C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
AT KHAMMAM
Dated this the 04th day of May, 2026
Present: Ms.Yepuri Bindu Priya. II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Khammam.
C.C No.1142/2017
Between: State through Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S Khanapuram Haveli.
...Complainant.
and
1) Bondili Nagala Sujitha Bai, W/o Ayyappa Singh, Age: 27 years, Occu: Fashion Designer,
2) Bondili Sardar Singh, S/o Late Hari Singh, Age: 60 years, Occu: Business,
3) Bondili Naga Bala Tripula Sundari Bai, W/o Sardar Singh, Age: 55 years, Occu: Household, All are presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Bal- aji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007.
...Accused Nos.1 to 3.
***
This case coming before me on 28.04.2026 for hearing in the presence of Asst. Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri K.S.T Singh, Counsel for the Accused Nos.1 to 3, upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing both sides and hav- ing stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-
:: J U D G M E N T ::
1.The State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S Khanapuram Haveli has filed Charge Sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Cr.No.356/2017 for the of- fences punishable under Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC.
Pages 1 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
2.The brief facts of the Charge Sheet are that:
(i)The complainant Bondili Ayyappa Singh has filed a private complaint be- fore this Court stating that, he married A.1 on 16.11.2007 as per the rites and customs prevailing in their community and after the marriage, A.1 has joined the conjugal company of the complainant and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with a son by name Satvik Singh. During their marital life, the accused No.1 has created many troubles to the complainant and his mother and the complainant used to spend huge amounts to his wife (A.1) for her development and also joined her in Fashion Design- ing course. The complainant has purchased costly phones, presented gold and silver articles to the accused No.1 out of love and affection, even though A.1 never showered love and affection towards him and A.1 has behaved rudely with the complainant and his mother. On several occasions, the accused No.1 has left the company of com- plainant and used to stay at her parents house at Guntur for months together and twice or thrice the elders interfered and A.1 came back to the complainant but, dis- putes again arose. In the month of February 2017, A.1 left the company of the com- plainant at Hyderabad without intimation and left to Guntur to her parents house.
Subsequently, the complainant approached the accused Nos.1 to 3 following which a panchayath was held before elders and in that panchayath, A.1 to A.3 demanded the complainant to shift their residence from Hyderabad to Khammam accordingly, the complainant vacated the house at Hyderabad and came to Khammam and took a rented house and intimated the same to accused Nos.1 to 3 and accordingly, the ac- cused No.1 joined the complainant on 14.06.2017 at Khammam and she was accompa- nied by accused Nos.2 and 3. On shifting to Khammam, the complainant and the ac-
Pages 2 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 cused No.1 took admission of their son Satvik in Spring Board School, Bypass Road,
Khammam and after ten days, the accused No.1 in collusion with the accused Nos.2 and 3 started demanding the complainant to register house sites on her name but, the complainant refused due to which, disputes again arose between the couple. There- after, A.1 threatened the complainant that she will commit suicide by executing sui- cide note against him and his mother if they did not register the house sites on her and on 11.07.2017, the accused Nos.2 and 3 went to Guntur without any intimation with some luggage and on 13.07.2017 during morning hours, the complainant went out on some work and to drop his son in the school and on completion of work, he re- turned home and found the house was locked. Immediately, he phoned A.1 then, she informed the complainant that she is not willing to live with the complainant and she intends to reside at her parents house and also intimated that she will never come back to Khammam. Then, the complainant opened locks and observed that his wife (A.1) took away entire gold ornaments i.e., bracelet-1, gold chains-2, gold rings-3 be- longs to him and also the gold ornaments of the minor boy and also some gold orna- ments purchased to her and also some cash of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand
Only) and the accused persons has also taken away the passport of the complainant and A.1, original educational certificates, original sale deeds and link documents of the sites. Immediately, the complainant phoned to A.1 and enquired the whereabouts of the above said articles then, she intimated that the entire certificates, gold and other documents are in her possession at present on which, he requested A.1 to come back home but, she did not listen and went to her parents house thereby, he went to Guntur and approached the accused Nos.1 to 3 but, they did not allow him into the house and
Pages 3 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 abused him in filthy language. In these compelling circumstances, he is not having any other go, he approached the caste elders. On his approach, the elders held the panchayath, in the panchayath A.1 to A.3 abused him and threatened that they are going to file cases against him and his mother before the Guntur police as well as in
Courts as such, having no other option the complainant headed back to Khammam and thereafter, on so many occasions, he tried to convince his wife (A.1), but in vain.
Presently, his son is in his custody and he filed complaint before Khanapuram Haveli
P.S against the accused and the police got issued a receipt bearing No.85 dated 03.08.2017 but, the police did not initiate any action against the accused. Immedi- ately, he made another complaint before the Commissioner of Police, Khammam and the same was acknowledged by the said Office, but till date no action was initiated against them with regard to the theft committed by the accused from his house as well as cheating committed against him. The complainant has waited all these days with a fond hope that the police would initiate action against the accused with regard to the offence committed by them, but in vain thereby, he approached the Court with this private complaint.
(ii)On receipt of the above petition, the Hon’ble Court endorsed the same and referred to S.H.O Khanapuram Haveli P.S for investigation of the case under
Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC.
(iii)On 06.09.2017 around 9.00 pm, on receipt of the above endorsement from the Court, L.W.9/Head Constable-860 of P.S Khanapuram Haveli registered case in
Cr.No.356/2017 under Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC and issued First Informa-
Pages 4 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 tion Report and furnished copies of First Information Report to the Court and all con- cerned and handed over the C.D file of L.W.10/Sub-Inspector of Police for further in- vestigation.
(iv)During the course of investigation, L.W.10 examined and recorded the statements of L.Ws.1 to 4.
(v)L.W.10 visited the scene of offence, secured the presence of L.Ws.5 and 6 and conducted Crime Details Form by incorporating rough sketch in it.
(vi)While the efforts are in progress, on 16.09.2017 the Sub-Inspector of Po- lice along with his staff visited the house of accused Nos.1 to 3 at plot No.302, Sri Hari
Vasam, Balaji Nagar, Guntur and interrogated them in the presence of mediators (L.Ws.7 and 8). On interrogation, the accused No.2 confessed guilt that he committed theft of luggage bag and one sewing machine which belongs to A.1 but, on opening the bag he noticed some documents due to which he thrown the documents at the same place and reached to Guntur. Later, the accused Nos.1 and 3 also confessed the same and recorded the statements of accused Nos.1 to 3 and seized one USHA Janome sewing machine bearing SI No.620030147 from their possession under the cover of panchanama in the presence of same mediators. As such, L.W.10 issued Sec.41(A) read with 41(1)(b) of Cr.P.C notices to the accused persons on 22.06.2018 directing them to appear before the Court on receipt of summons and on completion of entire in- vestigation, he filed Charge Sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences pun- ishable under Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC.
Pages 5 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
3.This Court had taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC against the accused Nos.1 to 3.
4.On appearance of the accused Nos.1 to 3, copies of case record as required under
Sec.207 Cr.P.C are supplied to them.
5.The accused No.1 to 3 are examined under Sec.239 Cr.P.C for the offences under
Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC and particulars of the accusation read over and explained to them in Telugu for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
Hence the matter is posted for trial.
6.In order to prove it's case, the prosecution got examined P.Ws.1 to 7 and marked
Exs.P.1 to P.17. The prosecution has given up the evidence of remaining witnesses.
7.On completion of trial, the accused Nos.1 to 3 are examined under Sec.313 of
Cr.P.C for the incriminating evidence appearing against them in the evidence of prose- cution witnesses. They denied the same and reported no written statement to be filed.
During cross examination of prosecution witnesses, the defence got marked Exs.B.1 and B.2.
8.Heard arguments on both sides.
9.Now the point for determination is:
"Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused Nos.1
to 3 for the offences punishable under Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34
of IPC, with which they are charged. If so, whether the accused
Nos.1 to 3 are liable for punishment of the same?"
Pages 6 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
POINT:
10.To prove it's case, the prosecution cited as many as (10) witnesses in the Memo of Evidence. Out of them, P.Ws.1 to 7 are examined and marked Exs.P.1 to P.17.
11.To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has relied upon the evi- dence of P.Ws.1 to 7.
12.P.W.1/B.Ayyappa Singh Bondili, he stated that LW2 is his mother LW3 is his grandfather. LW4 is his tenant. A1 is his wife. A2 and A3 are his in-laws. His mar- riage with A1 is solemnized in the year 2007 and it is love marriage. Thereafter with intervention of elders he was married to A1 on 16.11.2007 in the presence of elders at
Nannupuneni Function Hall, Guntur and they shifted to Khammam and resided here for three months along with LW2. A1 and LW2 are not in good terms as such on the advise of elders they shifted to Hyderabad. He was pursuance in his PG. DBM from
IIPM, Hyderabad and he joined A1 as fashion designer at Hamstech Designing studio,
Panjagutta on the interest of A1. On the complexion of A2, A1 left over her studies without completing In the year 2012 they begotten their first male child and he started working as HOD at HBS Degree college, situated at SR Nagar, Hyderabad. In the meanwhile, A1 adopted western culture and she used to party with her friends and used to visit parties and he intimated the act of A1 to A2 an 28.02.2017, on which A2 and A3 came to Hyderabad and took away A1 from his matrimonial company without any intimation. While leaving the home, A1 to A3 took away gold ornaments of P.W.1, their child and gold belonging of A1, property documents, passport belonging to him and his education certificates without his knowledge. Immediately he lodged report
Pages 7 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 with S.R Nagar police, on which SR Nagar police informed the same to A1 over the phone and accused informed that as the matter pertains to family, the same would be resolved among elders and several meetings were conducted among the elders and one of the panchayath was resolved to shift them to Khammam and on 14-06-2017, he along with A1 shifted to Khammam and they started residing in rented house at Flat
G.6, Cherukuri Enclave, Road No. 1, Sri Nagar Colony, Wyra Road, Khammam. There- after, A1 started to harass him and threatened him to end her life if the properties standing in the name of his mother are not registered in her name. On 11.07.2017 A2 and A3 came to their residence without any intimation to him and left on the same day. On 13.07.2017 at about 8 to 8.30 am, he went to drop his son in Spring Board in- ternational School, situated at Bypass Road, Khammam and returned home after dropping him and found the house locked. Immediately he called A1 over the phone and enquired about her whereabouts on which she stated that she is leaving to Guntur and not intended to live with him any then,he immediately opened the lock with the help of the key which they usually place in the shoe rack and found gold ornaments, education certificates and passports, property documents and sewing machine were missing. On which, he called A1 over the phone and enquried about missing objects for which A1 replied that the said objects were handed over to A2 and A3 on 11.07.2017 and they carried them to Guntur. Immediately he went to police station and reported
before the police on 03.08.2017 and police did not take any action stating that the same
is family matter. Again on 16.08.2017 he reported the same before Commissioner of
Police, Khammam and no action was initiated, on which he filed private complaint be- fore this Court on 22.08.2017. In the meanwhile, accused lodged Sec.498-A IPC against
Pages 8 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 him at Guntur and also lodged kidnapping case against him as his son is in his cus- tody and the case was closed as mistake of fact. On 07-09-2017, police called him to po- lice station and examined and recorded his statement.
(b)During cross examination he admitted that an appeal was pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana against the order in F.C.O.P No.205/2018 by the
Hon’ble Family Court, Khammam and D.V.C No.6/2019 and C.C No.412/2017 are
pending before the Hon’ble Mobile Court, Guntur and G.W.O.P No.205/2018, F.C.O.P
No.519/2018 are still pending on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, Guntur and copy of complaint filed before the SR Nagar P.S is available with him and as mentioned in the list of documents in Ex.P.1 he submitted all the documents before the Court. P.W.1 further stated that he has filed the receipt of complaint before Khanapuram Haveli
P.S before the Court at the time of filing private complaint and he has sent the copy of complaint filed before Khanapuram Haveli P.S to the Commissioner of Police and he has filed documents pertaining co this case in F.C.O.P No.305/2018 on the file of
Hon'ble Judge, Family Court, Khammam and has copy of receipt of report filed before
Khanapuram Haveli P.S as well as copy of report sent to Commissioner of Police and he do not have any objection to file the same before the Court and he can file the said report before this Court if time is given. Upon confrontation of copy of receipt bearing
No.85 dated 03.08.2017 to P.W.1 and counsel stated that it is the accused copy given by the Court and P.W.1 stated that it is the same receipt he filed before the Court.
Ex.B.1 is the copy of receipt bearing No.85, dated 03.08.2017. Upon confrontation of para No.6 of Ex.P.1 to P.W.1, he stated that it is mentioned in Ex.P.1 para No.6 i.e., gold ornaments, original certificates, property documents, passports, etc., were taken
Pages 9 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 away by A.1 to A.3. Upon confrontation of Ex.P.1 para No.5 to P.W.1, he stated that it is mentioned in Ex.P.1 para No.5 that bracelet, gold chain, gold ring, gold articles of minor boy and himself and cash of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) and original educational certificates, original sale deed, link property documents and pass- port were taken away by A.1 to A.3 and he has not pursued the investigation carried out by his advocate. P.W.1 admitted that it is mentioned in Ex.P.3 with regard to sewing machine and upon confrontation of seal behind report dated 28th February he stated that the seal belongs to Hon'ble Family Court-cum-Addl. District Judge, Kham- mam and Ex.B.2 is the copy of report dated 28th February (copy supplied to the ac- cused by the Hon'ble Family Court, Khammam).
P.W.1 further stated that, he do not know whether there is SHO signature on
Ex.B.1 or not but, Ex.B.1 is handed over by police and he filed complaint before police requesting to resolve disputes between himself and A.1. Upon confrontation of list of documents filed along with private complaint to P.W.1, he admitted that those are the documents filed by him before this Court at the time of filing private complaint and
Ex.P.15 is the copy of report dated 03.08.2017 before SHO PS Rotary Nagar and
Ex.P.16 is the receipt bearing No.85 and Ex.P.17 is the copy of report sent to Commis- sioner of Police, Khammam. P.W.1 admitted that he filed report before Rotary Nagar
P.S on 03.08.2017 and upon confrontation of Ex.P.15 to P.W.1, he stated that the re- port is transcribed by him and upon confrontation of Ex.P.15 to P.W.1, he stated that he has not mentioned sewing machine in it and he prayed in relief to resolve the dis- putes between himself and A.1 and upon confrontation of Ex.P.16 to P.W.1, he stated that there is no other signature expect his. P.W.1 admitted that there is no signature
Pages 10 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 of SHO and no seal or stamp of SHO Khanapuram Haveli and the name of cadre of po- lice officer is mentioned in Ex.P.16. Upon confrontation of Ex.P.17 to P.W.1, he stated that it is filed by him before Commissioner of Police, Khammam. Upon confrontation of Ex.P.17 to P.W.1, he stated that the font size is not small in the last column and he did not send Ex.P.17 through register post and upon confrontation of Ex.P.17 to P.W.1, he stated that he has not mentioned the word sewing machine in Ex.P.17 and denied formal suggestions posed by the defence.
13.P.W.2/B.Janardhan Singh, he stated that PW1 is his grandson. He know
LW2. He know LW2 and LW4 and he know accused persons who are his relatives.
PW1 married to A1 in the year 2007 and it is love marriage. Thereafter with interven- tion of elders PW1 was married to A1 on 16.11.2007 in the presence of elders at Nan- nupuneni Function Hall, Guntur and they shifted to Khammam and resided here for three months along with LW2, A1 and LW2 are not in good terms as such on the ad- vise of elders they shifted to Hyderabad. PW1 was pursuance in my P.G. DBM from
IIPM, Hyderabad and PW1 joined At as fashion designer at Hamstech Designing stu- dio, Pangajgutta on the interest of A1 and sewing machine was also bought by PW1.
On the complexion of A2, A1 left over her studies without completing. In the year 2012 they begotten their first male child and PW1 started working as HOD at HIBS Degree college, situated at S.R Nagar, Hyderabad. In the meanwhile, A1 adopted western cul- ture and she used to party with her friends and used to visit parties and PW1 inti- mated the act of A1 to A2 on 28.02 2017, on which A2 and A3 came to Hyderabad and took away A1 from matrimonial company without any intimation and at the time he is residing at Warangal and on his retirement he called PW1, LW2, A1 to A3 and the
Pages 11 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 brother of A1 and the sister and brother-in-law of A2 and tried to pacify the disputes between PW1 and A1 and accused persons requested to partition the property to A2, on which LW2 refused the same stating that PW1 is the only son and the property would inherit upon PW1 on her demise and advised them not to reside at Hyderabad and requested to shift Khammam, on which A1 and PW1 shifted to Khammam and resided in a separate rented house at Cherukun Apartments, Sri Nagar Colony and he also shifted to Warangal to Khammam as he is constructing house at Madhura Nagar,
Khammam. On 13-07-2017 al about 10.00 am PW1 called him and asked him to come to house immediately. And two days prior to 11-07-2017, A2 and A3 came to residence of PW1 and returned to Guntur on the same day through Golkonda Train. On which, he immediately proceeded to the house of PW1 and PW1 informed him that while he went to school to drop their child, A1 locked the house and when he called to A1, she informed that she went to Guntur and PW1 opened the door with the help of key prop- erty documents and sewing machine were missing. On which, PW1 called A1 over the phone and enquried about missing objects for which A1 replied that the said objects were handed over to A2 and A3 on 11.07.2017 and they carried them to Guntur. Imme- diately he along with PW1 went to police station and reported before the police on 03.08.2017 and police did not take any action stating that the same is family matter.
Again on 16.08.2017 PW1 reported the same before commissioner of police, Khammam and no action was initiated, on which PW1 filed private complaint before this Court on 22.08.2017 and on 07.09.2017 police called him to police station and examined and recorded his statement.
Pages 12 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
(b)During cross examination he stated that, the police examined him and recorded his statement at his residence and he do not know whether the cases filed by
A.1 against P.W.1 are pending or not.
14.P.W.3/Bharathi Bai, she stated that PW1 is her son. PW2 is her uncle. She know LW4. Accused No.1 is her daughter in law. Accused No. 2 and 3 are parents of
A1. PW1 married to A1 in the year 2007 and it is love marriage. Thereafter with in- tervention of elders PW1 was married to A1 on 16.11.2007 in the presence of elders at
Nannupuneni Function hall, Guntur and they shifted to Khammam and resided here for three months along with LW2 A1 and LW2 are not in good terms as such on the ad- vise of elders they shifted to Hyderabad. PW1 was pursuance in my P.G. DBM from
IIPM, Hyderabad and PW1 joined A1 as fashion designer at Hamstech Designing stu- dio, Pangajgutta on the interest of A1 and sewing machine was also bought by PW1.
On the compulsion of A2, A1 left over her studies without completing. On 23.05.2012 they begotten their first male child and PW1 started working as HOD at HBS Degree college, situated at S.R Nagar, Hyderabad. In the meanwhile, Al adopted western cul- ture and she used to party with her friends and used to visit parties and PW1 inti- mated the act of A1 to A2 on 28.02. 2017, on which A2 and A3 came to Hyderabad and took away A1 from matrimonial company without any intimation and at the time PW2 intervene and conducting panchayath at Warangal and tried to pacify the disputes be- tween PW1 and A1 and accused persons requested to partition my property, on which I refused the same stating that PW1 is the only son and the property would inherit upon
PW1 on my demise and elders advised them not to reside al Hyderabad and requested to shift Khammam, on which A1 and PW1 shifted to Khammam and resided in a sepa-
Pages 13 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 rate rented house at Cherukuri Apartments, Sri Nagar colony and she used to reside at Indira Nagar, Khammam. On 13-07-2017 at about 10:00 am PW1 called her and asked her to come to house immediately. And two days prior to 11-07-2017, A2 and A3 came to residence of PW1 and returned to Guntur on the same day through Golkonda
Train. On which, she informed the same to PW2 and PW4 over the phone and asked them to come to the residence of PW1 and she immediately proceeded to the house of
PW1 and PW1 informed me that while he went to school to drop their child, A1 locked the house and when he called to A1, she informed that she went to Guntur and PW1 opened the with the help of key placed in shoe rack and found gold ornaments, educa- tion certificates and passports, property documents and sewing machine and cash of
Rs.30,000/- were missing. On which, PW1 called A1 over the phone and enquried about missing objects for which A1 replied that the said objects were handed over to A2 and
A3 on 11.07.2017 and they carried them to Guntur. Immediately she along with PW1 went to police station and reported before the police on 03.08.2017 and police did not take any action stating that the same is family matter. Again on 16.08.2017 PW1 re- ported the same before commissioner of police, Khammam and no action was initiated, on which PW1 filed private complaint before this Court on 22.08.2017. On 07-09-2017, police called her to police station and examined and recorded her statement.
(b)During cross examination P.W.3 admitted that P.W.1 and A.1 are residing at Cherukuri Apartments after their return from Hyderabad following the panchayath and she never visited Cherukuri Apartments during the stay of P.W1 and A.1 and she went to Cherukuri Apartments for the first time on the call of P.W.1 on 13.07.2017 and he do not remember the exact time when she went to Cherukuri Apartments on
Pages 14 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 13.07.2017 and she do not know whether DVC, 498-A, custody petition, MC and di- vorce cases are still pending between P.W.1 and A.1 and the counsel reported that he did not refer to divorce case and P.W.3 know that a RCR case filed by P.W.1 against A.1 and the same is still pending and she is not concerned about the cases as she is suffer- ing from ill-health and one Rama Rao police person received report from them on 07.09.2017 and police reported that the articles reported by P.W.1 as stolen are stolen and denied formal suggestions posed by the defence counsel.
15.P.W.4/P.Upender, he stated that he know LW5. On 07.09.2017 at about 10 am while he was proceeding near by Cherukuri Apartments at Rotary Nagar, police stopped him and took him to Flat No.6 at Ground Floor and informed him that the wife of PW1 along with his in laws stolen the gold, property documents, passport and sewing machine and some cash from the house of PW1 and went away to Guntur by locking the door of the house and conducted scene offence panchanama and drafted rough sketch in his presence and in the presence of LW5. Nothing is elicited by the de- fence counsel from the cross examination of P.W.4.
16.P.W.5/Sk.Rafiuddin, he stated that he know LW7. He know A1 to A3 after this case. He is a cab driver and on 16-09-2017, he went for dropping some other passen- gers from Hyderabad to Guntur and thereafter he is waiting at Vamsi Rice Mill and police called him and disclosed his name as Rama Rao, Sl of police, Khanapuram
Haveli and also informed with regard to theft at house of PW1 and took me to Flat
No.302, Sriharivasam Apartments, Balaji Nagar, Guntur and asked them to inquired with accused person on which, accused No.2 confessed that he married his daughter/
Pages 15 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
A1 to Ayyappa Singh/PW1 at about 10 years ago and they are residents of Cherukuri
Apartments, Rotary Nagar, Khammam and there are quarrels between PW1 and A1 as such he along with A3 brought back the belongings i.e., USHA sewing machine, gold ornaments and property documents of PW1 in his absence on 11-07-2017 for sur- vival of A1 and police seized the above said property in his presence and in the pres- ence of LW7 and thereafter we inquired with A1 and A3 and they confessed in the same lines of A2.
(b)During cross examination P.W.5 stated that, he works as cab driver with no restricted time and on 16.09.2017, he went to Guntur from Hyderabad for dropping other customers near by Vamshi Rice Mill and he studied upto 10th class. Upon con- frontation of panchanama dated 16.09.2017, his address is mentioned as 8-4-160, Rati
Darwaja, Mominam, Khammam and denied formal suggestions posed by the counsel for defence.
17.P.W.6/M.Krishna Murthy, he stated that during his tenure at Khanapuram
Haveli as HC, on 06-09-2017 at about 21.00 hours, he received private complaint from
Honorable Court vide Dis.No.911/2017 dated 05-09-2017. Basing on the said report,
he registered a case in Cr.No.356/2017 for the offence under Sec.406, 379, 420,r/w 34 of
IPC and Sec.156(3) Cr.P.C and issued FIR and copies to all concerned. Later, I handed over the CD file to LW10 for investigation.
(b)During cross examination he stated that, he deposed his chief examina- tion by referring to CD file available with Court Duty Officer and he do not remember whether he has received list of documents along with receipt of private complaint and
Pages 16 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 affidavit and he is duty-bound to verify the documents received from the Court and he is duty-bound to verify whether the list of documents were enclosed at the time of for- warding Ex.P.1 by the Court and he has sent First Information Report to the Court along with all the received documents from the Court and he has received original doc- uments and sent back all the original documents to the Court. Upon confrontation of
Ex.P.1 to P.W.6, he stated that it is not mentioned in Ex.P.1 with regard to theft of sewing machine and there are no enclosed copies sent along with Ex.P.1 in the file present with Court Duty Officer and all the copies of documents sent to the Court are present with station file and he has taken copies of all the documents received from the Court and issued First Information Report and the entire CD file was handed over to L.W.10 and denied formal suggestions posed by the defence.
18.P.W.7/K.Rama Rao, he stated that he received CD file from PW6 and he have examined and recorded the statements of PW1 to PW3 and LW4. Later, he visited scene of offence and conducted scene of offense pancahanama in the presence of PW4 and LW5. On 16-09-2017, he went to the residence of accused persons and secured the presence of PW5 and LW7 and conducted confession cum seizure panchanama and seized documents and sewing machine and brought them to Khanapuram Haveli PS and issued 41-A CrPC notice and released them in the same day. Thereafter, on 23-11- 2017, and upon completion of investigation, he filed the charge-sheet against A1 to A3 for the offence under Sec.406, 379, 420 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.156(3) Cr.P.C.
(b)During cross examination he stated that, he is deposing evidence basing on his investigation and he has not brought any documents along with him today for
Pages 17 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 deposing evidence. The counsel for the accused persons posed question stating that “What is the paper in your hand which you are holding at the time of deposing chief examination” then, P.W.7 replied as “This paper is gist of investigation done by me and prepared by myself.” P.W.7 further deposed that he prepared the investigation basing on the soft copy of CD file send by Court Duty Officer to his WhatsApp. Upon compar- ing the soft copy and CD file submitted to him by the Court Duty Officer both are one and the same. Upon confrontation of original receipt bearing No.85 which is present in the Court file to P.W.7, he stated that he has not seen the copy of receipt No.85 and he know that police obtains report and issues receipts. P.W.7 admitted that upon inaction of SHO the complainant reported the same before higher authorities and usually upon inaction of SHO and Commissioner, the complainant approaches the Court for filing private complaint. P.W.7 admitted that a copy of private complaint and documents are photocopied and kept in CD file and originals are returned to the Court and he is duty- bound to verify the genunity of documents sent by the Court and he has not verified the genunity of the documents in this case. Upon confrontation of copy of report dated 03.08.2017 to P.W.7, he stated that it is not mentioned by P.W.1 with regard to theft of sewing machine. The counsel for accused requested P.W.7 to read last para of copy of report dated 03.08.2017 and witness read out the last para stating that the prayer of the complainant is to resolve the disputes between him and his wife. Upon confronta- tion of original receipt No.85 to P.W.7, he stated that there is no sign of issuing author- ity and there is no stamp and seal of police station and he can not identify the issuing authority basing on the writing of receipt No.85 and he has not verified the receipt bearing No.85 by comparing the same with receipt book of police station to know
Pages 18 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 whether it is issued by Khanapuram Haveli P.S or not and he has not verified the peti- tion basing on the petition number mentioned in receipt No.85. Upon confrontation of copy of reports sent to Commissioner of Police, Khammam to P.W.7, he stated that it is not mentioned in it with regard to theft of sewing machine. Upon confrontation of last para to P.W.7, he stated that the font size of last para is smaller than the font size of the report. Upon confrontation of copy of reports sent to Commissioner of Police,
Khammam to P.W.7, he stated that it is prayed by complainant to take action against accused and to return his gold, cash, passport and documents and upon confrontation of copy of reports sent to Commissioner of Police, Khammam to P.W.7, he stated that the word cash is not mentioned in relief para and Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of L.W.1 is of his writing and he is in habit of affixing his initial upon striking. Upon confronta- tion of Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of L.W.1 to P.W.7, he stated that the word is erased with whitener and machine is written in Telugu and no initial is affixed. P.W.7 admit- ted that there is no description of machine as washing machine or sewing machine and the theft of machine is deposed by P.W.1 only in his Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement and he do not know whether a case was registered against P.W.1 and in order to counterblast the case P.W.1 fabricated the reports and filed this private complaint. Apart from this, nothing is elicited from the cross of P.W.7.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE:
19.The prosecution charged the accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences under Sec.406, 379, 420 read with 34 of IPC and in order to prove their case, the prosecution relied upon the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 7.
Pages 19 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
20.In order to attract the ingredients under Sec.379 of IPC, the prosecution has to prove the following: 1) the property must be movable, 2) taking the property out of pos- session without consent, 3) property must be moved, 4) dishonest intentino to take property. As per the testimony of P.W.1 who is the defacto complainant, he categori- cally deposed that, on 13.07.2017 at about 8.00 to 8.30 am, when he went to drop his son in Spring Board international School, situated at Bypass Road, Khammam and re- turned home after dropping him and found the house was locked. Immediately he called A.1 over phone and enquired about her whereabouts on which, she stated that she is leaving to Guntur and not intended to live with him then, he immediately opened the lock with the help of key which they usually place in the shoe rack and found gold ornaments, education certificates, passports, property documents and sewing machine were missing. On which, he called A.1 over phone and enquried about missing objects for which, A.1 replied that the said objects were handed over to A.2 and A.3 on 11.07.2017 and they carried them to Guntur. Immediately he went to police station and reported before the police on 03.08.2017 and police did not take any action stating that the issue pertains to family and again on 16.08.2017, he reported the same before the Commissioner of Police, Khammam but, no action was initiated, on which he filed private complaint before this Court on 22.08.2017 and on 07.09.2017 po- lice called him to police station and recorded his statement.
21.P.W.2 who is the relative of P.W.1 stated that on 13.07.2017 around 10.00 am he received phone call from P.W.1 asking him to come to his house thereby, he went to the house of P.W.1 then, P.W.1 informed P.W.2 about the arrival and departure of accused
Nos.2 and 3 prior to the even date and also informed about missing of gold ornaments,
Pages 20 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 education certificates, passports, property documents and sewing machine and P.W.1 informed P.W.2 with regard to his conversation with A.1 over phone about her confes- sion in taking away the above mentioned articles with the accused Nos.2 and 3. On perusal of evidence of P.W.3 who is the mother of P.W.1 deposed in the same lines as
P.W.2. On combined reading of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, it is firmly deposed by them with regard to missing of gold ornaments, education certificates, passports, property documents and sewing machine and alleged that the accused No.1 along with accused
Nos.2 and 3 has taken away the said property from the house of P.W.1 in his absence.
On perusal of evidence of P.W.5 who is the panch witness for Confession-cum-Seizure
Panchanama categorically deposed that on 16.09.2017 he went to Guntur for dropping passengers and while he was waiting at Vamshi Rice Mill, the Sub-Inspector of Police,
Khanapuram Haveli has called him and informed him with regard to theft committed at the house of P.W.1 and took him to Flat No.302, Sriharivasam Apartments, Balaji
Nagar, Guntur and instructed him to enquire the accused persons and on such en- quiry, the accused No.2 confessed that he married his daughter i.e., A.1 to P.W.1 at about ten years back and they are residing at Cherukuri Apartments, Rotary Nagar,
Khammam and during their marital-fold disputes arose between the couple due to which, the accused No.2 and 3 brought back the belongings i.e., Usha sewing machine, gold ornaments and property documents of P.W.1 in his absence on 11.07.2017 for sur- vival of A.1 thereby, the police seized it in his presence and L.W.7 under the cover of
Confession-cum-Seizure Panchanama and accordingly, the prosecution got marked
M.O.1. In contra, the defence counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 3 has taken defence that the complainant/P.W.1 has not mentioned about sewing machine in Ex.P.1/Report and
Pages 21 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 contended that he has mentioned about the sewing machine only in his Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement as such, the complainant/P.W.1 has falsely implicated the accused persons in this case. On this point, this Court relies upon the judgment in Superintendent of
Police CBI vs. Tapan Kumar Singh 2003 (6) SCC 175 and Mukesh Kumar vs.
NCT Delhi wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated that, “FIR is not an encyclopedia which is expected to contain all the minute details relating to the offence and it is not meant to be a detailed docu- ment containing chronicle of all intricate and minute details. Even if in- formant does not furnish all the details, it is for the investigating officer to find out those details during the course of investigation and to collect nec- essary evidence. Thus, the information disclosing commission of cogniz- able offence only sets in motion the investigating machinery with a view to collect necessary evidence and thereafter taking action in accordance with law.”
Placing reliance upon the above precedent, this Court is of the opinion that there is no necessity in disclosing all the facts in the report itself as the report is filed only to inform the police concerned with regard to commission of offence and the im- provements in Sec.161 Cr.P.C statements of the witness is the actual statements of the witnesses which are elicited by the investigating agency during their investiga- tion. Hence, the defence of accused Nos.1 to 3 stating that there are improvements in
Sec.161 Cr.P.C statements when compared to F.I.R is not tenable as F.I.R is not an en- cyclopedia of offence. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that P.W.1 who lodged
Exs.P.1, P.15 and P.17 clearly disclosed the commission of cognizable offence i.e., theft of property documents, gold, cash and passports wherein, non mentioning of sewing machine in Ex.P.1 is not fatal to the case of the prosecution because P.W.1 has stated the clear list of documents in his Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement.
Pages 22 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
22.On perusal of evidence on record in detail, this Court is of the opinion that, the counsel for defence has nowhere put a suggestion that A.1 and P.W.1 did not reside at
Hyderabad and P.W.1 never purchased USHA sewing machine for the purpose of
Fashion Designing course of P.W.1 and P.W.1 and accused No.1 never resided at
Cherukuri Apartments, Khammam and it is well settled fact that accused not taking any defence with regard to purchase of Usha sewing machine amounts to admission.
Hence, the accused persons on one hand admitting the fact with regard to purchase of
Usha sewing machine by P.W.1 and on the other hand, cannot take aid of omission with regard to mentioning of description of machine in Sec.161 Cr.P.C statements.
23.On perusal of evidence on record, it is firmly deposed by the mediator for Con- fession-cum-Seizure Panchanama/Ex.P.12 that in his presence and in the presence of
L.W.17, the police seized M.O.1 from the possession of accused Nos.1 to 3 at their resi- dence at Guntur. P.W.5 who is disinterested witness deposed about the crime and the confession made by the accused persons in his presence and during cross examination the counsel for accused could elicit only the address of P.W.5 as H.No.8-4-160, Rathi
Darwaja, Mominam, Khammam and when it is deposed by P.W.5 that he is a cab driver and on that day, he was present at Guntur for dropping the passengers from
Hyderabad to Guntur and the counsel for accused did not put suggestion denying the occupation of P.W.5 or with regard to his trip from Hyderabad to Guntur as such,
P.W.5 being resident of Khammam and his presence at Guntur cannot be doubted bas- ing on his occupation. At this juncture, this Court is of the opinion that it is settled principle as per Sec.25 and 26 of Indian Evidence Act confession of accused is not rele- vant. However, the discovery of any material fact in consequence of information given
Pages 23 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 by accused is relevant under Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act. Here, the accused persons produced M.O.1/Usha sewing machine before police in the presence of mediators and
P.W.5 being witness to Confession-cum-Seizure Panchanama withstood the cross ex- amination and also identified M.O.1 even after lapse of eight years. Hence, the confes- sion of accused persons leading to discovery of M.O.1 is relevant under Sec.27 of In- dian Evidence Act. On perusal of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, 5 to 7, the evidence is fully corroborating with each other and also with Ex.P.12/Confession-cum-Seizure Pan- chanama, in all material aspects. As such, this Court could safely conclude that the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and P.W.5 is in corroboration and the prosecution is successful in establishing the recovery of M.O.1 from the possession of accused persons in the presence of P.W.5.
24.The second defence taken by the accused persons is that, A.1 is the wife of
P.W.1 and for her survival she has taken away the articles and it is not theft but, the accused persons through their counsel nowhere whispered with regard to the occupa- tion of A.1 is depended on M.O.1. The counsel for defence nowhere denied the pur- chase of M.O.1 by P.W.1 and ownership of P.W.1 with regard to M.O.1 is undisputed.
Hence, this Court is of the opinion that if the property is taken away without consent of the owner, it amounts to parting of the movable property from the custody of the original owner as such, the dishonest intention of the accused is very clearly estab- lished.
25.Furthermore, it is established by P.W.1 that there are matrimonial disputes be- tween P.W.1 and the accused No.1 but, the defence counsel has not even suggested ei-
Pages 24 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 ther to P.W.1 or to other witnesses that the accused No.1 has not left the house of
P.W.1 voluntarily and she was forcibly sent out by P.W.1 and that A.2 and A.3 has not visited the house of P.W.1 at Cherukuri Apartments, Khammam on 11.07.2017 which clearly establishes the dishonest common intention among A.1 to A.3 to part away the properties of P.W.1 as it is clearly deposed by P.Ws.1 to 3 that A.2 and A.3 came to the house of P.W.1 i.e., to Cherukuri Apartments, Khammam on 11.07.2017 and left on the same day. In absence of any such suggestions, it can be presumed as admitted that the accused No.1 has left the matrimonial company of P.W.1 without intimation on 13.07.2017 and A.2 and A.3 visited and left the house of P.W.1 on 11.07.2017 as it is admitted by the accused persons during cross examination of P.W.1 stating that a kidnap case was filed by the accused No.1 against P.W.1 with regard to their minor child and subsequently, the police closed it referring it as mistake of fact vide Ex.P.9 which clearly shows the ill-intention on part of accused persons in order to harass
P.W.1.
26.On perusal of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, they deposed that P.W.1 purchased sewing machine for the accused No.1 for her Fashion Designing course and subse- quently, A.1 discontinued the said course at the instance of A.2 and the defence coun- sel appearing for the accused persons has not put any suggestion to P.Ws.1 to 3 that the sewing machine was not purchased by P.W.1 or the ownership of P.W.1 over the sewing machine as such, it can be treated as P.W.1 has purchased the sewing machine
for the accused No.1 for the purpose of her Fashion Designing course and the same is
parted away by accused No.1 without the consent and intimation to P.W.1 and it is also established by P.W.1 that there are several matrimonial cases filed by the accused
Pages 25 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
No.1 against P.W.1 and the same is also suggested by the counsel for defence to
P.Ws.2 and 3 stating that there are many cases pending between P.W.1 and the ac- cused No.1 vide Exs.P.2 to P.10 and on perusing them, it is observed by this Court that there are matrimonial cases filed post this crime as such, the dishonest intention of accused persons was established successfully by the prosecution. In view of above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution established the theft of property by accused persons as P.W.5 firmly deposed with regard to confession of A.1 to A.3 leading to discovery of M.O.1 and the dishonest intention of accused persons in parting away the property belonging to P.W.1. Accordingly, the prosecution is success- ful in establishing the guilt of accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offence under Sec.379 of IPC.
27.On perusal of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, 6 and 7, nowhere they deposed with re- gard to deception played by the accused persons on P.W.1 which made him deliver the property to accused persons and the details of property delivered by P.W.1 towards ac- cused on the deception played by accused persons as such, it is clear that there is no deception played by the accused persons upon P.W.1 inducing him to deliver the prop- erty and in the absence of deception, the ingredients of Sec.420 of IPC does not attract as such, the accused Nos.1 to 3 are not found guilty for the offence under Sec.420 of
IPC.
28.Furthermore, the prosecution charged the accused persons for the offence under
Sec.406 of IPC which is criminal breach of trust. At this stage, this Court feels it is pertinent to mention here that usually it is very common in Indian households that the household articles usually be in the custody of both wife and husband and it is a
Pages 26 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 fact that accused No.1 and P.W.1 have resided at Khammam on their return from Hy- derabad and admittedly, they are wife and husband and both the parties are the cus- todians of the household articles which means, in the absence of one person the other person would be the custodian and the same cannot be attributed as entrustment. As such, the question of criminal breach of trust does not arise in the sphere of common household. Therefore, the accused Nos.1 to 3 are found not guilty for the charge under
Sec.406 of IPC. Accordingly, point is answered.
29.IN THE RESULT, the accused Nos.1 to 3 are found guilty for the offence pun- ishable under Sec.379 read with 34 of IPC and accordingly, they are convicted under
Sec.248(2) Cr.P.C for the above said offence. The accused Nos.1 to 3 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sec.420 and 406 of IPC and accordingly, they are acquitted under Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C for the offences under Sec.420 and 406 of IPC.
M.O.1: USHA Janome sewing machine shall be returned to it’s owner on proper identi- fication and adknowledgment, after expiry of appeal time.
Dictated to the Stenographer Gr-III, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in
the open Court on this, the 04 th day of May, 2026.
Sd/- xxxxxx
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM.
:: QUANTUM OF SENTENCE ::
30.When the accused Nos.1 to 3 are heard about the quantum of sentence, A.3 reported that she is suffering with ill-health, A.2 reported that he is suffering
with ill-health and A.1 reported that she has minor child dependent on her
Pages 27 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026 and requested to take lenient view. This Court found repentance basing of the plea of the accused while submitting before this Court. Considering the plea of the accused Nos.1 to 3 and considering the facts of this case and also the nature of the offence, the accused are entitled for some leniency. However, the application of provisions of the probation of offenders Act, 1958 could not be probable in this case.
31.IN THE RESULT, the accused Nos.1 to 3 are convicted under Sec.248(2) of
Cr.P.C for the offence punishable under Sec.379 read with 34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of ONE YEAR and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) each and in case of default of fine amount, the accused Nos.1 to 3 shall undergo further imprisonment of ONE
MONTH .
32.The remand period of the accused Nos.1 to 3 if any, shall be set off under
Sec.428 of Criminal Procedure Code.
33.The certified copy of this judgment is to be given to the accused persons on free of cost and the accused are appraised of their right of appeal against this judgment.
On enquiry, they stated that they are having sufficient means to engage counsel in preferring the appeal.
Directly typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this, the 04 th day of May, 2026.
Sd/- xxxxxx
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM.
Pages 28 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For Prosecution: P.W.1: B.Ayyappa Singh, defacto complainant P.W.2: B.Janardhan Singh, relative of P.W.1 and circumstantial witness P.W.3: B.Bharathi Bai, mother of P.W.1 and circumstantial witness P.W.4: P.Upender, panch witness for Crime Details Form P.W.5: Sk.Rafiuddin, panch witness for Confession-cum-Seizure Panchanama dated 16.09.2017 P.W.6: M.Krishna Murthy, police personnel who issued First Information Report P.W.7: K.Rama Rao, Sub-Inspector who filed Charge Sheet
For Defence:- NIL -
EXHIBITS MARKED
For Prosecution: Sl. Exhibit Date Description No.
1.Ex.P.122.08.2017Private complaint
2.Ex.P.208.01.2019Certified copy of R.C No.2/2019 and D.V.C No.6/2019 on the file of Hon’ble Special Mobile Court, Guntur
3.Ex.P.324.01.2020Certified copy of counter in D.V.C No.6/2019 on the file of
Hon’ble Special Mobile Court, Guntur
4.Ex.P.422.11.2018Certified copy of petition filed in F.C.O.P No.590/2018 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, Guntur
5.Ex.P.509.11.2022Certified copy of counter filed in F.C.O.P No.590/2018 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, Guntur
6.Ex.P.607.08.2017Certified copy of FIR along with Report in Cr.No.165/2017 of Women P.S Guntur and Charge Sheet vide C.C No.412/2017
7.Ex.P.730.04.2018Certified copy of petition in G.W.O.P No.205/2018 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, Guntur
8.Ex.P.826.09.2018Certified copy of counter in G.W.O.P No.205/2018 on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, Guntur
9.Ex.P.924.12.2024Certificate issued by police department with regard to Cr.No.387/2017 of Nallapadu P.S
10.Ex.P.1028.05.2024Certified copy of order in F.C.O.P No.205/2018 on the file of
Pages 29 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
Hon’ble Family Court, Khammam
11.Ex.P.1106.09.2017 Crime Details Form
12.Ex.P.1216.09.2017Relevant portion of Confession-cum-Seizure Panchanama
13.Ex.P.1305.09.2017Endorsement on covering letter of the Hon’ble Court
14.Ex.P.1406.09.2017First Information Report
15.Ex.P.1503.08.2017Copy of report before SHO, Rotary Nagar P.S
16.Ex.P.1603.08.2017Receipt No.85
17.Ex.P.1716.08.2017Copies of report to Commissioner of Police, Khammam
For Defence:
1.Ex.B.103.08.2017Copy of receipt No.85
2.Ex.B.128th February Copy of report
Material objects marked: M.O.1:USHA Janome sewing machine
Sd/- xxxxxx
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM.
// True copy //
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM
Pages 30 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
FORM No. 6 WARRANT OF COMMITMENT ON A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT OR FINE OR BOTH
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KHAMMAM
C.C No.1142/2017
To The Superintendent, District Jail, Khammam.
Whereas today i.e., on 04.05.2026 A.1/ Bondili Nagala Sujitha Bai, W/o Ayyappa
Singh, Age: 27 years, Occu: Fashion Designer, presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Balaji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007, is involved in C.C No.1142/2017 on the file of this Court is convicted before me under Sec.248(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence under Sec.379 of IPC. Accordingly, the convict is sentenced to undergo the Simple Imprisonment for a period of ONE YEAR and shall pay a compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only), failing which to suffer S.I for a period of ONE MONTH. This is to authorize and require you to receive the said accused A.1/Bondili Nagala Sujitha Bai, W/o Ayyappa Singh into your custody in the said jail together with this warrant, and there carry the aforesaid sentence into execution according to law. The diet to which the prisoner was accustomed according to her own statement. The distance from the prisoner’s residence to the nearest railway station i.e., Guntur i.e., 2.7 to 4 kms. Details of the property on the person of the prisoner – ‘nil’.
DESCRIPTIVE ROLL: A.1/ Bondili Nagala Sujitha Bai, W/o Ayyappa Singh, Age: 27 years, Occu: Fashion Designer, presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Balaji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007.
DESCRIPTIVE MARKS:-
A mole on the ____________________________________________.
Given under my hand and seal of the Court on this, the 04 th day of May, 2026.
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM.
Pages 31 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
FORM No. 6 WARRANT OF COMMITMENT ON A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT OR FINE OR BOTH
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KHAMMAM
C.C No.1142/2017
To The Superintendent, District Jail, Khammam.
Whereas today i.e., on 04.05.2026 A.2/ Bondili Sardar Singh, S/o Late Hari Singh,
Age: 60 years, Occu: Business, presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Balaji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007, is involved in C.C No.1142/2017 on the file of this Court is convicted
before me under Sec.248(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence under Sec.379 of IPC. Accordingly, the
convict is sentenced to undergo the Simple Imprisonment for a period of ONE YEAR and shall pay a compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only), failing which to suffer S.I for a period of ONE MONTH. This is to authorize and require you to receive the said accused A.2/Bondili Sardar Singh, S/o Late Hari Singh into your custody in the said jail together with this warrant, and there carry the aforesaid sentence into execution according to law. The diet to which the prisoner was accustomed according to his own statement. The distance from the prisoner’s residence to the nearest railway station i.e., Guntur i.e., 2.7 to 4 kms. Details of the property on the person of the prisoner – ‘nil’.
DESCRIPTIVE ROLL: A.2/Bondili Sardar Singh, S/o Late Hari Singh, Age: 60 years, Occu: Business, presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Balaji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007.
DESCRIPTIVE MARKS:-
A mole on the ____________________________________________.
Given under my hand and seal of the Court on this, the 04 th day of May, 2026.
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM.
Pages 32 of 30
C.C No.1142 of 2017, dated 04.05.2026
FORM No. 6 WARRANT OF COMMITMENT ON A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT OR FINE OR BOTH
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KHAMMAM
C.C No.1142/2017
To The Superintendent, District Jail, Khammam.
Whereas today i.e., on 04.05.2026 A.3/ Bondili Naga Bala Tripula Sundari Bai, W/o
Sardar Singh, Age: 55 years, Occu: Household, presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Balaji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007, is involved in C.C No.1142/2017 on the file of this Court is convicted before me under Sec.248(2) of Cr.P.C for the offence under Sec.379 of IPC. Accordingly, the convict is sentenced to undergo the Simple Imprisonment for a period of ONE YEAR and shall pay a compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only), failing which to suffer S.I for a period of ONE MONTH. This is to authorize and require you to receive the said accused A.3/Bondili Naga Bala Tripula Sundari Bai, W/o Sardar Singh into your custody in the said jail together with this warrant, and there carry the aforesaid sentence into execution according to law. The diet to which the prisoner was accustomed according to her own statement. The distance from the prisoner’s residence to the nearest railway station i.e., Guntur i.e., 2.7 to 4 kms. Details of the property on the person of the prisoner – ‘nil’.
DESCRIPTIVE ROLL: A.3/Bondili Naga Bala Tripula Sundari Bai, W/o Sardar Singh, Age: 55 years, Occu: Household, presently residing at Sri Harivasam, 3rd Floor, Flat No.302, 1st Lane, Balaji Nagar, Panduranga Nagar, Beside Vamshi Krishna Rice Mill Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522007.
DESCRIPTIVE MARKS:-
A mole on the ____________________________________________.
Given under my hand and seal of the Court on this, the 04 th day of May, 2026.
II ADDL. JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
KHAMMAM.
Pages 33 of 30