FORM No.72
Calendar and Judgment
District of Vizianagaram
Calendar of cases tried by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Cheepurupalli.
Judgment in Calendar Case No.101/2020
Nature of Offence: 454, 380 or 411 of IPC
Date of Judgment: 16.04.2025
Offence Report ofApprehensionDate ofRelease onCommence-Closure ofSentence or complainant of accusedremandbail ment of trialtrial order
Prior to18.11.201919.11.201913.10.2023 20.03.2025 16.04.2025 18.11.2019
Explanation for the delay: The delay is due to non-appearance of accused and non-production of witnesses.
Complainant: State: Sub Inspector of Police, Garividi Police Station
Accused: Punnana Rambabu, S/o late Narasimhamurthy, aged 25 years, resident of Pattikaya palavalsa village, Cheepurupalli mandal, vizianagaram district.
Finding: Found Guilty under section 411 of IPC
Sentence : In the result, accused is found not guilty for the
offences punishable under sections 457 and 380 of Indian
Penal Code. Therefore, accused is acquitted under section
248 (1) Cr.P.C for the said offences.
But the accused is found guilty for the offence
punishable under section 411 of Indian Penal Code.
Therefore, the accused is convicted under section 248 (2)
Cr.P.C for the said offence.
The detention period of accused i.e from
06.12.2019 to 13.01.2020( 38 days) and from 11.08.2023 to
27.12.2023 (138 days) and 20.03.2025 to 16.04.2025 (27
days) i.e total 203 days (Both days inclusive) shall be given
2 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
set off under section 428 of criminal Procedure Code against
his sentence of imprisonment.
As per the orders in Crl.M.P.No. 290/2020 in Cr.No.
163/2019 dated. 10.03.2020 on the file of this court, MOs.1
to 5 which were already given to PW1 for interim custody
shall made absolute after expiry of appeal time.
As per the orders in Crl.M.P.No.84/2020 in
Cr.No.171/2019, dated 23.01.2020 on the file of this court,
MO.6 which was already given to PW3 for interim custody
shall made absolute after expiry of appeal time.
As per the orders in Crl.M.P.No.83/2020 in Cr.No.
175/2019, dated 23.01.2020 on the file of this court, MO.7
and 8 which were already given to PW5 for interim custody
shall made absolute after expiry of appeal time.
The accused is informed of his right to prefer an
appeal against the Calendar and Judgment of this court.
When he is asked about his means to prefer an appeal, he
stated that he is having means to engage a legal counsel
and he does not need legal aid. He is informed that he has
right to avail free legal aid.
JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
CHEEPURUPALLI.
3 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF THE
FIRST CLASS, CHEEPURUPALLI.
Present : Smt. Y. Premalatha
Judicial Magistrate of the First Class,
Cheepurupalli
Wednesday, this the 16th day of April, 2025.
C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
Between:
State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Garividi Police Station. …Complainant. And:
Punnana Rambabu, S/o late Narasimhamurthy, aged 25 years, resident of Pattikaya palavalsa village, Cheepurupalli mandal, vizianagaram district.
…Accused.
This case is coming on 09.04.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of the Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. K. Simhachalam, advocate for accused and after perusing the material available on record and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1.This case arises out of Crime No.163 of 2019, Crime no. 171 of 2019, Crime no. 175/2019 of Garividi Police Station registered against the accused for the offence under Sections 454, 380 or 411 of IPC.
2.The brief averments of the charge sheet are that:
(a) On 14.10.2019, at about 10:30 a.m., his wife
Narayanamma went to their relatives house in the same village and returned at about 12.30 hours and found that the lock of the door of the iron safe was opened and found missing of MOs.1 to 5 and confirmed that some unknown culprits committed theft of the same, then he gave report to the police, then PW12 4 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 registered the same as in Cr. No. 163/2019 U/Sec. 380 IPC of
Garividi Police Station.
(b) On 11.11.2019, PW3 came from Hyderabad to their village and visited their house, when they went to their house and foud that the lock of the door was broken and found missing of MO.6 in the iron safe , then he gave report to the police, then PW12 registered the same in Cr. No. 171/2019 U/Sec.
380 IPC of Garividi Police Station.
(c) On 04.08.2019, husband of PW5 went to
Rajahmundry, when she opened the iron safe for money and found missing of MOs.7 and 8 in the iron safe, then she gave report the police, then PW12 registered the same in Cr. No.
175/2019 U/Sec. 380 IPC of Garividi Police Station.
(d) While so, during investigation, PW11 arrested the accused and interrogated him in the presence of mediators. The accused voluntarily confessed before mediators. Inturn PW11 informed the facts to PW12. PW11 also informed that they recovered the property from the Manupparam fincorp, IIFL finance and Muthoot Finance in the presence of mediators. After completion of investigation, PW12 filed charge sheet against the accused.
3.Cognizance was taken for the offence under Section 454, 380 or 411 of IPC.
4.After furnishing the copies of the relevant documents as contemplated under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., accused was examined under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. and contents of the charge sheet was read over to him in Telugu, for which he denied. A charge under section 454, 380 or 411 of IPC Was 5 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 framed and read over the same in telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5.During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 to P.W.12 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P17 and
MOs.1 to 8. After closure of prosecution evidence, accused were examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C and the incriminating evidence of the prosecution against the accused were read over and explained to them in Telugu language and they denied the same and reported no defence evidence.
6.Arguments heard.
7. Now the point for consideration is;
“ Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the
accused for the offence under Sec. 454, 380 or 411 of IPC .
beyond all reasonable doubt?”
Point:
8. PW1, defacto complainat in Cr.No.163/2019 deposed that he is having RCC building in Dummeda village, at about 4 years back an unknown person committed theft of MOs.1 to 5 in their house. He locked his house and attended his duties and his wife went to the house of her relatives by duly locking the door.
After 12 noon, he received phone call from his wife by stating that locks of their doors were broke open and found missing of gold ornaments i.e. two rows gold chain, black beeds chain with locket, one pair of gold ear studs, two gold rings, two pair of gold otthulu (bangles) I.e MOs.1 to 5 in their house which were kept in the iron safe. He went to the police station and lodged report( Ex.P1) . After one year of the report, he was informed by the police that Mos. 1 to 5 were recovered.
6 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
9.PW3, defacto complainat in Cr.No.171/2019 deposed that he is having own house at Vedullavalsa village and he went to Visakhapatnam by duly locking his house at about 4 years back, after one week they came back from Visakhapatnam to
Vedullavalsa and noticed the doors of their house was broke open around 11.30 a.m. The articles in the house were pelmel condition. He went into the Hall and found the iron safe was broke open and found missing of MO.6. Immediately they rushed to Garividi police station and lodged report (Ex.P3). After one month of his report, police called him and informed that his stolen property was recovered.
10.PW5, defacto complainat in Cr.No.173/2019 deposed that at about 3 years back on one day she duly locked her house and went out side. Every day herself and her husband attend coolie works by duly locking their house. One day, he opened her iron safe and found missing of MOs.7 and 8,. Then, she went to police station and lodged report (Ex.P5). Later they were informed by the police station her stolen property I.e MOs. 7 and 8 were recovered by them.
11PW2, mediator for scene observation in
Cr.No.163/2019 deposed that at about 4 or 5 years back at 7 a.m., police called him to act as mediator to the house of PW.1.
Police observed the scene in his presence and prepared scene observation report and he signed on the scene observation report i.e Ex.P2.
7 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
12. PW4, mediator for scene observation in Cr. No.
171/2019 deposed that at about 4 years back on one day police called him and G. Suryanarayana (LW14) to act as mediators for scene observation at house of PW.3 and police observed the scene in their presence and prepared scene observation report i.e. Ex.P.4 .
13.PW7, mediator for scene observation in Cr.No.175/2019 deposed that while he was returning from his fields at about 4 years back, on one day, at the residence of PW.5 concerned police asked him, LW.22 (M. Kamunaidu) to act as mediator and enquired them about the boundaries of the scene of offence and prepared scene observation report. He subscribed his signature on scene observation report i.e Ex.P7.
14. PW6, mediator for identification parade of property in
Cr.No.163/2019 deposed that at about 4 years back, concerned police conducted test identification parade of the recovered property by the PW.1 at MPDO office, Garividi. PW.1 identified his property MO.1 to MO.5. Police prepared report in his presence and one Gidijala Laxmana (LW.25) and he signed on the said report i.e.
Ex.P.6.
15.PW10, mediator for test identification parade of property in Cr.No.171/2019 deposed that at about 5 years back,
LW.28 (G. Thamminaidu) called him to come to MPDO office, Garividi for test identification parade Accordingly test identification parade was conducted at MPDO office varandah at after noon hours. PW.3 identified his property ie.. M.O. 6 in their presence under cover of test identification parade. He signed on the report i.e Ex.P.10.
8 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
16.PW9, mediator for test identification parade of property in Cr.No.175/2019 deposed that at about 5 years back, police called her and LW.29 (Reddi Satyanarayana) to the MPDO office, Garividi.
There the police conducted test identification parade by placing the identical items of the property along with Mo.7 and 8 in their presence. PW.5 identified her property under cover of test identification parade report i.e. Ex.P.9 and he signed on it.
17. PW8, mediator for confession and seizure of property deposed that on 19-11-2019 at about 7 a.m. Tahsildar called him and LW.24 (B. Mukundarao) and instructed them to go to the police station to act as mediators, Accordingly they went to the police station, Rajam. Then they along with the police went to the Jandala
Dibba situated in Gara Cheepurupalli village, there the police conducting vehicle checking, then police noticed the accused came on a motor cycle and on seeing them, the accused trying to escape from the police. Then police caught hold him and interrogated him.
On interrogation, the accused confessed that he committed thefts at Garividi, G. Sigadam, Antakapalli of Rajam mandal and Gurla.
Accordingly, police took them to the house of the accused situated at Cheepurupalli and the accused showed the receipts relating to the pledging of gold ornaments. Then, they along with police went to the Mannapuram, IAFL banks and seized the gold omaments, which were committed theft in Garividi police station limits. He signed on confession mediator nama i.e. Ex.P.8 .
18. PW11, investigation officer deposed that on 19.11.2018, on credible information, he along with his staff and mediators PW8 and LW24 B. Mukunda rao reached jandala Dibba junction, Cheepurupalli road. While conducting vehicle checking, they noticed one person was coming on motorbike and on seeing 9 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 them, he tried to escape from them. Immediately, he along with his staff stopped him and interrogated him, then he disclosed his identity particulars as accused in this case. Then, he arrested the accused. Then, he confessed that he committed offence of committing theft in Crime no. 163/2019 of Garividi Police station and also confessed that he committed the offences by committing theft in two other crimes i.e. 171/2019 and 175/2019 of Garividi
Police station under Ex-P8 confession mediatonama. Then, as per the confession of the accused, on 19.11.2019, he along with his staff, mediators and accused went to IAFL and Muthoot Fincorp company and gave requisition to recover MOs.1 to 8 in crime no.
163/2019 crime no.175/2019 to recover MOs.1 and 8 which were pledged by the accused along with his relatives. After two days of the giving requisition to IAFL, Cheepurupalli and Muthoot Fincorp,
Cheepurupalli, they handed over the properties MOs.1 to 8 to them and in turn on the same day, he handed over the same to the SHO,
Garividi Police Station.
19.PW12 another investigtion officer deposed that on 14- 10-2019 at 7.15 p.m. while he was present in the police station,
PW.1 came to the police station and presented a written report.
Basing on the report, he registered a case in Cr. No. 163/2019 u/sec.
454, 380 of IPC. On 11-11-2019 at about 5.30 p.m. while, he was present in the police station, PW.3 came to the police station and presented a written report. Basing on the report, he registered a case in Cr. No. 171/2019 u/sec. 380 of IPC. On 18-11-2019 at about 8.30 p.m. while, he was present in the police station, PW.5 came to the police station and presented a written report. Basing on the report, he registered a case in Cr. No. 175/2019 u/sec. 380 of IPC.
Then he examined and recorded the statements of witnesses.
Then, he visited the scene of offences and prepared rough sketch of 10 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 the scene of offences and also prepared scene observation reports in the presence of mediators. On 19-11-2019, he received information from Inspector of Police, Rajam about the apprehension of the accused and involvement of accused in Cr. No. 163/2019 and also in Cr. No. 171/2019 and in Cr. No. 175/2019 and recovery of property from the accused basing on his confession. On 24-11-2019 the Head constable, Rajam P.S. came to their Police Station, Garividi and handed over the recovered property. On 09-12-2019, he produced the accused before this Court on P.T. warrant and on 14- 12-2019 and he conducted test identification parade (Ex.P.6) of the property in the presence of PW.6 and G. Laxmana. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.
20.As can be seen from the cross examination of prosecution is materially elicited by the defence counsel, PW1 stated that he has no bills to show that Mos.1 to 5 belongs to him.
PW3 stated that they lodged report on the same day when the theft was occurred. PW5 stated that he had not mentioned the exact date when the theft was committed in their house and he wears
MOs. 1 and 2 daily and he he has no bills to show that he purchased Mos.1 and 2. PW8 stated that the house of accused is a slabbed house. PW11 stated that he has not filed any documents in name of accused that he pledged the gold ornaments in IAFL and
Mannapuram gold finance, Cheepurupalli. PW11 admitted that he has not recovered property from the direct possession of the accused.
21.The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 12 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P17 establishes the commission of thefts and that the evidence of Pws.8 and 11 along with the contents of confession-cum- mediator report (Ex. P8) 11 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 establishes that the stolen properties i.e., M.Os.1 to 8 were recovered as per the confession of accused and thus, the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused for the offence under section 411 of IPC beyond the reasonable doubt.
22.On the other hand, the learned defence counsel contended that the accused did not commit the offence and the police never seized the gold ornaments from the possession of the accused and he is no way concerned to this case, therefore the accused is entitled for benefit of doubt.
23.In order to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under sections 380 Indian Penal Code, the prosecution has to prove that the accused had dishonestly taken away the movable properties i.e., M.Os.1 and 8 from the houses of
PWs. 1, 3, 5 respectively without their consent for unlawful gain or to cause loss to them. Section 411 of IPC is concerned the prosecution has to prove that accused had dishonestly received or retained the stolen property knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property.
24.On careful perusal of the evidence, initially, the prosecution has to prove the factum of commission of thefts in the houses of P.W.1, P.Ws.1,3,.5 as alleged by the prosecution. To prove the same, the prosecution has relied upon the evidence of P.Ws.1 to
12. The evidence of P.W.1 who is the defacto-complainant in crime number Cr.No.163/2019 goes to shows that some unknown offendenders committed theft of Mos.1 to 5 from the house of
PW1. Similarly, the evidence of P.W.3 who is the defacto-
Complainant in Cr.No.171/2019 goes to show that some unknown offenders committed theft of MO.6 from their house and the evidenc of PW5 who is the defacto-Complainant in Cr.No.175/2019 12 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 goes to show that some unknown offenders committed theft of
MOs.7 and 8 from the house of PW5. The evidence of P.Ws.6,9,10 mediators for identification parade of property also corroborated the version of P.Ws.1,3,5 regarding their identification of M.Os.1 to 8 under Ex.P6, Ex.P9, Ex.P10 Test Identification Parade reports.
PWs.11 and 12 investigation officer supported the version of
P.Ws.1,3,5 regarding giving reports and registration of the said report as First Information Reports under Ex.P11, Ex.P13, Ex P17 in crime number Cr.No.163/2019, Cr.No.171/2019, Cr.No.131/2019 under sections 457 and 380 or 411 of Indian Penal Code. As such, the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 12 coupled with the documentary evidence clinchingly establishes that some unknown offenders gained entrance into the houses of P.Ws. 1, 3 and 5 during night time and thereby committed theft of M.Os.1 to 5 from the house of
P.W.1, M.O.6 from the house of P.W.3 and M.Os.7 and 8 from the house of P.W.5 by committing lurking house trespass during night time and that M.Os. 1 to 8 are the stolen properties. But there is no direct witness for the the alleged commission of offence. There is no whisper in the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 12 about the involvement of accused as thief. The contents of Ex. P1 to P17 are also silent about the details of accused as thief. No direct or circumstantial evidence such as broken locks or window bars from the scene of offence containing finger prints of accused were seized by the investigation officer to establish the connectivity of accused with the alleged theft. Therefore, the court finds no convincing evidence to hold that the accused had committed lurking trespass by night and also committed thefts of M.O.s 1 to 8 from the houses of P.Ws.
1, 3 and P.W.5 as alleged. Thus, the court holds that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under sections 457 and 380 of Indian Penal
Code beyond the reasonable doubt.
13 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
25.So far as the alternative charge for the offence punishable under section 411 of Indian Penal Code is concerned, the prosecution has to establish that Mos. 1 to 8 were recovered from the possession of the accused as alleged. In order to prove the same, the prosecution has relied upon the evidence of P.W.8 independent mediator and P.W.11 investigation officer as well as the contents of confession mediators report i.e., Ex.P8. The evidence of
PW8 shows that the accused confessed the offences in this case and other crimes and the accused showed the receipts relating to the pledging of gold ornamentsin Mannapuram, IAFL banks and
PW11 seized the Mos. 1 to 8 in his presence. The evidence of PW11 is corroborated with the evidence of PW8. The evidence of P.W.8 who is one of the independent mediators corroborates the version of P.W.11 as well as the contents of mediators report (Ex.P8) in all the material aspects that Mos.1 to 8 were recovered from the accused as per the confession of the accused. Further, those properties were returned to P.W.1, P.W.3 and P.W.5 for interim custody. No one including the accused claimed those items or disputed the ownership of the P.W.1, PW3 and P.W.5. But no dissimilarity were elicited from Pws.1 to 12 to establish that the
M.Os.1 to 8 are not the items which were actually stolen from the houses of P.Ws. 1, 3 and 5 respectively.
26. It is well settled law that it is the burden of the accused to account for his possession of those stolen properties. If the accused gives reasonable explanation as to how he obtained those stolen properties, the court will be justified in not drawing presumption of guilt as provided under section 114 of Indian
Evidence Act. Herein the case, the accused did not make any effort to account for his possession and also failed to rebut the 14 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020 prosecution evidence with regard to recovery of stolen property i.e
Mos. 1 to 8 from his possession. It is not the case of the accused that he had purchased the said items without having knowledge that the same are stolen properties. Except denying that M.O.s 1 to 8 were seized from his possession, accused failed to establish that he had no knowledge that the said properties are stolen properties.
In such facts and circumstances, the court holds that the accused was in possession of M.Os. 1 to 8 by knowing that such items are stolen properties.
27.In view of the above discussion, the court holds that the prosecution is able to establish that MOs.1 to 5 were stolen from the house of P.W.1, MO.6 was stolen from the house of P.W.3 and
M.O.7 and M.O.8 were stolen from the house of P.W.5 prior to the recovery made on 19.11.2019 and that accused had dishonestly retained M.Os. 1 to 8 in his possession by knowing that those items are stolen properties and failed to account for the possession of the said properties. Hence, the court holds that the prosecution is able to establish all the ingredients of section 411 of Indian Penal Code, to bring home the guilt of the accused for the said offence, beyond the reasonable doubt. Accordingly, point is answered .
28. In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offences
punishable under sections 457 and 380 of Indian Penal Code.
Therefore, accused is acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C for
the said offences.
But the accused is found guilty for the offence
punishable under section 411 of Indian Penal Code.
Therefore, the accused is convicted under section 248 (2)
Cr.P.C for the said offence.
Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 16th day of April, 2025
JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
CHEEPURUPALLI.
15 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
29.When accused is questioned about the sentence, he states that his family members are depending on his income and pleaded mercy.
30.On considering the facts of this case, the court is of the view that it is not a fit case to apply provisions of Probation of Of- fenders Act. However, in view of the submissions of accused with regard to his family conditions, the court is inclined to take bal- anced view in imposing sentence.
31. Hence, accused is sentenced to suffer simple im-
prisonment for a period of SIX months for the offence pun-
ishable under section 411 of Indian Penal Code.
32.The detention period of accused i.e from
06.12.2019 to 13.01.2020( 38 days) and from 11.08.2023 to
27.12.2023 (138 days) and 20.03.2025 to 16.04.2025 (27
days) i.e total 203 days (Both days inclusive) shall be given
set off under section 428 of criminal Procedure Code against
his sentence of imprisonment.
33. As per the orders in Crl.M.P.No. 290/2020 in Cr.No.
163/2019 dated. 10.03.2020 on the file of this court, MOs.1
to 5 which were already given to PW1 for interim custody
shall made absolute after expiry of appeal time.
34. As per the orders in Crl.M.P.No.84/2020 in
Cr.No.171/2019, dated 23.01.2020 on the file of this court,
MO.6 which was already given to PW3 for interim custody
shall made absolute after expiry of appeal time.
16 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
35. As per the orders in Crl.M.P.No.83/2020 in Cr.No.
175/2019, dated 23.01.2020 on the file of this court, MO.7
and 8 which were already given to PW5 for interim custody
shall made absolute after expiry of appeal time.
36. The accused is informed of his right to prefer an
appeal against the Calendar and Judgment of this court.
When he is asked about his means to prefer an appeal, he
stated that he is having means to engage a legal counsel
and he does not need legal aid. He is informed that he has
right to avail free legal aid.
Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 16th day of April, 2025
JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
CHEEPURUPALLI.
Appendix of Evidence
Witnesses Examined
For Prosecution: For Defence:
P.W.1: Korada SriramuluNONE
P.W.2: Pathivada Ramana
P.W.3: Vempadapu Chinnarao
P.W.4: Gudivada Appalanaidu
P.W.5: Vempadapu Punyavathi
P.W.6: Reddi Narayanappalanaidu
P.W.7: Potnuru Gollababu
P.W.8: Duppada Anandarao
P.W.9: Senapathi Adinarayana
P.W.10: Gudivada Suryanarayana
P.W.11: G. Somashekar 17 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
P.W.12: K. Krishnaprasad
Documents Marked
For Prosecution:
Ex.P.1: Report of the PW1 in crime no. 163/2019
Ex.P.2: Scene observation report
Ex.P.3: Report
Ex.P.4: Scene observation report dt. 12.11.2019 in cr.no.171/2019
Ex.P.5: Report (crime. no.175/2019)
Ex.P.6: Test identification report.
Ex.P.7: Scene observation report in Cr.no.175/2019
Ex.P.8: Confession mediator nama, dt. 19.11.2019
Ex.P.9: Test identification parade report in Crime no. 175/2019
Ex.P.10: Test identification parade report, dt.15.12.2019 at 10.00
A.M
Ex.P.11: FIR in Crime no. 163/2019
Ex.P.12: Rough Sketch of the scene of offence in crime no.
163/2019
Ex.P.13: FIR in Crime no. 171/2019
Ex.P.14: Rough Sketch of the scene of offence in crime no.
171/2019
Ex.P.15: FIR in Crime no. 175/2019
Ex.P.16: Rough Sketch of the scene of offence in crime no.
175/2019
Ex.P.17: Mediator report in crime no. 163/2019, 171/2019, 175/2019.
For Defence:
NIL
Material Objects Marked
MO1: Two Rows gold chain. MO2: Black beeds chain. MO3: One Pair of Gold ear studs MO4: Two gold rings MO5: Two pairs of Bangles MO6: Gold Pusthela taadu. MO7: Gold Pusthela taadu MO8: One pair of ear studs.
18 J.M.F.C. COURT, CHEEPURUPALLI C.C.NO.101 OF 2020
JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
CHEEPURUPALLI.