THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Appeal No.777 of 2004 (Dated: 17-02-2010) Between: State of A.P., rep. by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP., Hyderabad …Appellant A n d G.Bhoopal Reddy and others ….Respondents/ Accused THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Appeal No.777 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Appeal, filed by the State, is directed against the common judgment dated 24.4.2003 passed in C.C.Nos.418 of 2002 and 419 of 2002 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate (Special Mobile Court), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, whereby and whereunder, the learned Magistrate found the accused not guilty for the offences under Sections 420, 379, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 201 of IPC and acquitted them accordingly. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is A-1 G.Bhoopal Reddy is a Civil Contractor and A-2-K.Komaraiah is a Senior Assistant in District Treasury Office, Ranga Reddy District. Kattula Parvathamma is Pw-1 in C.C.No.418 of 2002 and Sarpanch of Ramanjapur village, whereas A.Balamani is Pw-1 in C.C.No.419 of 2002 and Sarpanch of Nanajipur village. Both of them are defacto complainants. In the year 1996, they presented reports before the Station House Officer, Shamshabad P.S alleging inter alia that they handed over cheque-book of their respective Gram Panchayats to A-1 Bhoopal Reddy to draw amount for the work entrusted to him in the village. They also handed over the cheque- book for audit purpose in M.D.O Office to A-1 Bhoopal Reddy. The said cheque-books were mis-utilized by Bhoopal Reddy and certain amounts were drawn from the treasury without their knowledge. Basing on the complaints submitted by them, cases in Crime Nos.207 of 1996 and 206 of 1996 respectively for the offences under Sections 420, 379, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 201 IPC were registered by the S.H.O., Shamshabad P.S. After due investigation, charge sheets in each of the crime came to be presented before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, West and South, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District. The learned Magistrate took the charge sheets on file as C.C.Nos.472 of 1997 and 473 of 1997. Subsequently, the cases came to be transferred to the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Mobile Court, Ranga Reddy District for disposal according to law, and renumbered as C.C.Nos.418 of 2002 and 419 of 2002. 3. To bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences under Sections 420, 379, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 201 of IPC, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses as Pws. 1 to 16 and marked 7 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-7 in C.C.No.418 of 2002. Whereas, in C.C.No.419 of 2002, the prosecution examined 18 witnesses as Pws.1 to 18 and marked 44 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-44. Seven material objects came to be marked as M.Os. 1 to 7. 4. It appears that the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed a memo during the course of arguments to pass a common judgment in C.C.Nos.418 of 2002 and 419 of 2002 on the ground that the evidence of the witnesses, material documents and the investigation is common in both the cases. The learned Magistrate considered the memo and heard arguments in both the C.Cs together and passed a common judgment acquitting the accused for the offences under Sections 420, 379, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 201 of IPC. The said judgment is assailed in this appeal. 5. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the appellant-State and perused the material brought on record. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not correctly appreciated the evidence brought on record, and thereby, erred in recording acquittal of the accused for the offences under Sections 420, 379, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 201 of IPC. 7. I have gone through the grounds of appeal. It is not clear from the grounds of appeal as to against which of the two C.Cs, this appeal is relatable. It is stated in the memorandum of appeal, that the appeal is directed against the judgment passed in C.C.Nos.418 and 419 of 2002 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Mobile Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. Such is the memorandum of appeal, it is difficult to understand as to against which of the two C.Cs., the appeal is preferred. Be that as it may, of the witnesses examined in both the C.Cs., all the material witnesses turned hostile. More particularly, Pw-1 in C.C.No.418 of 2002 and Pw-1 in C.C.No.419 of 2002 who are the defacto complainants, who presented reports alleging that the accused misutilized the cheque-book, turned hostile. Even the panch witnesses in the presence of whom cash of Rs.11,76,500/- and 75,000/- respectively came to be seized by the police, also did not support the prosecution. The trial Court has considered the evidence brought on record in a right perspective, and proceeded to record acquittal of the accused for the offences with which they stood charged. I do not see any illegality or irregularity in the judgment under appeal, warranting interference of this Court in exercise of powers under Section 378 (3) and (1) Cr.P.C. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment dated 24.4.2003 passed in C.C.Nos.418 of 2002 and 419 of 2002 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Mobile Court, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.17-02-2010 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Appeal No.777 of 2004 (Dated: 17-02-2010)