State of Kerala (Police) vs Sajan Varghese Advocate - JOHN JUDE ISSAC — 401403/2018

Case under Ipc \ Section 447,294(b),427. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 11th March 2026.

CC - CALENDAR CASE

CNR: KLAL130035862018

Case disposed

Filing Number

403571/2018

Filing Date

28-07-2018

Registration No

401403/2018

Registration Date

28-07-2018

Court

JFCM II, Cherthala

Judge

1-Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Cherthala

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--AQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

812

Police Station

Aroor Police Station

Year

2018

Acts & Sections

IPC \ Section 447,294(b),427
Crl.MP/3598/2025 Classification : Absent Petition Section Sajan Varghese

Petitioner(s)

State of Kerala (Police)

Adv. Asst. Public Prosecutor II, Cherthala

Respondent(s)

Sajan Varghese Advocate - JOHN JUDE ISSAC

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Cherthala

11-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Order/ Judgement

20-02-2026

FOR HEARING

12-02-2026

FOR HEARING

29-01-2026

FOR HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Judgement

The Judicial First Class Magistrate court in Cherthala acquitted Sajan Varghese of charges under IPC sections 447 (criminal trespass), 294(b) (obscene language), and 427 (mischief) due to insufficient evidence. The court found the prosecution witnesses were interested parties whose testimonies lacked consistency, no documentary proof of property ownership or alleged losses was produced, and the case failed to meet the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard required for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Judicial First Class Magistrate court in Cherthala acquitted Sajan Varghese of charges under IPC sections 447 (criminal trespass), 294(b) (obscene language), and 427 (mischief) due to insufficient evidence. The court found the prosecution witnesses were interested parties whose testimonies lacked consistency, no documentary proof of property ownership or alleged losses was produced, and the case failed to meet the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard required for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

JFCM II, Cherthala All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case