State of Kerala Police vs NARAYANAPANICKER Advocate - APPACHANKUTTY M M — 100226/2024
Case under Ipc \ Section 285,268,278,290,336. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 28th March 2026.
CC - CALENDAR CASE
CNR: KLAL320010482024
e-Filing Number
09-04-2024
Filing Number
101045/2024
Filing Date
24-04-2024
Registration No
100226/2024
Registration Date
24-04-2024
Court
JFCM Ramankary
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary
Decision Date
28th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
158
Police Station
Pulinkunnu Police Station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Kerala Police
Adv. Asst. Public Prosecutor, Ramankari
Respondent(s)
NARAYANAPANICKER Advocate - APPACHANKUTTY M M
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
For further hearing
No sitting notified
No sitting notified
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-03-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 23-03-2026 | For further hearing |
| 21-03-2026 | No sitting notified |
| 16-03-2026 | No sitting notified |
Interim Orders
The Judicial First Class Magistrate acquitted Narayanapanicker of charges under IPC sections 285, 268, 278, 290, and 336 (fire endangerment and negligence offenses). The court found critical inconsistencies in prosecution witness testimonies regarding property ownership, fire origin, and damage extent, and noted that key witnesses neither saw the accused set fire nor directly witnessed fire transmission between properties. The court held the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Judicial First Class Magistrate acquitted Narayanapanicker of charges under IPC sections 285, 268, 278, 290, and 336 (fire endangerment and negligence offenses). The court found critical inconsistencies in prosecution witness testimonies regarding property ownership, fire origin, and damage extent, and noted that key witnesses neither saw the accused set fire nor directly witnessed fire transmission between properties. The court held the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts