State of Kerala (Police) vs Dineesh — 200234/2021

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 427,294(b). Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 30th March 2026.

Case disposed

SC - SESSIONS CASE

CNR: KLAL030003842021

Filing Number

58/2021

Filing Date

20-Apr-2021

Registration No

200234/2021

Registration Date

28-Apr-2021

Court

Sub Court Alappuzha

Judge

1-Sub Judge, Alappuzha

Decision Date

30-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--AQUITTED

Last updated 12-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

627

Police Station

North Police Station, Alappuzha

Year

2015

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 427,294(b)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Kerala (Police)

    Adv. AGP and PP For Sub Court, Alappuzha

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Dineesh

  2. 2.Risvan Nissar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Court Summary The Assistant Sessions Judge, Alappuzha acquitted Accused No.1 (Dineesh) of all charges under IPC Sections 427 (mischief), 294(b) (obscene words), and 308 (attempt to cause culpable homicide) read with Section 34. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as key eyewitnesses did not support the allegations, the primary complainant could not be produced despite repeated summons, and the damage certificate contradicted the prosecution narrative. The accused was granted benefit of doubt and set at liberty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    For hearing under section 232 CRPC

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  6. 19-Mar-2026

    Issue Bailable Warrant

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  7. 17-Mar-2026

    Examination of the Accused U/S 313 Cr.PC

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  8. 11-Mar-2026

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  9. 05-Mar-2026

    BW to cws

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  10. 25-Feb-2026

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  11. 10-Feb-2026

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  12. 30-Jan-2026

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  13. 14-Jan-2026

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  14. 17-Dec-2025

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  15. 04-Nov-2025

    For Steps

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  16. 22-Oct-2025

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  17. 17-Sep-2025

    Issue Summons

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  18. 17-Jul-2025

    BW to cws

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  19. 24-Jun-2025

    call on

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  20. 23-May-2025

    Issue Summons

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  21. 02-Apr-2025

    Repeat Summons

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  22. 21-Jan-2025

    Repeat Summons

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  23. 24-Oct-2024

    Issue Summons

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  24. 11-Sep-2024

    No Further Time

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  25. 09-Aug-2024

    Appearance of Accused

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  26. 18-Jul-2024

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  27. 26-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  28. 08-Sep-2023

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  29. 13-Jun-2023

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  30. 23-Jan-2023

    Judge on leave / duty

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  31. 27-Sep-2022

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  32. 13-Jun-2022

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  33. 17-Jan-2022

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  34. 02-Nov-2021

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge, Alappuzha

  35. 07-Jul-2021

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  36. 20-Apr-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. 200234/2021

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Assistant Sessions Judge, Alappuzha acquitted Accused No.1 (Dineesh) of all charges under IPC Sections 427 (mischief), 294(b) (obscene words), and 308 (attempt to cause culpable homicide) read with Section 34. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as key eyewitnesses did not support the allegations, the primary complainant could not be produced despite repeated summons, and the damage certificate contradicted the prosecution narrative. The accused was granted benefit of doubt and set at liberty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case