The State by Lingadahalli Police Station vs Arun Kumar S/o Shekarappa, aged about 25 years, R/o Nandi Village, Lingadahalli Hobli, Chikkamagalu Advocate - H.P. VISHWANATHA — 59/2023
Case under Sc and St (prevention of Attrocities)act,1989 Section Sec, 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.
SPL.C - SPECIAL CASES
CNR: KACM010011882023
e-Filing Number
22-05-2023
Filing Number
59/2023
Filing Date
26-05-2023
Registration No
59/2023
Registration Date
26-05-2023
Court
PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU
Judge
214-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CHIKMAGALUR
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
0003
Police Station
LINGADAHALLI PS
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State by Lingadahalli Police Station
Adv. Public Prosecutor Chikkamagaluru
Respondent(s)
Arun Kumar S/o Shekarappa, aged about 25 years, R/o Nandi Village, Lingadahalli Hobli, Chikkamagalu Advocate - H.P. VISHWANATHA
Hearing History
Judge: 214-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CHIKMAGALUR
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 03-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 26-02-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 23-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The I Additional Sessions & Special Judge at Chikkamagaluru acquitted Arun Kumar of all charges under IPC sections 504, 326, and 506, and SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), and 3(2)(va). The court found that all key prosecution witnesses (the complainant, victim, and eyewitnesses) retracted their statements and refused to support the allegations; without direct evidence, medical evidence alone was insufficient to establish guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The I Additional Sessions & Special Judge at Chikkamagaluru acquitted Arun Kumar of all charges under IPC sections 504, 326, and 506, and SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), and 3(2)(va). The court found that all key prosecution witnesses (the complainant, victim, and eyewitnesses) retracted their statements and refused to support the allegations; without direct evidence, medical evidence alone was insufficient to establish guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts