1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

SPECIAL MOBILE COURT :: GUNTUR.

PRESENT : Ms. K.ANUSHA,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Special Mobile Court, Guntur

Friday, this the 22nd day of June, 2018

C.C.No. 592 of 2016

Between:

State : Rep.by the Sub-Inspector of Police,

Nagarampalem Police Station.
(Crime No.245 of 2015) … Complainant.

And:

1. Shaik Munna S/o Late Mahaboob Subhani, 30 years, Muslim, Bapuji

Road, Sangadigunta, Guntur.

2. Shaik Karimulla @ Mulla S/o Rasool, 30 years, Muslim, 8 th lane,

Anandapet, Guntur.

3. Shaik VAhida @ Vaheda W/o Nagul Meera @ Nagula, 25 years, Muslim,

Mutton Babu street, China Bazaar, Lalapet, Guntur.

4. Syed Gousiya D/o Indaz Ali, 22 years, Muslim, D.No.18-11-16, Mutton

Babu Street, China Bazaar, Lalapet, Guntur.
… Accused.

This case coming on for final hearing before me in the presence of

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of Complainant State represented
by the Police and of Sri V.Ankalu, Learned counsels for A1 to A3 and of
Sri.T.Umakanth and Sri S.M.Subhani, Advocates for A4 and having stood over for
consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT

The Inspector of police, Nagarampalem Police Station, filed charge sheet

against accused A1 to A4 in Cr. No. 245 of 2015 for offences punishable under

Sections 394 & 120-B of Indian Penal Code.

2. The brief facts of case of prosecution are that:-

The prosecution case is that Lw.1 Shaik Mahaboob Basha @ Basha is a

resident of SS No.155869, SC.No.356849, 4th Lane, Kodanda Ramaiah Nagar, Near

Chuttugunta, Guntur and is working as Manager of Kallam Agro Products & Oils (P)
 2

Ltd., Dokiparru, Perecherla village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur District, daily

about 8:30 A.M. He used to leave the house to join his duty and returns back to

the house at 8:00 P.M. Prior to 21.8.15 A4 has conspired with A1 and A3 to commit

house breaking in the house of Lw.1 Basha in order to get settled in the life. A4

has shown the house of the said Basha to A1 and A3. In the first week of August,

2015, A4 contacted A3 and advised her to direct A1 to commit house breaking in

the house of the said Basha as none were available in the house. In order to

commit House braking A1 visited to the house of Basha and found the house was

locked. A1 did not prefer to break the lock due to fear that the neighbours will

respond and has returned back.

On 20.08.15 at about 2:00P.M. both Lws.3 & 4 went to the house of the

mother of Lw.4 in Nadigama as Lw.3 has to attend Oriental Insurance

Examination. On the same day, Lw.5 went to look after their house which is

situated in Ngarampalem, Guntur. A4 came to konw that on 21.08.15 Lw.2 Shaik

Nigar Sulthana @ Neelu wil be along in the house, A4 contacted A3 and advised

her to alert A1 to commit offence in Basha's house. Accordingly, A3 contacted A1

and has alerted him. A1 contacted A2 and advised him to assist him for

committing the offence promissing to give a share in the stolen property.

On 21.08.15 around 8:00 A.M both A1 & A2 visited to Chuttugunta Center by

conveying Bajaj Caliber 115 bike bearing No.AP-28-Q-6269. There A3 advised A1

to commit the offence in between 11:00 A.M to 5:00 P.M. In the meanwhile A1 has

purchased chilli powder packets fromt he shop of Lw.11 Grandhi Gopala Krishna

and packing tape from the shop of Lw.12 Gajaballi Sambaiah in order to use them

for committing the offence.

At about 8:30 A.M. Lw.1 Basha left the house with carrier to join his duty

Lw.2 Neelu has remained alone in the house making preparations to attend

Oriental Insurance Company examination in NRI College, Vijayawada. At about

1:30 P.M. Lw.6 Shaik Muntaj saw A1 & A2 were waiting inf ront of the main gate

which is situated in between her house and the house of Basha and they were
 3

chit-chatting. Noticing Lw.6 Muntaj both A1 & A2 has left away from there and

they have passed in front of the house of Lw.6 Muntaj. As the main gate was

locked and themain door was closed A1 has visited tothe house of A2 and advised

her to direct A3 to help them to call Neelu to the ground floor which will help them

to gain entrance into the house of Basha. A3 directed the CICL Shaik Chandini @

Chandu who is working as servant maid in her house to show the house of Basha

and to call Neelu to the ground floor offering Rs.100/- for that help.

As the CICL agreed to call Lw.2 Neelu to the ground floor of the building A1

took the CICL to the house of Basha. In the meanwhile, A2 went to the terrace of

the building of Basha with the packing tape real. According to the direction of A1,

the CICL called Neelu to the ground floor calling her as Neelu. At that time CICL

wore burka. Neelu has responded to call of the CICL and came to the ground floor.

At that time A2 has entered into the house of Basha. Soonafter, the arrival of

Neelu to the ground floor, the CICL has left away from there without speaking with

her. At that time A1 is standing nearer to that house.

Since the CICL has returned back without speaking Neelu has returned back

to her house and while Neelu is closing the main door A2 caught hold of Neelu

and has twisted the neck and have fisted ont he right eye. At that time Neelu has

bitten on the left hand of A2, A2 has tied her hands with the plastic tape and have

closed her mouth threatening to do away with her, if she raised alarms and have

robbed gold chain and gold ring from the possession of Neelu. A2 phoned to A1

and have invited him into the house.

Soonafter the arrival of A1 in to the house, he has tied the hands of Neelu

with a towel and has tied a cloth to the mouth. Both A1 & A2 have pushed her

into the bathroom. Both have searched the house for the key of iron safe but it

was not traced. Later A1 & A2 demanded Neelu to furhnish the place where the

key of iron safe is available. As she refused to furnish the information they have

sqeezed the throat. As she is not able to take breath she has revealed the palce

where keys of the iron safe were kept. She tried to come out from the bathroom
 4

by removing the tape that was tied tot he mouth but A2 has fisted on her and

pushed her into the bathroom.

A1 & A2 have opened iron safe and they have robbed (1) Big gold necklaces

– 4, (2) Smalla gold necklaces – 2, (3) Gold Chandraharams – 3, (4) Gold black

beeds chain – 1, (5) Small gold bangles – 4 & Big gold bangles -8, (6) Gold

necklace studded with white stones-1, (7) Gold necklace studded with red stones-

1, (8) Gold rings – 7 (two plain ring, one kalyanapu ring, one ring studded with

white stone, one ring studded with rose colour stone, one ring studded with

almond shape stone and one ring studded with white, red and green stones), (9)

Four pairs of gold Kammalu, (10) One pair of gold ear studds (diddulu), (11) One

gold chain, (12) Gold papidi billalu -2 & Spurious papidi billa-1, (13) One pair of

gold champaswaralu, (14) One pair of gold matees, (15) One gold ring with pearl,

(16) One gold ring with enamel paint, (17) Timex & Force Wrist Watches – 3, (18)

Sony Company Camera, (19) Celcon & Nokia & Samsung Mobiles – 3 all the gold

ornaments weighing about 90 sovereigns and have decamped with the booty

worth of Rs.20 lakhs by sprinkling chilli powder in the house in order to prevent

the police dog to track them.

A1 & A2 visited the house of A3 and there A1 took (1) Big gold necklaces –

4, (2) Big gold bangles – 8, (3)Gold pearl ring, (4) Gold ring with enamel paint, (5)

Spurious papidi billa, (6) Sony Camera, (7) Celkon Mobile, Nokia Mobila and

Samsung Mobile as his share. A1 gave (1) Small gold necklaces – 2, (2) Gold

chandraharam's – 3, (3) Small gold bangles -4 and (4) Plain gold ring to A2 for his

cooperation in this offence. A1 gave (1) Gold black beeds chain, (2) Gold necklace

studded with white stones, (3) Gold necklace studded with red stones, (4) Gold

Kalyanapu ring and five gold rings total 6 rings, (5) Three pairs of gold ear

Kammeelu and one single ear stud (one single ear stud was misplaced in the

scene of offence), (6) One pair of gold ear studs (7) One gold chain, (8) Gold

papidi billalu – 2, (9) Gold champa swaralu with jodu, (10) One pair of gold matees

and (11) Watches – 3 as her share. A1 has advised A3 to give some money to A4
 5

by selling her share of robbed property as she has shown the house in which they

have committed robbery.

A1 sold one gold ring studded with pearl and one goldring with enamel

coating to one unknown person at Guntur RTC Bus Stand for Rs.15,000/- and

spent the amount for his requirements. A1 has destroyed the three mobiles and

the camera and has thrown then in Budampadu Canal in order to prevent to track

them by the police. A1 sold four robbed bangles to the gold smith Pappu Oja for

Rs.50,000/- and has spend the amount for his requirements. A2 sold the plain gold

ring to one unknown person at Market Center for Rs.7,000/- and spent the amount

for his vices.

Lw.2 Neelu came out from the house by crying, Lw.10 Shaik Mahaboob

Subhani who is passing in front of their house, saw her hands were tied with tape

and the mouth was closed with the tape. He has alerted Lws.8 & 9 viz., Md.Jabeer

and Shaik Arifulla @ Arif. In the meanwhile Lws.6 & 7 have arrived. Neelu

informed about the offence to Lws.6 to 10 viz., Shaik Muntaj, Shaik Vahib,

Md.Jabeer, Shaik Arifulla @ Arif, Shaik Mahaboob Subhani. Lw.8 Md.Jabeer made a

phone call to Basha and informed him about the offence. Neelu has spoken her

father Basha and informed him about the offence while Lw.7 Shaik Vahib Abdul

made a phone call to Lw.5 Shaik Mothi Begam and informed her about the

offence. Basha made a phone call to Lw.3 Shaik Nizam Basha and advised him to

come back to the house immediately along with Lw.4 Shaik Mohin Sultana. In a

short span Basha has returned back to their house and they have learnt about the

offence. After thorough enquiry on the same day at 5:00 P.M. Basha gave a report

about the offence in Nagarampalem P.S. And Neelu got treatment for her injuries

in GGH, Guntur.

On 22.08.15 A4 visited the house of A3 and asked her to give her share and

A3 promised to give money by selling her share of robbed property. The CICL

came to know about the offence through daily news paper. A2 has promised to

give her share in the robbed property. The CICL has also conspired with A3 & A4
 6

even she is aware that the offence was committed by A1 & A2, since A3 promised

to give share in the stolen property.

Basing on said report, a case in Crime No.245 of 2015, U/Secs.394 & 120-B

IPC is registered. The Police visited the scene of offence and observed the same

and prepared the scene observation report in the presence of mediators Lws.13 &

14 viz., Thunuguntla Srinivas and Koturi Venkata Rao and Lw.20/ Pw.8 seized 5”7

inches length of brown colour tape from bathroom and 10”5, hair red colour chilli

powder and towel and blue colour nylon cloth from scene. Lw.20/Pw.8 examined

Lws.1 to 10 viz., Shaik Mahaboob Basha @ Basha, Shaik nigal Sulthana @ Neelu,

Shaik Nizam Basha, Shaik Mohin Sultana, Shaik Mothi Begam, Shaik Muntaj, Shaik

Vahib Abdul, Md.Jabeer, Shaik Arifulla @ Arif, Shaik Mahaboob Subhani and

recorded their 161 statements and sent Lw.2/Pw.2 to GGH for treatment. While

investigation was in progress, on 11.9.15 Lw.20/Pw.8 the Inspector of Police,

apprehended A1 & A2 by names Sk.Munna and Sk.Karimulla at Chuttugunta

center while they were proceeding in suspicious circumstances and thus, he

secured two mediators namely M.Durga Reddy and N.Srinivasarao i.e., Lws.15 &

16 viz., Mallela Durga Reddy and Nimmalapalli Srinivasa Rao and on interrogation,

the A1 & A2 have confessed committing the offence in the house of Pw.1. Thus,

the Pw.8 had recorded the detailed Confession of A1 & A2 and seized in this case

from his possession under a Confession cum Seizure Panchanama in the presence

of above said mediators. Later, the Pw.8 brought the A1 & A2 to the Police

Station, effected their arrest and on the same day Pw.8 apprehended the A3 & A4

by names Sk.Vahida and Sk.Gousiya and aslo CICLSk.Chandini at Musil burial

ground infornt of the house of A3. Based on the confession of A1 & A2 Pw.8

secured two mediators namely M.Durga Reddy and N.Srinivasarao i.e., Lws.15 &

16 and on interrogation, the A3 & A4 have confessed committing the offence in

the house of Pw.1. Thus, the Pw.8 had recorded the detailed Confession of A3 & A4

and seized. Later, the Pw.8 brought the A3 & A4 to the Police Station, effected

their arrest and produced A1 to A4 before this Court along with seized property
 7

and got conduct the Test Identification Parade of A1 to A4. Since the accused

conspired to commit this offence, Pw.8 added Sec.120-B of IPC and filed alteration

memo before this requesting to add Sec.120-B of IPC. Later, on completion of

investigation, the Police filed the charge sheet against the A1 to A4 after receiving

the Wound Certificate of Lw.2/Pw.1.

3. This court has taken cognizance for the offence U/Secs.394 & 120-B IPC

against the A1 to A4. On apperance of A1 to A4 charge sheet and other

documents were furnished to them U/Sec.207 Cr.P.C and the A1 to A4 are

examined U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C. in respect of the charge for the offence U/Secs.394

& 120-B IPC, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. To prove its case, the prosecution has examined Pws.1 to 8 and got marked

Exs.P1 to P10 and M.O.s 1 to 6. After closure of prosecution evidence, the A1 to A4

are examined U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C in respect of incriminating material appearing

against them in the version of prosecution witnesses and they reported no

defence. No witnesses are examined and no documents are marked on behalf of

A1 to A4.

5. Heard the learned Asst.Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the A1

at length.

6. Now the point for consideration is ....

Whether the A1 & A2 in association with A3 & A4 and girl-Juvenile, on the

afternoon of 21-08-2015 at 15:00 hours, have robbered jewelery of worth
Rs.14 lakhs in the house of Pw.1 and thus committed an offence U/Secs.394
and 120 (B) of IPC ?

7. P O I N T:

To prove its case for the offences U/Secs.394 & 120-B of IPC, the

prosecution examined Pws.1 to 10. The Pw.1 is the Defacto Complainant, Pw.2 is
 8

the victim. The Pws.3 & 4 are circumstantial witneses. Pw.5 is the mediator for

scene observation report. Pw.6 is the mediator for Confession-cum-Seizure-

Panchanama. The Pws.7 & 8 are the Investigating Officers. Pw.9 is the medical

officer. The Pw.10 is the Magistrate, who conducted the Test Identification Parade.

8. Sk.Mahaboob Bhasha, Pw.1 deposed that on 21.8.2015 between 2:00 P.M. to

2:15 P.M., he received a phone from his neighbours stating that robbery was

committed in his house, they further stated that the robberers beat his daughter.

Immediately, he went to his house and his daughter stated that some girl called

her in the ground floor and she went to the ground floor, meanwhile some people

entered into the house and the girl herein left the place and his went to the house

and she noticed that robberers entered into the house and the robberers herein

threatened her daughter and beat her indiscriminately and asked her for locker

keys, as she denied the same, they tide her neck with ladies jacket and she

showed the locker keys and the robberers opened the lock and thefted the gold

ornaments. The gold ornaments are steps necklace, snake type necklace, two

small necklaces, chain, two rows of haram, bangles-4 big, bangles-4 small, rings,

ear studs, two watches, papidibillalu-2, mateelu, long haram, chempasavarlu and I

am unable to recollect some other ornaments. On the same day at 5:00 P.M., he

gave report before Nagarampalem P.S.. During the course of cross examination he

admitted that he did not mention in Ex.P1 about the source of information. He

admitted that he did not mention in Ex.P1/report that two persons beat my

daughter. He admitted that he did not mention either in Ex.P1 or in his 161 Cr.P.C.

statement that what is total worth of the gold thefted. He deposed that he came

to home around 2:20 P.M., to 2:30 P.M., and he gave complaint at 5:00 P.M.

Witness further adds that he called to 100 and informed to the police about the

alleged offence. It is true that I did not choose to give report to police through my

daughter. He admitted that he did not gave any receipts to Inspector of Police to

show that he is the owner of the thefted gold ornaments.

 9

9. Sk.Nigar Sultana, Pw.2 deposed that Pw.1 is her father. On 21.8.2015 while

she was in house preparing for Oriental Insurance Company, she heard some one

calling with her 'nicke' name ‘neelu’, so she went to the ground floor. Some

unknown girl, who called her name stated that her friends are waiting at the end

of gally and said that she will bring her friends and so, she waited for her, but she

did not return. Thereafter, she went to house. When she entered into the hall, she

noticed that some one entered into the house, when she tried to see, some one

caught hold her and the said person fisted blow on her face and when she tried to

escape from his hands, A2 pushed her and tide her hands and legs with plaster

and thrown her in the bathroom. She noticed that A2 called some one in phone

and the same person came and A1 & A2 searched for locker keys, but they failed

to find and asked her for the keys, but she denied to inform them, thereafter they

found the keys and opened the locker and thefted the gold ornaments. The gold

ornaments are steps necklace, snake type necklace, two small necklaces, chain,

two rows of haram, bangles-4 big, bangles-4 small, rings, ear studs, two watches,

papidibillalu-2, mateelu, long haram, chempasavarlu, one diamond ring, all

together 22 items were thefted. She deposed that on the same day at 5:00 P.M.,

Pw.1 gave report before Nagarampalem P.S.. She has been examined by doctor

and Woman Constable accompanied him to GGH, Guntur. Test identification

parade was conducted and she identified the accused in the presence of learned

Magistrate.

10. Ganji Gopalkrishna, G.Sambaiah, Pws.3 & 4, who are circumstantial witness

turned hostile and and did not support the case of prosecution. They deposed that

they do not know anything about this case. Police did not examine them. At this

juncture, the learned A.P.P. treated the witnesses as hostile and marked their 161

Cr.P.C. statements which are marked as Exs.P2 & P3, but did not elicit anything

against the accused.

 10

11. K.Venkatarao, Pw.5 deposed that on 21.8.2015, he received a call from his

friend/Pw.1 requesting him to come to his home, when he went there, he observed

the things inside the house were scattered and chillie powder sprinkled and he

also saw plastic tap role, nylon cloth, towel. Police inspected the scene of offence

and prepared scene observation report in his presence and he attested on the

same. Ex.P4 is the scene observation report dt.21.8.2015 at 6.00 P.M.

12. M.Durgareddy, Pw.6 deposed that on 11.9.2015 at about 8:00 A.M.,

Inspector of Police/Lw.20/Md.Hussain called him to Police Station requesting him

to act as mediator. He and Lw.16/N.Srinivasa Rao accompanied

Pw.8/Lw.20/Inspector of Police along with his staff and proceeded to Chuttugunta

Center, there two persons looked suspicious, on interrogation of Pw.8/Lw.20/

Inspector of Police, they revealed their identity particulars and confessed about

the committing the offence. Based on the confession Pw.8/Lw.20/Inspector of

Police seized 15 to 20 gold ornaments in his presence under cover of

mediatornama. Further A1 confessed that the said gold ornaments are the one

which they thefted on 21.8.2015. Further, A1 & A2 confessed that they are about

to sell the stolen articles at Chilakaluripet. The entire confession of accused and

seizure was recorded in his presence under vide mediatornamma and he attested

on the same. Ex.P5 is the mediatornama dt.11.9.2015 at 8:00 A.M. Further, A1

confessed the involvement of A3 & A4. He deposed that on the same day at 12:00

noon, further Pw.8/Lw.20/Inspector of Police arrested A3 & A4 based on the

confession of A1 in his presence under the cover of mediatornama. Ex.P6 is the

mediatornama dt.11.9.2015 at 12:00 noon.

13. Ch.Krishnareddy, Pw.7 deposed that on 21.8.2015 at 17.00 hours, on receipt

of report given by Pw.1 he registered the report as a case in Crime No.245 of 2015

U/s.394 of IPC.

During the course of cross-examination he admitted that Ex.P1 does not

 11

contain the names of Lw.5/Mothi Begum, Lw.6/Sk.Muntaz, Lw.7/Abdul, Lw.8/

Jabbeer, Lw.9/Arifulla and Lw.10/M.Subhani. He admitted that within 10 minutes,

one can reach to the Nagarampalem P.S. from the scene of offence. He admitted

that Pw.2 is a victim. He admitted that he did not choose to obtain the report from

the victim i.e., Pw.2. He admitted that in FIR/Ex.P7, they estimated the cost of

thefted property is Rs.14,00,000/-. He denied the suggestions.

14. R.Dharmendra Babu, Pw.8 deposed that on 21.8.2015 he has received copy

of express FIR at about 5:30 P.M. he intimated to clues team. Immediately, he

visited the scene of offence located at Kodandaram Nagar and along with clues

team, he inspected the scene of offence in the presence of mediators i.e., Lw.13/

T.Srinivas and Pw.5 and prepared scene observation report and seized 5 to 7

inches length brown colour tape from the bath room, 10 to 5 inches length of

brown colour tape from the ground floor, hair without roots, red colour chilli

powder, snuf colour towel, blue colour nylon cloth in the presence of medaitors.

M.O.1 is the 5 to 7 inches length brown colour tape from the bath room, M.O.2 is

the 10 to 5 inches length of brown colour tape from the ground floor, M.O.3 is the

hair without roots, M.O.4 is the red colour chillie powder, M.O.5 is snuff colour

towel, M.O.6 is blue colour nylon cloth. he has also prepared prepared rough

sketch. Ex.P8 is the rough sketch. At the scene of offence, he has secured and

examined Pws.1 & 2, Lw.3/Sk.Nizam Basha, Lw.4/Sk.Sultana, Lw.5/Sk.Moti Begum,

Lw.6/Sk.Muntaz, Lw.7/Sk. Abdul, Lw.8/Md.Zabbeer, Lw.9/Sk.Arifulla and Lw.10/Sk.

Subhani at scene of offence and recorded their statements U/S.161 Cr.P.C. At the

time of inspection, clues team collected the chance prints from the scene of

offence. He send Pw.2 to G.G.H., Guntur for treatment. On 11.9.2015, he

received a information that A1 & A2 are roaming at Chuttugunta Center and he

secured mediators i.e., Pw.6, Lw.16/N.Srinivasa Rao and proceeded to the

Chuttugunta Center and found A1 & A2 there and on interrogation A1 & A2 gave

their identity particulars and confessed about committing the offence in the
 12

presence of mediators. Based on the confession of A1 & A2, he seized 5 gold

items from the possession of A1, 6 gold items were seized from the possession of

A2 and also seized a Black Bajaj Caliber bike bearing No.AP 28 Q 6269 from the

possession of accused. He recorded the entire proceedings under vide mediator-

nama. On the same day at about 12:00 P.M., based on the confession of A1 & A2 ,

he apprehended A3 & A4 in the presence of same mediators and he seized 11

gold items from the possession of A3 under mediatornama. He effected the arrest

of accused and later accused were sent to judicial remand. On 12.09.2015 he filed

a requisition before Hon’ble Excise Court, Guntur and the Hon’ble Magistrate

conducted the test identification parade of A1 & A2 on 22.9.2015. On 13.9.2015,

in the presence of Pw.6, Lw.16/N.Srinivasa Rao, property identification was

conducted and in their presence Pw.1 identified the property. On 13.9.2015, he

have received Wound Certificate issued by Pw.9/Lw.17/Leela Kanth Karmal. He has

obtained finger prints of accused herein and send the chance finger prints and

accused finger prints to the F.S.L. On 9.10.2015 he received F.S.L report and

opined that finger prints of one Munna/A1 are matched with the chance prints

collected at the scene of offence. Further he made efforts to trace out one Oja

who said to have purchased the gold bangles from A1. Thereafter, he submitted

the C.D. file to Lw.21/Md.Hussain, Inspector of Police.

15. Dr.P.Leelakanth, Pw.9 deposed that on 21.8.2015 at about 7:43 P.M., she

examined Pw.2 and found the following injuries. A contusion over the right eye

region. She opined that injury sustained by Pw.2 is simple in nature and she

issued Wound Certificate as in Ex.P9. During the cross-examination she admitted

that it in the column of Wound Certificate that who accompanied Pw.2 was blank.

She admitted that she did not mention in wound certificate that who assaulted

Pw.2 either known or unknown persons or whether they assaulted Pw.2 with

hands. She admitted that the age of injury is not mentioned in Wound Certificate.
 13

16. P.Govardhan, Pw.10 deposed that On 15.9.2015 he received requisition from

the Inspector of Police, Nagarampalem P.S. to conduct the Test Identification

Parade of A1 & A2 in Crime No.245 of 2015. He fixed the date of identification

parade as 22.9.2015 and accordingly, issued summons to the sole witness i.e.,

Pw.2. On 22.9.2015 at 11:30 A.M., he recorded the statement of Pw.2 at court and

then visited the District Jail, Guntur by 4:10 P.M. and conducted identification

parade for A1 & A2 in the Old Jail in the jail premises. He deposed that he

conducted the identification parade by following the procedure under R.34 of

Criminal Rules of Practice and S.9 of Evidence Act, where Pw.2 identified A1 & A2 .

17. On careful perusal of the above evidence, it is clear that the evidence of

Pw.2 is showing about the accused commiting robbery on 21.8.15 and about she

sustaining injuries and her father lodging report to Police. The Pw.2 identified the

A1 & A2 as the persons who committed robbery in her house. The Test

Identification Parade Proceedings under Ex.P10 conducted by the Pw.10 are

throwing light on the version of Pw.2 and on the prosecution case. Though the

Pws. 2 & 10 were cross-examined at length by the learned defence counsel,

nothing material could be elicited to disbelieve their version. Further the Test

Identification Parade Proceedings recorded by Pw.10 are clearly showing that he

had followed the requisite procedure in conducting Test Identification Parade and

there is no violation of any procedure. In view of the evidence of Pws.2 and 10 and

the contents of Exs.P1 and P10, I hold that the prosecution successfully

established that A1 & A2 were the persons who have robbed the gold ornaments

in Pw.2's house.

18. The Pw.6 who is the mediator for the confession of the A1 & A2 under

Ex.P2 totally supported the prosecution case. The Pw.5 clearly stated about the

recovery of stolen case property in this case from the possession of A1 & A2 on

the basis of a panchanama/Mediatornamma marked as Ex.P5. The evidence of

 14

Pw.6 corroborates the evidence of Investigating Officer (Pw.8), who stated that he

arrested the A1 & A2 and seized the stolen property from them. The evidence of

Pw.6 fully supports the version of Pw.8 and though the Pws.6 and 8 are cross-

examined at length, no material could be elicited to discredit their version. Thus,

the evidence of Pws.6 and 8 inspires confidence in prosecution case as to the

seizure of stolen Gold Chain from the possession of A1 & A2 . As the Pw.6 clearly

stated about the recovery of stolen property in this case from the possession of

A1 & A2 , I hold that the prosecution could establish the seizure of stolen case

property from the possession of A1 & A2 . Though, the confession of A1 & A2

under Ex.P5 is hit U/Sec.25 and 26 of Indian Evidence Act, here the Ex.P5 is

showing that the stolen property in this case was recovered from the A1 & A2 .

Thus, the confession part under Ex.P5 which led to recovery of gold ornaments

(which are given to Pw.1 for interim custody) is well protected in view of the

provisions U/Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act. Thus, the seizure part in Ex.P5 can be

acted to uphold the prosecution case to connect the A1 & A2 with the offence.

19. Coming to the charges against A3 & A4 admittedly Pw.2 who is the victim

could not identify accused no.3 and 4. Further the investigating officer also did not

take any steps to conduct test identification parade in respect of accused no.3

and 4 for the reasons best known to him. Here, there is no direct or eye witness

to prove the ingredients of the offence U/Sec.394 IPC. Further, the confession of

accused under Ex.P6 cannot be based to uphold the prosecution case as it was

recorded in the immediate presence of Police and thus such confession is hit

U/Sec.25 & 26 of Indian Evidence Act. Therefore, I hold that the prosecution could

not make out the ingredients of the offence U/Sec.394 IPC against the accused A3

& A4. As per the version of Pw.6 A3 & A4 confessed in his presence and Pw.8

seized gold ornaments from the possession of A3 & A4. Even other wise, as per

the evidence of Pw.6 and the contents of Ex.P6, the said confession was recorded

by Pw.8, while the accused was in police custody and thus, I hold that the said
 15

confession under Ex.P6 is invalid in view of the bar contained U/Sec.25 and 26 of

Indian Evidence Act and thus no reliance can be placed on Ex.P6. As per Sec.25

and 26 of Indian Evidence Act, a confession made to the police officer and also

the confession made by an accused while he is in the custody of the police officer

is inadmissible in evidence. Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act is carving a proviso to

Secs.25 and 26. Thus Secs.25 and 26 though exhaustive in nature, are controlled

by the operation of Sec.27 of Indian Evidence Act. As per Sec.27 of Indian

Evidence Act so much of information given by an accused in the custody of a

police officer is admissible in evidence, if it leads to discovery of any information

or property. When the property is allegedly

20. Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the

case, the oral and the documentary evidence available on record, this Court is of

the considered opinion that the prosecution is able to prove that the accused A1 &

A2 have committed the offence under Sec.392 I.P.C. but not for 394 IPC, as the

prosecution failed to prove that accused A1 A2 attacked Pw.2 and voluntarily

caused hurt to Pw.2 while commiting robbery. The version of Pw1 is completely

inconsistence with the case of the prosecution. Further more, as per the Pw1, the

accused gave fisted blow on her face, where is ExP1 she specificaly stated that

accused beat her on right eye on his cheeks and the medical evidence of PW9 and

of the wound certificate under Ex.P6 are showing that a contusion was found on

the right side of the eye of the Pw1. Thus the medical evidence is also completely

inconsistent with the version of the Pw1. As per the provisions of Sec.222 Cr.P.C.,

when the offence proved forms the part of the offence charged, the accused is

liable to be convicted for such proved charge. The offence U/Sec.392 IPC is an

integral part of the offence U/Sec.394 IPC. Hence from the aforesaid discussion

this court is of considered opinion that prosecution succeded in proving the guilt

of accused for the offence under section 392 IPC but not for 394 IPC.
 16

21. In the result, the A1 & A2 are found guilty for the offence U/s.392 of

IPC and they are convicted U/s.248(2) of Cr.P.C. and A3 & A4 are found not guilty

for the charge U/s.394 of IPC that so, they are acquitted U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C for the

said charge. Bail bonds of A3 & A4 shall ramian in force for a period of Six months

as per Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.The unmarked property which was already given to

Pw.1 Shaik Mahaboob Basha @ Basha for interim custody shall holds good after

expiry of appeal time, if no appeal prefers.

Upon considering the plea of the accused their age and antecedents besides

their family conditions and circumstances of the case as there was no previous

offences against the accused considering this as their first mistake this court

inclines to invoke Sec.4 of Probation of Offenders Act. Accordingly, A1 & A2 are

released under Sec.4(1) of Probation of Offenders Act with a direction to execute

bond for an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) without sureties

and on some conditions and the sentence is postponed for one-year under Sec.4

of Probation of Offenders Act.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me, in the Open Court,

this the 22nd day of May, 2018.

Sd/-K.ANUSHA,
JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
SPL.MOBILE COURT, GUNTUR

22. Plea of the A1 on quantum of Sentence:

When A1 is questioned about the quantum of sentence by informing the

prescribed sentence to the charged offence U/s.392 of IPC and he pleaded mercy

of the Court stated that he did not committ any offence, he, is auto driver and,his

mother, wife and one daughter aged about two years depended upon him. Further

stated that, he has no means to pay any fine amount, if imposed and if court

punishes him, his mother, wife and children will suffer a lot. He further stated that

his mother suffering from Brain Tumour and he has to look after his mother.
 17

23. Plea of the A2 on quantum of Sentence:

When A2 questioned about the quantum of sentence by informing the

prescribed sentence to the charged offence U/s.392 of IPC and he pleaded mercy
of the Court stated that he did not commit any offence and by doing mason work
he eking his livelihood and his mother, wife and two children aged about four and
six years respectively depended upon him. Further stated that he has no means to
pay any fine amount, if imposed and if court punishes him, his mother, wife and
children will suffer a lot. He further stated that her mother is a patient.

24. Upon considering the plea of the accused their age and antecedents besides
their family conditions and circumstances of the case as there was no previous
offences against the accused considering this as their first mistake, this court
inclines to invoke Sec.4 of Probation of Offenders Act. Accordingly, A1 & A2 are
released U/s.4(1) of Probation of Offender Act with a direction to execute bond for
an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) without sureties and on
some conditions and the sentence is postponed for one-year U/s.4 of Probation of
Offender Act.
1. Accused shall not involve in any similar offence or any other offence .
2. Accused shall maintain good behavior and conduct.
3. And they shall present before the Probation of Officer as on when directed
by him .
4. Deviation of any of the said condition or on receipt of any adverse remarks
from probation officer during surveillance consequents in execution of
sentence prescribed for offence.
5. Accused shall present before the court as on when directed by the court.
In this regard, Probation Officer, Guntur is here by directed to send monthly
report about reformation in conduct of Accused. Office is directed to furnish free
copy of Judgement to Probation Officer, Guntur in this regard. On informing the
sentence imposed to them this court also informed them about the right to
appeal. Free copy of this Judgment is also furnished to him immediately on
pronouncing the Judgment and obtained his endorsement thereof.
Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me, in the Open Court,

this the 22nd day of May, 2018.

Sd/-K.ANUSHA,
JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
SPL.MOBILE COURT, GUNTUR
 18

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITENSSES EXAMINED
For Prosecution: For Defence:

Pw.1 : Shaik Mahaboob Basha -None-

Pw.2 : Sk.Nigar Sultana
Pw.3 : Ganji Gopala Krishna
Pw.4 : G.Sambaiah
Pw.5 : K.Venkata Rao
Pw.6 : Mallela Durga Reddy
Pw.7 : Ch.Krishna Reddy
Pw.8 : R.Dharmendra Babu
Pw.9 : Dr.P.Leelakanth Kamal
Pw.10: P.Govardhan
Documents Marked
For Prosecution: For Defence:

Ex.P.1 : Report of Pw.1 -Nil-

Ex.P.2 : 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of Pw.3
Ex.P.3 : 161 Cr.P.C. Statement of Pw.4
Ex.P.4 : Scene Observation Report, dt.21.08.15 at 6:00 P.M.
Ex.P.5 : Mediatornama dt.11.09.15 at 8:00 A.M.
Ex.P.6 : Mediatornama dt.11.09.15 at 12:00 Noon
Ex.P.7 : FIR
Ex.P.8 : Rough Sketch
Ex.P.9 : Wound Certificate of Pw.2
Ex.P.10 : Identification Parade proceedings conducted by Pw.10

Material Objects Marked

M.O.1 : 5 to 7 inches length brown colour tape from the bath room
M.O.2 : 10 to 5 inches length of brown colour tape from the ground floor
M.O.3 : Hair without roots
M.O.4 : Red colour chilly powder
M.O.5 : Snuff colour towel
M.O.6 : Blue colour nylon cloth
Sd/-K.ANUSHA,
JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
SPL.MOBILE COURT, GUNTUR
// True Copy //

JMFC.SMC.GNT.,
 19

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

SPECIAL MOBILE COURT :: GUNTUR.

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT

DISTRICT: GUNTUR. C.C.No.592 of 2016 DATES OF

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offence Filing Appearance Released Commencement Closure of Sentence
on bail of trial trial or order
21.08.15 31.12.16 25.09.15 12.10.15 27.02.18 06.04.18 22.06.18
(A1 & A2)
28.09.15
(A3 & A4)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explanation for the delay :- This case was taken on file on 31.12.16 and copies furnished
to accused on 10.07.17 and on 20.02.18 accused were examined U/s.239 Cr.P.C. Pws.1 to
4 were examined on 27.02.18, Exs.P1 to P3 were got marked and on 07.05.18 Pw.1 was
further cross-examined. On 28.02.18 Pws.5 to 7 were examined, Exs.P4 to P7 were got
marked. On 12.03.18 Pw.8 was examined, M.Os.1 to 6 were got marked. On 22.03.18
Pw.9 was examined, Ex.P9 was got marked. On 06.04.18 Pw.10 was examined, Ex.P10
was got marked and on the same day prosecution side evidence closed. On 06.04.18 A1
to A4 were examined U/s.313 Cr.P.C. Heard arguments on the same day & Judgment
pronounced on 22.06.18. Hence the delay.
Between:
State : Rep.by the Inspector of Police,
Nagarampalem Police Station.
(Crime No.245 of 2015) … Complainant.
And:
1. Shaik Munna S/o Late Mahaboob Subhani, 30 years, Muslim, Bapuji Road,
Sangadigunta, Guntur.

2. Shaik Karimulla @ Mulla S/o Rasool, 30 years, Muslim, 8 th lane, Anandapet,

Guntur.

3. Shaik Vahida @ Vaheda W/o Nagul Meera @ Nagula, 25 years, Muslim, Mutton
Babu street, China Bazaar, Lalapet, Guntur.

4. Syed Gousiya D/o Indaz Ali, 22 years, Muslim, D.No.18-11-16, Mutton Babu
Street, China Bazaar, Lalapet, Guntur. … Accused.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nature of Offence :- U/s.394 &120-B of IPC
Plea of accused :- Not guilty. Finding: - Found Guilty.

SENTENCE OR ORDER:-
A1 & A2 are found guilty for the offence U/s.392 of IPC and they are
convicted U/s.248(2) of Cr.P.C. and A3 & A4 are found not guilty for the charge
U/s.394 of IPC that so, they are acquitted U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C for the said charge.
Bail bonds of A3 & A4 shall ramian in force for a period of Six months as per
Sec.437-A of Cr.P.C.The unmarked property which was already given to Pw.1
Shaik Mahaboob Basha @ Basha for interim custody shall holds good after expiry
of appeal time, if no appeal prefers.
Contd...
 20

// 2 //

Upon considering the plea of the accused their age and antecedents besides
their family conditions and circumstances of the case as there was no previous
offences against the accused considering this as their first mistake this court
inclines to invoke Sec.4 of Probation of Offenders Act. Accordingly, A1 & A2 are
released under Sec.4(1) of Probation of Offenders Act with a direction to execute
bond for an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) without sureties
and on some conditions and the sentence is postponed for one-year under Sec.4
of Probation of Offenders Act.

Sd/-K.ANUSHA,
JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,
SPL.MOBILE COURT, GUNTUR
Copy submitted to :
The Hon’ble Chief Judicial Magistrate, Guntur.
Copy to the Superintendent of Police, Guntur.

// True Copy //

JMFC.SMC.GNT.,