr.P.C Statements respectively, they denied the same and inturn reported that the matter was compromised outside the Court.

19)As seen from the evidence on available on record, it is evident that

P.W-1 who has set the criminal Law into motion by way of filing the complaint before the Police completely turned hostile to the prosecution case. Further, P.W-2 during the course of his cross examination by the 10/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor stated that the matter was compromised outside the Court and that the Police not examined and recorded their statements. As P.Ws.1 and 2, who being the material witnesses in this case failed to support the prosecution case, the Learned Addl.Public

Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.3, 5 to 11 as no purpose would be served even if the remaining witnesses were examined.

20)As seen from the record, from the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 that there is absolutely no evidence available on record to prove the offences for which the Accused No’s.1, 2, 4 and 5 are charged with. Hence, this

Court is of the opinion that the Prosecution miserably failed to produce any material before this Court to prove that the accused has committed the offence U/sec.498(A), 307 of IPC and Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act with which they are charged and as such, the accused is entitled for acquittal. Point is answered accordingly.

21)In the result, the accused No’s.1, 2, 4 and 5 are found not guilty for the charges punishable under Sections.498(A), 307 of IPC and Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly they are acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.,for the above said offences. The Bail bonds of the accused No’s.1, 2, 4 and 5 shall remain in force for a period of Six months U/sec.437-A of C.P.C.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer (Gr-III), corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 16th day of May, 2022.)

Sd/-

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

11/11Judgment of S.C. No.642 of 2011/IIAASJC, Wgl.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

PW.1 Gaddameedi Manjula-NIL- PW.2 Dadi Srinivas

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P-1: Signature of P.W-1 on the report-Nil- Ex.P-2: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-1 Ex.P-3: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-2

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

NIL

Sd/-

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

1 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL

Monday, this the 16th day of May, 2022.

Present:- Sri K.Venkatesh, II-Addl. Asst. Sessions Judge, Warangal.

Sessions Case No.332 OF 2018.

(PRC No.26/2018 on the file of Addl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parkal– Crime No.83 of 2018 of Police Station, Regonda against Accused No’s.1 and 2) 1Name and description of:The State of Telangana through the Sub the complainantInspector of Police, Police Station, Regonda. 2Name and description of:A-1) Boini Rajaiah, S/o: Eedappa, Age: 45 the accusedyears, Caste: Yadava, Occu: Agriculture,

A-2) Boini Bhadraiah, S/o: Eedappa, Age: 40 years, Caste: Yadava, Occu: Agriculture,

Both are R/o: Dumpillapally, H/o:Bhagirthipet village of Regonda Mandal. 3Offences with which :Under Section.307, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian chargedPenal Code against Accused No’s.1 and 2. 4Counsel for the :Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. P.P. Prosecution 5Counsel for the Accused:Sri.C.Vidyasagar Reddy, Advocate. 6Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty. 7Finding of the Court:Found not guilty. 8Sentence or Order:Accused is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

This Sessions Case is coming on 12.05.2022 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri.C.Vidyasagar Reddy, Learned Counsel for the accused No’s.1 and 2 and upon hearing the arguments of both the sides and the matter having stood over for consideration till date, this Court made the following:

JUDGMENT

1)The Sub Inspector of Police, Police station, Regonda filed charge sheet against the accused No’s.1 and 2 in crime No.83 of 2018 for the offence punishable under Sections.307, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C.

2)The brief allegations of the prosecution are that P.W-1/defacto- complainant gave a complaint stating that, on 23.04.2018 around 16.00 2 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

hours, while Mission Kakatiya works were in progress on the Tank Bund of Oorakunta nearby the fields of P.W-1 and A-1 and A-2, in the meantime, A-1 and A-2 were present there and A-1 went to

L.W-4/Polusani Srinivasa Rao, who is a contractor of Mission Kakatiya who was dumping mire at tank bund to get repairs and told him to dump mud on two sides equally of the tank bund and that on hearing the same, P.W-1 went to the accused No.1 herein and asked him a to why he is asking to dump mud in fields and P.W-2 kicked the accused No.1 and on that the accused No.1 grew wild and beat on her cheek. Immediately,

P.Ws.1 to 3 grew wild and went to beat the accused No.1 and that on observing the panic situation, the accused No’s.1 and 2 decided to do way with any one of P.W-1’s family members and that the accused No.1 picked up an iron rod and the accused No.2 picked up a stick and attacked, beat P.Ws.1 to 3 with an intention to kill them, on noticing the same, L.W-4/Polusani Srinivasa Rao and L.W-5/Bussa Iyluswamy rescued to interfere P.Ws.1 to 3 from the cluthes of the accused and they managed to escape from them and that P.W-1 sustained head injury and

P.W-2 got injuries to her left cheek and thigh.

3)On receipt of the complaint from P.W-1, L.W-12/N.Sadakar, Sub-

Inspector of Police, P.S, Regonda registered a case as in Cr.No.83/2018,

Under Section.307, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and issued F.I.R and dispatched the copies to all the concerned and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, L.W-12/N.Sadakar examined P.Ws-1 to 3 and recorded their statements at Police Station, referred them to CHC, Parkal for treatment, visited the scene of offence situated at Oorakunta of

Dumpillapally Village, secured the presence of L.W-7/Thatikanti Iylaiah and L.W-8/Dasari Lingaiah and examined the scene minutely, 3 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

incorporated the physical features of the scene in the crime details form, drew rough sketch of the scene of offence, further secured the presence ofL.W-4/PolusaniSrinivasaRao,L.W-5/BussaIyluswamy,

P.W-4/Gundaboina Rajakka, examined and recorded their statements in

Part-II CD’s in detail and that on 09.05.2018, L.W-12/N.Sadakar, Sub-

Inspector of Police arrested the accused No’s.1 and 2 and produced them before the court for judicial remand. L.W-11/Dr.D.Goutham, CAS,

CHC, Parkal who treated the injured P.Ws.1 and 2 and issued Medical certificate opined that the injured P.Ws.1 and 2 received injuries which are simple in nature. On completion of investigation, L.W-12/N.Sadakar,

Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S, Regonda filed charge Sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/sec.307, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

4)The case was taken on file by the learned Addl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parkal, against the accused No’s.1 and 2 for the offences under Sections.307, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

5)On appearance of the accused No’s.1 and 2, the learned

Magistrate furnished the copies of case documents to the accused as

required under Sec.207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short

Cr.P.C.). As the offence charged U/sec.307 of IPC against the accused

No’s.1 and 2 is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned

Magistrate after compliance of Sec.209 Cr.P.C., committed the case vide

P.R.C.No.26/2018 to the Hon'ble Principal Sessions Court, Warangal.

6)The Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal, assigned the

Sessions Case No.279 of 2018 and made over to this Court for disposal

according to law.

4 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

7)Upon hearing both sides, charges under Section.307, 506 r/w 34 of

IPC, was framed against the accused No’s.1 and 2, read over and explained to them in Telugu, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the Court fixed the trial schedule and issued summons to the witnesses to record their evidence.

8)During the course of trial, Pws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.P-1 to

P-4 were marked.

9)As the material witnesses ie.,L.Ws.1 to 3 and 6 (P.Ws.1 to 4) not supported the prosecution case, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.4, 7 to 12 and reported that the prosecution evidence was closed.

10)As there are no incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of Pws.1 to 4, the examination of the accused No’s.1 and 2 under

Sec.313 Cr.P.C., is dispensed with.

11)Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the defence.

12)Perused the record.

13)Now the point for determination is, “whether the prosecution

proved the guilt of the accused No’s.1 and 2 for the charges

punishable U/sec.307, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, Sec.3 & 4 of D.P Act

beyond reasonable doubt?”

14)POINT: It is the case of the prosecution that, on 23.04.2018 at about 4.00 PM, while Mission Kakatiya works were in progress on the

Tank Bund of Oorakunta nearby the fields of P.W-1 and the Accused

No’s.1 and 2, accused No.1 and 2 were present and that the accused 5 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

No.1 went to L.W-4/Polusani Srinivas Rao/Contractor of Mission Kakatiya

Works and asked him to dump mud on two sides equally of the tank bund and on hearing the same, P.W-1 went to the accused No.1 and asked him as to why he is asking to dump mud in his fields and P.W-2 kicked the accused No.1 and on that the accused No.1 became wild and beat on her cheek. Immediately P.Ws.1 to 3 grew wild and went to beat the accused No.1, for which the accused No’s.1 and 2 decided to do away any of the family members of P.W-1 and that the accused No.1 picked up an iron rod and the accused No.2 picked up a stick, attacked and beat P.Ws.1 to 3 with an intention to kill them and on noticing the same, L.Ws.4 and 5 ie., Polusani Srinivasa Rao and Bussa Iyluswamy rescued P.Ws.1 to 3 from their clutches and the accused No’s.1 and 2 managed to escape and due to the attack of the accused No’s.1 and 2,

P.W-1 sustained head injury and P.W-2 got injuries to her left cheek and thigh.

15)In this regard, P.W-1/Boini Iylaiah/defacto-complainant has set the criminal law into motion by way of submitting a complaint to the police.

While filing the charge sheet, though the investigating agency cited total 12 witnesses, Pws.1 to 4 who are the material witnesses in this case are alone examined and the evidence of official witnesses and Panch witnesses for the scene of offence and the Panch witnesses for the confession and recovery panchanama were given up by the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor since the material witnesses in this case ie.,

P.Ws.1 to 4 not supported the prosecution case and not identified the accused.

16)On perusal of the evidence on record, PW.1 who is the complainant in this case, deposed that on 23.04.2018 at about 4.00 PM, he along with 6 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

his wife/P.W-2/Boini Prameela and P.W-3/Boini Nagaraju went to

Oorakunta of Dumpillapally for attending Mission Kakatiya Works and in the meanwhile, some unknown persons came behind their back and beat with iron rods and fled away and that he did not notice those persons. In that regard, he went to Police station, Regonda and the police obtained his Thumb Impression on some Blank Papers and that the police not examined and recorded his statement.

17)P.W.2/Boini Prameela is the wife of P.W-1 and victim, P.W-3 is the son of P.Ws.1 and 2 also deposed on the similar lines as that of P.W-1.

As P.Ws.1 to 3 went against the prosecution case, the Learned

Addl.Public Prosecutor upon obtaining the permission of the Court, put suggestions to P.Ws.1 to 3 that they have stated before the police as in

Exs.P-1 to P-3 respectively, but they denied the same and reported in one voice that the case was compromised outside the Court.

18)P.W-4/Gundaboina Rajakka who is the eye witness to the incident, deposed that she does not know anything about the case and that the police did not examine and recorded her statement.

Further, as P.W.4 went against the prosecution case, the Learned

Addl.Public Prosecutor upon obtaining the permission of the Court, put suggestions to P.W.4 that she has stated before the police as in Exs.P-4, but she denied the same and remained hostile to the prosecution case.

19.As seen from the evidence on available on record, it is evident that

Pws.1 to 3, who are the material witnesses in this case did not support the prosecution case and deposed in one voice that when they went to attend Misson Kakatiya Works, some unknown persons came behind their back and beat them with iron rods and fled away and that they did 7 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

not witness the said persons and that the police not examined and recorded their statements. Further, during the course of cross examination by the Learned Addl.P.P with the permission of this Court,

P.Ws.1 to 3 stated in one voice that the case was compromised outside the Court. So also, P.W-4 being the eye witness to the incident also turned completely hostile to the prosecution case. As P.Ws.1 to 4, who being the material witnesses in this case and P.W-1 who has set the criminal Law into motion by way of presenting a complaint to the police failed to support the prosecution case, the Learned Addl.Public

Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.4, 7 to 12 as no purpose would be served even if the remaining witnesses were examined.

20)As seen from the record, from the evidence of Pws.1 to 4 that there is absolutely no evidence available on record to prove the commission of offence by the accused. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the Prosecution miserably failed to produce any material

before this Court to prove that the accused No’s.1 and 2 have committed

the offence U/sec.307, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, which is charged against them and as such, the accused are entitled for acquittal. Point is answered accordingly.

21)In the result, the accused No’s.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the charges punishable under Section.307, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, and accordingly they are acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C., for the above said offences. The Bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for a period of Six months U/sec.437-A of C.P.C. The unmarked case property if any, which is deposited before the court of the Addl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parkal, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

8 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.332 of 2018/IIAASJC, Wgl.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer (Gr-III), corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 16th day of May, 2022.)

Sd/-

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

PW.1 Boini Iylaiah-None- PW.2 Boini Prameela PW.3 Boini Nagaraju PW.4 Gundaboina Rajakka

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P-1: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-1-Nil- Ex.P-2: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-2 Ex.P-3: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-3 Ex.P-4: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-4

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

NIL

Sd/-

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

1 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL

Monday, this the 16th day of May, 2022.

Present:- Sri K.Venkatesh, II-Addl. Asst. Sessions Judge, Warangal.

Sessions Case No.225 OF 2021.

(PRC No.90/2020 on the file of 1-Addl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Warangal– Crime No.20 of 2020 of Police Station, Mills Colony against Accused No’s.1 to 3) 1Name and description of:The State of Telangana through the Sub the complainantInspector of Police, Police Station, Mills Colony. 2Name and description of:A-1) Suddala Prabhakar @ Dinesh, S/o: the accusedEkadarshanam, Ag: 25 years, Caste: Madiga, Occu: Painting work, R/o: H.No: 19- 11-339/3, Shambunipet, Warangal.

A-2) Muntukula Santhosh, S/o: Raghu, Age: 27 years, Occu: Driver, R/o: H.No.17-10- 291, Ursu Kareemabad, Warangal.

A-3) Avunoori Karthik @ Nanni, S/o: Lingamurthy, Age: 26 years, Caste: Kummari, Occu: Tiles worker, R/o: H.No.17- 11-40, Kummariwada Ursu Bodrai, Warangal.

3Offences with which :Under Section.448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of the chargedIndian Penal Code against Accused No’s.1 to 3. 4Counsel for the :Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. P.P. Prosecution 5Counsel for the Accused:Sri.N.Ramesh, Advocate. 6Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty. 7Finding of the Court:Found not guilty. 8Sentence or Order:Accused is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

This Sessions Case is coming on 12.05.2022 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri.N.Ramesh, Learned Counsel for the accused No’s.1 to 3 and upon hearing the arguments of both the sides and the matter having stood over for consideration till date, this Court made the following:

2 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

JUDGMENT

1)The Sub Inspector of Police, Police station, Mills Colony filed charge sheet against the accused No’s.1 to 3 in crime No.20 of 2020 for the offence under Sections.448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of I.P.C.

2)The brief allegations of the prosecution are that P.W-1/defacto- complainant came to P.S, Mills Colony and gave a complaint stating that, on 13.01.2020 at about 5.30 PM, he along with his family members went to movie and that on the same day at about 9.30 PM, the accused No’s.1 to 3 herein came to their house and removed the dried sarees, clothes from the wire and kept on the chair and burnt them, due to which the clothesanddoorswereburntandthathiswife/

L.W-2/Md.Yasmin and P.W-2/Pathri Ramu were coming in an auto saw the flames near the corner of their house and that the accused saw them coming in an Auto stopped the said auto and beat P.W-2 with hands and caused loss to a tune of Rs.20,000/-. That the accused while beating

P.W-2 told that they themselves have burnt the clothes due to previous grudges.

3)On receipt of the complaint from P.W-1, L.W-12/N.Laxman Murthy,

Head Constable-2236 of P.S, Mills Colony registered a case as in

Cr.No.20/2020, Under Section.448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC, issued F.I.R and dispatched the copies to all the concerned and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, he examined P.Ws-1 to 3, L.W-2/Md.Yasmim, L.W-4/Md.Shahin and recorded their statements, secured the presence of L.W-7/Sayad Anwar, L.W-8/Md.Shakil and conducted scene of offence observation panchanama duly drafting it in crime details form in the presence of the mediators. Subsequently,

L.W-10/P.Devender, Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S, Mills Colony took up 3 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

investigation and verified the investigation done by L.W-9 is on proper lines. That on 24.02.2020, Accused No.2 herein got anticipatory bail vide Crl.M.P.No.136/2020 from the Hon’ble II-Addl.Sessions Judge,

Warangal and on 03.03.2020, L.W-10 arrested the accused No.1 and produced him before the court for judicial custody. On 23.03.2020, accused No.3 got anticipatory bail vide Crl.M.P.No.181/2020 from the

Hon’ble II-Addl.Sessions Judge’s Court, Warangal and was released on

bail. On completion of investigation, L.W-10/P.Devender, Sub-Inspector of

Police, P.S, Mills Colony filed charge Sheet against the accused No’s.1 to 3 for the offences punishable U/sec.448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC.

4)The case was taken on file by the learned 1-Addl.Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Warangal, against the accused No’s.1 to 3 for

the offences under Sections. 448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC.

5)On appearance of the accused No’s.1 to 3, the learned Magistrate furnished the copies of case documents to the accused as required under Sec.207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.). As the offence charged U/sec.436 of IPC against the accused No’s.1 to 3 is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate after compliance of Sec.209 Cr.P.C., committed the case vide P.R.C.No.90/2020 to the Hon'ble Principal Sessions Court, Warangal.

6)The Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal, assigned the

Sessions Case No.225 of 2021 and made over to this Court for disposal

according to law.

7)Upon hearing both sides, charges under Sections. 448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC, were framed against the accused No’s.1 to 3, read over and explained to them in Telugu, to which the accused pleaded not guilty 4 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the Court fixed the trial schedule and issued summons to the witnesses to record their evidence.

8)During the course of trial, Pws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.P-1 to

P-5 were marked.

9)As the material witnesses ie.,L.Ws.1, 3, 5 and 6 (P.Ws.1 to 4) not supported the prosecution case, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.2, 4, 7 to 10 and reported that the prosecution evidence was closed.

10)As there are no incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of Pws.1 to 4, the examination of the accused No’s.1 and 2 under

Sec.313 Cr.P.C., is dispensed with.

11)Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the defence.

12)Perused the record.

13)Now the point for determination is, “whether the prosecution

proved the guilt of the accused No’s.1 to 3 for the charges

punishable U/sec.448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC beyond reasonable

doubt?”

14)POINT: It is the case of the prosecution that, on 13.01.2020 at about 9.30 PM, at Gollawada, Rangashaipet, Fort Warangal, P.W-1 along with his family members went to movie and that on the same day at about 9.30 PM, the accused No’s.1 to 3 came to their house and removed the dried sarees, clothes from the wire and kept on the chair and burnt them, due to which the clothes and doors of their house were burnt and by that time, L.W-2/Md.Yasmin/Wife of P.W-1 and P.W-2/Pathri 5 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

Ramu were coming in an auto noticed the said flames to their house and that the accused stopped the said Auto and beat P.W-2 with hands and caused loss to a tune of Rs.20,000/-.

15)In this regard, P.W-1/Md.Innthiyaz/defacto-complainant has set the criminal law into motion by way of submitting a complaint to the police.

While filing the charge sheet, though the investigating agency cited total 10 witnesses, Pws.1 to 4 who are the material witnesses in this case are alone examined and the evidence of official witnesses and Panch witnesses for crime details form were given up by the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor since the material witnesses in this case ie., P.Ws.1 to 4 not supported the prosecution case and not identified the accused.

16)On perusal of the evidence on record, PW.1 who is the complainant in this case, deposed that about two years back, he along with his family members went to a movie and that after watching the movie, they returned to their house and found that the sarees of his wife were burnt and that some unknown persons burnt those sarees. That while searching for those persons, somebody came behind his back and beat him with hands and fled away and that he did not notice the said persons and in that regard, he went to P.S, Mills Colony, where the police obtained Ex.P-1/his signature on a blank paper and that the police not examined and recorded his statement.

17)As P.W-1 went against the prosecution case, the Learned

Addl.Public Prosecutor upon obtaining the permission of the Court, put suggestions to P.W-1 that he has stated before the police as in

Ex.P-2/161 Cr.P.C Statement, but he denied the same and reported that the case was compromised outside the Court.

6 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

18)P.W-2/Pathri Ramu is the eye witness to the incident, deposed that he does not know anything about the case and that the police did not examine and recorded her statement.

Further, as P.W.2 went against the prosecution case, the Learned

Addl.Public Prosecutor upon obtaining the permission of the Court, put suggestions to P.W.2 that he has stated before the police as in Ex.P- 3/161 Cr.P.C Statement, but he denied the same and inturn reported that the matter is compromised outside the court.

19)P.W-3/Katherapally Nagaraju and P.W-4/Katherapally Sathish are said to have witnessed the accused beating L.W-2/Md.Yasmin deposed in one voice that they does not know anything about the case and that the police did not examine and recorded their statement.

Further, as P.Ws.3 and 4 went against the prosecution case, the

Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor upon obtaining the permission of the

Court, put suggestions to P.Ws.3 and 4 that they have stated before the police as in Exs.P-4 and P-5/161 Cr.P.C Statement, but they denied the same.

20)As seen from the evidence on available on record, it is evident that

Pws.1 to 4, who are the material witnesses in this case did not support the prosecution case and turned to be the hostile witnesses and stated that the police not examined and recorded their statements. Further during the course of cross examination by the Learned Addl.P.P with the permission of this Court, P.Ws.1 and 2 stated in one voice that the case was compromised outside the Court. So also, P.Ws-3 and 4 being the eye witnesses to the incident also turned completely hostile to the prosecution case. As P.Ws.1 to 4, who being the material witnesses in 7 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

this case and P.W-1 who has set the criminal Law into motion by way of presenting a complaint to the police failed to support the prosecution case, the Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of

L.Ws.2, 4, 7 to 10 as no purpose would be served even if the remaining witnesses were examined.

21)As seen from the record, from the evidence of Pws.1 to 4 that there is absolutely no evidence available on record to prove the commission of offence by the accused No’s.1 to 3. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the Prosecution miserably failed to produce any material before this Court to prove that the accused No’s.1 to 3 have committed the offence U/sec.448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC, which is charged against them and as such, the accused No’s.1 to 3 are entitled for acquittal. Point is answered accordingly.

22)In the result, the accused No’s.1 to 3 are found not guilty for the charges punishable under Sections. 448, 436, 323 r/w 34 of IPC, and accordingly they are acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C., for the above said offences. The Bail bonds of the accused no’s.1 to 3 shall remain in force for a period of Six months U/sec.437-A of C.P.C.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer (Gr-III), corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 16th day of May, 2022.)

Sd/-

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

PW.1 Md.Inthiyaz-None- PW.2 Pathiri Ramu PW.3 Katherapally Nagaraju PW.4 Katherapally Sathish 8 /8 Judgment of S.C. No.225 of 2021/IIAASJC, Wgl.

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P-1: Signature of P.W-1 on the report Ex.P-2: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-1-Nil- Ex.P-3: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-2 Ex.P-4: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-3 Ex.P-5: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-4

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

NIL

Sd/-

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Dt.19.5.2022 1/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL

Thursday, this the 19th day of May, 2022.

Present:- K.Venkatesh, II-Addl. Asst. Sessions Judge, Warangal.

Sessions Case No. 279 OF 2017

(PRC No.9/2016 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Parkal – Crime No.209 of 2015 of P.S. Parkal against the accused). 1Name and description of:The State of Telangana through the Sub the complainantInspector of Police, P.S, Parkal. 2Name and description of:Doggela Rajaiah, S/o. Ramaiah, Age : 50 the accusedyears, Caste : Madiga, Occu : Agriculture, R/o.Varikole Village of Parkal Mandal. 3Offences with which :Under Section. 307 of IPC charged 4Counsel for the :Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. P.P. Prosecution 5Counsel for the Accused:Sri B.Sudhakar, Advocate. 6Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty. 7Finding of the Court:Found not guilty. 8Sentence or Order:Accused is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

This Sessions Case is coming on 16.05.2022 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Shaik Abdul Nabi, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri B.Sudhakar, Learned Counsel for the accused and after hearing the arguments of both the sides and the matter having stood over for consideration till date, this Court made the following:

JUDGMENT

1)The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S, Parkal filed charge sheet against the sole accused in Crime No.209 of 2015 for the offence under

Section.307 of IPC.

2)The brief allegations of the prosecution are that on 14-7-2015 at 11.30 hours, LW1/Doggela Kumaraswamy came to PS Parkal and lodged a written complaint that on 13-7-2015 night at 19.00 hours, while they were present at home, accused along with Doggela Ravinder and

Doggela Sammamma came to his house and abused them in filthiest language suspecting that his mother viz., Doggela Rajamma practiced

Dt.19.5.2022 2/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

sorcery upon the above persons and when they came outside by opening the door of his house, the above three persons pounced on him and beat him with sticks and iron rod and caused injuries and beat his wife and mother with sticks and iron rod causing injuries and his wife caused injury to right eye and hence L.W-1 approached the police and requested to take action against the accused.

3)On receipt of the complaint from L.W-1, L.W-13/Mohd. Omar, Sub

Inspector of Police, P.S, Parkal registered a case as in Cr.No.209/2015,

U/sec.307 of Indian Penal Code, issued F.I.R and dispatched the copies to all the concerned and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, he examined and recorded the statement of L.W-1. Later

LW14/S.Deepak, SI of Police, Parkal took up further investigation and verified the investigation done by LW13 and found it on correct lines.

LW14 examined injured/LW2/Doggela Rajamma and recorded her statement. Thereafter, he visited the scene of offence and drafted Crime

Detail Form in the presence of LW8/Ramancha Bixapathi and

LW9/Doggela Ramesh and secured the presence of LW4/Ramancha

Komuraiah, LW5/Ramancha Sammaiah, LW6/Enugala Eshwaramma,

LW7/Doggela Sammaiah and recorded their statements. Later he visited

Govt. Eye hospital at Warangal and examined injured PW1/Doggela

Sharadha and recorded her statement. On 23-7-2015 LW14 apprehended the accused at Varikole Village and secured the presence of LW10 and

LW11 and recorded confessional statement of accused under a cover of panchanama. During interrogation, accused voluntarily confessed the commission of offence. After recording confession statement of accused, seized one iron rod and one stick from the accused in the presence of mediators LW10/Ramancha Bixapathi and LW11/Doggela

Dt.19.5.2022 3/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

Ramesh under cover of confession cum seizure panchanama. Later

LW14 apprehended the accused along with seized property and produced before the court for judicial custody. LW12/Dr.S.Prabhu Das who treated injured LW1 to LW3, opined that the injuries sustained by

LW1 to LW3 are simple in nature. On completion of investigation, LW-14 filed charge Sheet against the accused only for the offence punishable

U/sec.307 of IPC, by deleting the names of other persons, since the case is not made out against them.

4)The case was taken on file by the learned Addl. Judicial First Class

Magistrate, Parkal against the accused for the offence punishable

U/sec.307 of IPC.

5)On appearance of the accused, the learned Magistrate furnished the copies of case documents to the accused as required under Sec.207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.). As the offence

U/sec.307 of IPC, charged against the accused is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate after compliance of

Sec.209 Cr.P.C., committed the case vide P.R.C. No.9/2016 to the Hon'ble

Principal Sessions Court, Warangal.

6)The Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal, assigned the

Sessions Case No.279 of 2017 and made over to this Court for disposal

according to law.

7)Upon hearing both sides, charge Under Section.307 of IPC, was framed against the accused, read over and explained to him in Telugu, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Thereafter, the Court fixed the trial schedule and issued summons to the

Dt.19.5.2022 4/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

witnesses to record their evidence.

8)During the course of trial, Pws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.P-1 to

P-4 were marked.

9)As the material witnesses i.e.,L.W’s.3, 5 to 7, (P.Ws.1 to 4) not supported the prosecution case, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.4, 8 to 14 and reported that the prosecution evidence was closed.

10)As there are no incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of Pws.1 to 4, the examination of the accused under Sec.313 Cr.P.C., is dispensed with.

11)Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the defence.

12)Perused the record.

13)Now the point for determination is, “whether the prosecution

proved the guilt of the accused for the charge punishable Under

Section.307 of IPC, beyond reasonable doubt?”

14)POINT: It is the case of the prosecution that the accused beat

LW1, LW2 and P.W-1 with sticks and iron rods in order to commit murder, due to which the L.W-1, LW2 and PW1 received injuries.

15)In this regard, L.W-1/Doggela Kumaraswamy, de-facto complainant has set the criminal law into motion by way of submitting a complaint to the police. While filing the charge sheet, though the investigating agency cited total 14 witnesses, PWs.1 to 4 who are the material witnesses in this case are alone examined and the evidence of

Dt.19.5.2022 5/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

official witnesses and panch witnesses were given up by the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor since the material witnesses in this case i.e.,

P.Ws.1 to 4 not supported the prosecution case.

16)On perusal of the evidence on record, PW1/Sharadha deposed that about seven years back, while she along with LW1 and LW2 stood infront of her house, some unknown persons came behind their back and beat with sticks and iron rods and caused bleeding injuries and fled away and she did not notice those persons who beat them and that police not examined and recorded her statement.

17)PW2/Doggala Sammaiah, PW3/Ramancha Somaiah and

PW4/Enugala Eshwaramma are the alleged eye witnesses to the incident and they too deposed that they does not know anything about this case and they were not examined by the police.

18) Though the Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has cross examined the above witnesses ie., P.Ws.1 to 4 by suggesting that they stated before the police as in Exs.P-1 to P-4/161 Cr.P.C Statements respectively, they denied the same and in turn reported that the matter was compromised outside the Court. Further, LW1/Doggela Kumaraswamy is the defacto complainant and one of the injured and LW2/Smt.Doggela Rajamma is the another injured, were died hence their evidence is closed by this court.

19)As seen from the evidence on available on record, it is evident that

L.W-1 who has set the criminal Law into motion by way of filing the complaint before the Police, was died. Further, P.W-1 to PW4 during the course of their cross examination by the Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor

Dt.19.5.2022 6/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

stated that the matter was compromised outside the Court and that the

Police not examined and recorded their statements. As P.Ws.1 to 4, who being the material witnesses in this case failed to support the prosecution case, the Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.4, 8 to 14 as no purpose would be served even if the remaining witnesses were examined.

20)As seen from the record, from the evidence of PWs.1 to 4 that there is absolutely no evidence available on record to prove the offence for which the Accused is charged with. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the Prosecution miserably failed to produce any material

before this Court to prove that the accused has committed the offence

U/sec.307 of IPC with which he was charged and as such, the accused is entitled for acquittal. Point is answered accordingly.

21)In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the charge punishable under Sections. 307 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.,for the above said offence. The

Bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for a period of Six months

U/sec.437-A of C.P.C. The unmarked property i.e., 1) one iron rod 20 inches and 2) One bamboo stick 32 inches which was deposited before

Judicial First Class Magistrate – cum – Prl,. Junior Civil Judge’s court,

Warangal vide CPR No. 23/2017 dt. 18-7-2017 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer (Gr-II), corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 19th day of May, 2022.)

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Dt.19.5.2022 7/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

PW.1 Doggela Sharadha -NIL- PW.2 Doggela Sammaiah PW.3 Ramancha Sammaiah PW.4 Enugala Eshwaramma

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P-1: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-2NIL Ex.P-2: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-3 Ex.P-3: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-4 Ex.P-4: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-5

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED NIL

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Dt.19.5.2022 8/7S.C. No.279 of 2017 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

CALENDER EXTRACT

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

(Sessions Trials – SESSIONS CASE NO.279 of 2017 on the file of this Court – PRC No.9/2016 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Parkal – Crime No.209 of 2015 of Police Station, Parkal)

1.Case Number: SC.No.279 of 2017

2.Name of the Police Station:P.S. Parkal, Cr.No.209 of 2015 and crime Number

3.Offence :U/sec.307 of IPC

4.Description of the Accused:

5.Date of:: a. Occurrence:13-07-2015 b. Report:14-07-2015 c. Apprehension:23-07-2015 d. Released on bail:05-08-2015 e. Committed :20-07-2021 f. Commencement of Trial:06-05-2022 f. Closure of Trial:16-05-2022 g. Sentence or Order:19-05-2022

6.Finding of the Court: : Found Not guilty.

7.Explanation for Delay: On being made over from the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal and the Case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions on 20-07-2017. Trial has commenced on 06.05.2022 and Judgment pronounced on 19.05.2022.

II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Dt.18.5.2022 1/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL

Wednesday, this the 18th day of May, 2022.

Present:- K.Venkatesh, II-Addl. Asst. Sessions Judge, Warangal.

Sessions Case No. 42 OF 2021

(PRC No.40/2020 on the file of Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Parkal – Crime No.104 of 2020 of P.S, Bhupalpally against the accused). 1Name and description of:The State of Telangana through the Sub the complainantInspector of Police, P.S, Bhupalpalli. 2Name and description of:Manthu Nagaraju, S/o. Basavaiah, Age : 36 the accusedyears, Caste : Padmashali, Occu : Chicken Center, R/o. Azamnagar Village of Bhupalpally Mandal. 3Offences with which :Under Section.498-A, 307 of IPC charged 4Counsel for the :Sri Abdul Nabi Shaik, Addl. P.P. Prosecution 5Counsel for the Accused:Sri G.Jagadeeshwar, Advocate. 6Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty. 7Finding of the Court:Found not guilty. 8Sentence or Order:Accused is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

This Sessions Case is coming on 16.05.2022 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri Shaik Abdul Nabi, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/complainant and Sri G.Jagadeeshwar, Learned Counsel for the accused and after hearing the arguments of both the sides and the matter having stood over for consideration till date, this Court made the following:

JUDGMENT

1)The Sub Inspector of Police, P.S, Bhupalpally filed charge sheet against the sole accused in crime No.104 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Sections.498-A and 307 of IPC.

2)The brief allegations of the prosecution are that PW2/Kalyanapu

Agaiah performed the marriage of P.W-1/Manthu Sumalatha about 20 years back with accused, who is younger son of his elder sister and they blessed with two children viz., Sravan and Shravya. Since four years accused suspecting character of PW1 and used to quarrel with her. On 9-3-2020 at 16.00 hours, with an intention to eliminate PW1, accused

Dt.18.5.2022 2/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

armed with knife and quarreled with PW1 and he would kill PW1 and her children and chased Shravan (PW4) to stab him when PW1 tried to extricate accused stabbed his daughter who put her hand and caused injuries to her left hand fingers, again he stabbed on left abdomen and caused severe bleeding injuries, which was witnessed by Domala Raju and Karukuri Gopal who interfered and extricated PW1, when Gopal dragged knife from the hands of accused caused injury to his hand.

Later PW1 was shifted to Global Hospital at Bhupalpally in jeep and after first aid shifted to MGM Hospital and hence P.W-2 approached the police and requested to take action against the accused.

3)On receipt of the complaint from P.W-2/Kalyanapu Agaiah, L.W- 15/S.Vasudeva Rao, Inspector of Police, P.S, Bhupalpally registered a case as in Cr.No.104/2020, U/sec.498(A), 307 of Indian Penal Code, issued F.I.R and dispatched the copies to all the concerned and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, he examined and recorded the statements of P.W-1. On 11-3-2020 he visited the MGM

Hospital, Warangal secured the presence of PW1/Manthu Sumalatha examined and recorded her statement and secured the presence of

PW4/Manthuy Sravan, PW3/Manthu Sravya, PW5/Domala Raju,

LW6/Karukuri Gopal, LW7/Manthu Swapna, LW8/Manthu Srilatha and recorded their statements and observed the scene minutely conducted scene of offence in the presence of LW9/Govindula Shyam and

LW10/Pusala Ravinder and prepared a rough sketch of scene of offence.

On 18-3-2020 LW15 apprehended the accused at 8.30 hours and on interrogation he voluntarily confessed the commission of offence. On completion of investigation, L.W-15 filed charge Sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/sec.498(A) and 307 of IPC.

Dt.18.5.2022 3/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

4)The case was taken on file by the learned Addl. Judicial First Class

Magistrate, Parkal against the accused for the offences punishable

U/sec.498(A), 307 of IPC.

5)On appearance of the accused, the learned Magistrate furnished the copies of case documents to the accused as required under Sec.207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.). As the offence

U/sec.307 of IPC, registered against the accused is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate after compliance of

Sec.209 Cr.P.C., committed the case vide P.R.C. No.40/2020 to the

Hon'ble Principal Sessions Court, Warangal.

6)The Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal, assigned the

Sessions Case No.42 of 2021 and made over to this Court for disposal

according to law.

7)Upon hearing both sides, charges Under Sections.498(A), 307 of

IPC, was framed against the accused, read over and explained to him in

Telugu, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Thereafter, the Court fixed the trial schedule and issued summons to the witnesses to record their evidence.

8)During the course of trial, Pws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.P-1 to

P-6 were marked.

9)As the material witnesses i.e.,L.W’s.1 to 5, (P.Ws.1 to 5) not supported the prosecution case, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.6 to LW16 and reported that the prosecution evidence was closed.

10)As there are no incriminating circumstances found in the evidence

Dt.18.5.2022 4/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

of Pws.1 to 5, hence, the examination of the accused under Sec.313

Cr.P.C., is dispensed with.

11)Heard the arguments of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the defence.

12)Perused the record.

13)Now the point for determination is, “whether the prosecution

proved the guilt of the accused for the charge punishable Under

Sections.498(A), 307 of IPC, beyond reasonable doubt?”

14)POINT: It is the case of the prosecution that the accused harassed

P.W-1 both mentally and physically and attacked on PW1 with knife with an intention to kill her, due to which the P.W-2 lodged a complaint in the

P.S, Bhupalpalli.

15)In this regard, P.W-2/Kalyanapu Agaiah, de-facto complainant has set the criminal law into motion by way of submitting a complaint to the police. While filing the charge sheet, though the investigating agency cited total 15 witnesses, PWs.1 to 5 who are the material witnesses in this case are alone examined and the evidence of official witnesses and

Panchayath elder were given up by the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor since the material witnesses in this case i.e., P.Ws.1 to 5 not supported the prosecution case.

16)On perusal of the evidence on record, PW2/Kalyanapu Agaiah deposed that about two years back, some disputes arose in between

PW1 and the accused and in that regard, he went to P.S, Bhupalpally, where the police obtained Ex.P-2/his signature on some written documents and he does not know the contents of the it and that police

Dt.18.5.2022 5/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

not examined and recorded his statement.

17)On perusal of the evidence on record, PW1/Manthu Sumalatha is the victim, who deposed that about two years back, some disputes arose in between her and the accused and in that regard, her father PW2 went to P.S, Bhupalpally, where the police have obtained his signature on blank papers and that police not examined and recorded her statement.

18)P.W-3 and PW-4 who are the children of PW1 and PW5 is the alleged eye witness and they too, deposed more or less on the similar lines as that of P.W-1.

19) Though the Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has cross examined the above witnesses ie., P.Ws.1 to 5 by suggesting that they stated before the police as in Exs.P-2 to P-6/161 Cr.P.C Statements respectively, they denied the same and in turn reported that the matter was compromised outside the Court.

20)As seen from the evidence on available on record, it is evident that

P.W-2 who has set the criminal Law into motion by way of filing the complaint before the Police completely turned hostile to the prosecution case. Further, P.W-2 during the course of his cross examination by the

Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor stated that the matter was compromised outside the Court and that the Police not examined and recorded their statements. As P.Ws.1 to 5, who being the material witnesses in this case failed to support the prosecution case, the Learned Addl.Public

Prosecutor has given up the evidence of L.Ws.6 to 15 as no purpose would be served even if the remaining witnesses were examined.

21)As seen from the record, from the evidence of PWs.1 to 5 that

Dt.18.5.2022 6/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

there is absolutely no evidence available on record to prove the offences for which the Accused is charged with. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the Prosecution miserably failed to produce any material

before this Court to prove that the accused has committed the offences

U/sec.498(A), 307 of IPC with which they are charged and as such, the accused is entitled for acquittal. Point is answered accordingly.

22)In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the charges punishable under Sections.498(A) and 307 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly he is acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.,for the above said offences. The Bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for a period of Six months U/sec.437-A of C.P.C.

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer (Gr-II), corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 18th day of May, 2022.)

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence :

PW.1 Manthu Sumalatha -NIL- PW.2 Kalyanapu Agaiah PW.3 Manthu Sravya PW.4 Manthu Sravan PW.5 Domala Raju

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P-1: 161 Cr.PC statement of PW1 -Nil- Ex.P-2: Signature of P.W-2 on the report Ex.P-3: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-2 Ex.P-4: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-3 Ex.P-5: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-4 Ex.P-6: 161 Cr.P.C Statement of P.W-5

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED NIL

II-ADDL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Dt.18.5.2022 7/6S.C. No.42 of 2021 /IIAASJC, Wgl.

CALENDER EXTRACT

IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

(Sessions Trials – SESSIONS CASE NO.42 of 2021 on the file of this Court – PRC No.40/2020 on the file of Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Parkal – Crime No.104 of 2020 of Police Station, Bhupalpalli)

1.Case Number: SC.No.42 of 2021

2.Name of the Police Station:P.S. Bhupalpalli, Cr.No.104 of 2020 and crime Number

3.Offence :U/sec.498-A, 307 of IPC

4.Description of the Accused:Manthu Nagaraju, S/o. Basavaiah, Age : 36 years, Caste : Padmashali, Occu : Chicken Center, R/o.Azamnagar Village of Bhupalpally Mandal.

5.Date of:: a. Occurrence:09-03-2020 b. Report:10-03-2020 c. Apprehension:18-03-2020 d. Released on bail:08-06-2020 e. Committed :09-02-2021 f. Commencement of Trial:06-04-2022 f. Closure of Trial:16-05-2022 g. Sentence or Order:18-05-2022

6.Finding of the Court: : Found Not guilty.

7.Explanation for Delay: On 06-03-2021, the case was received on being made over from the Hon’ble

Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal and the Case is committed to the Hon’ble

Court of Sessions on 09-02-2021. Trial has commenced on 06.04.2022 and Judgment pronounced on 18.05.2022.

II-ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

WARANGAL.