PERIYAPATNA PS vs RAVIKUMAR K M — 307/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,498A,34,506,354C. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 08th April 2026.

Case disposed

C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES

CNR: KAMS610010652023

e-Filing Number

12-07-2023

Filing Number

308/2023

Filing Date

12-Jul-2023

Registration No

307/2023

Registration Date

12-Jul-2023

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PERIYAPATNA

Judge

452-Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

Decision Date

08-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

0357

Police Station

PIRIYAPATNA PS

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 323,498A,34,506,354C

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PERIYAPATNA PS (Police Station)

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAVIKUMAR K M

  2. 2.MURTHY J

  3. 3.NAGAMMA T S ALIYAS RATHNAMMA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Apr-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

    Case 307/2023 - Summary Court Decision: The court acquitted all three defendants (Ravikumar K M, Murthy J, and Nagamma T S) of charges under IPC sections 504, 498(a), 506, 323, and 354(c) with common intention, finding insufficient evidence to prove the allegations of domestic cruelty, harassment, and wrongful confinement. Key Reasoning: The complainant (sole witness) retracted her statements during cross-examination, denying the abusive treatment and mental/physical harassment alleged against the accused. Since the prosecution's primary witness failed to substantiate the charges and no corroborating evidence existed, the court found the prosecution unable to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  5. 17-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  7. 28-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  8. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  9. 24-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  10. 15-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  11. 08-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  12. 18-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  13. 06-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  14. 10-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  15. 19-Jun-2025

    Hbc

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  16. 17-Apr-2025

    Hbc

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  17. 27-Feb-2025

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  18. 30-Dec-2024

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  19. 27-Dec-2024

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  20. 18-Sep-2024

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  21. 16-May-2024

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  22. 22-Feb-2024

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  23. 22-Dec-2023

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  24. 25-Oct-2023

    Appearance Of Accussed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  25. 10-Aug-2023

    Call on

    Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC Piriyapatna

  26. 12-Jul-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 12-Jul-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 307/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case 307/2023 - Summary Court Decision: The court acquitted all three defendants (Ravikumar K M, Murthy J, and Nagamma T S) of charges under IPC sections 504, 498(a), 506, 323, and 354(c) with common intention, finding insufficient evidence to prove the allegations of domestic cruelty, harassment, and wrongful confinement. Key Reasoning: The complainant (sole witness) retracted her statements during cross-examination, denying the abusive treatment and mental/physical harassment alleged against the accused. Since the prosecution's primary witness failed to substantiate the charges and no corroborating evidence existed, the court found the prosecution unable to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case