Hyderabad:Gold ornaments and Rs 40,000 cash were reported missing from a flat at Sai Keerthi Estate in Friends Colony, Chandanagar. The suspect, a 40-year-old caretaker for an elderly couple, hired only four days earlier, has absconded.According to Chandanagar inspector S. Vijai, the accused, Mukkamalla Ravi, was engaged through the Uppal branch of Vashishtha Home Services to care for elderly couple Bussa Narsinga Rao and Chandrakala. He began staying at their residence on July 20.On July 24, around 5 pm, Ravi told the family he was stepping out to get his shirt ironed but never returned. When the couple checked the puja room, they discovered valuables missing.The stolen items include five tolas of stone bangles, six tolas of black bead chains, a 3.5-tola bracelet, a two-tola chain with a locket and rings of six grams. The police are in the process of tracing the accused.Bike theft gang busted, 4 heldHyderabad:Miyapur police apprehended five individuals, including two minors, for their involvement in a spate of motorcycle thefts across the tri-commissionerates. Sixteen stolen bikes were recovered during the operation.According to Miyapur DI G. Ramesh Naidu, the arrested persons include Shaik Sohail, Shaik Ahmad and Salman Khan, along with two juveniles in conflict with law. Two others, Sohail Ali and Kesmath Ali, remain absconding.The arrests followed a complaint lodged by Pulyala Umashankar, who reported the theft of his high-end bike on April 5. A case was registered at the Miyapur police station.Sohail, a habitual offender with a criminal history in Kamareddy, was identified as the gang’s kingpin. The group is linked to more than 10 cases across police stations in Miyapur, Chandanagar, KPHB, LB Nagar, Patancheru and other limits.Police said the gang would target parked bikes late at night after consuming intoxicants. The stolen vehicles were either sold or used personally.Cops, OSD acquitted inRs 86-L dacoity caseHyderabad:A sessions court in Andhra Pradesh has acquitted all ten accused in a 2015 train dacoity case involving `86.5 lakh, including three Armed Reserve constables and an Additional SP-ranked officer, citing serious procedural lapses, inconsistent testimony and lack of reliable evidence.The case emerged after a complaint by Vemuri Ramaiah and B. Suneel Kumar, who were transporting unaccounted cash for gold purchases. They alleged that four men posing as police boarded the Navajeevan Express, questioned them about the cash, forcibly deboarded them at Padugupadu, abducted them and looted the money near Maddurupadu.The main accused included AR constables Guddanti Dondi Kiran Babu, Sirigiri Ravi and Thupiri Siva Krishan. They were allegedly acting on instructions from Samayajan Rao Chikate, then serving as an officer on special duty in Prakasam district. The prosecution claimed Rao supplied weapons, logistical support and falsely portrayed the accused as members of a “CAT team”.The victims said their mobile phones, Aadhaar cards, ATM cards and `86,55,000 were seized during the incident.However, the Assistant Sessions Judge of Kavali found multiple inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case. Several civilian mediators who were cited as seizure witnesses either denied knowledge or admitted to routinely participating in unrelated police operations. One admitted to serving as a mediator in 50 to 100 police cases.The court observed that the prosecution failed to secure mandatory government sanction to prosecute Samayajan Rao under the Arms Act and relevant IPC sections. It also flagged the irregularity in the identification process, noting that the victims saw the accused at a press meet prior to the official parade, fatally undermining the case.A key officer denied issuing the pistols allegedly used in the crime. The country-made pistol (‘Tapancha’) was never seen during seizure by civilian mediators.The court also criticised the delayed marking of seized phones as evidence—done in 2024, though the seizure occurred in 2015—making IMEI verification unreliable. It concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the chain of custody or link the accused to the crime “by probable and cogent evidence”. “The evidence on record is insufficient to prove the guilt of the accused with which they stood charged; hence, the accused are entitled to the benefit of doubt,” the judge ruled.
Source link
