State of Kerala Police vs Kurian — 70/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),351(20,329(4). Disposed: Uncontested--AQUITTED on 29th April 2026.

ST - SUMMARY TRIAL

CNR: KLKK400001542025

Case disposed

Filing Number

154/2025

Filing Date

27-05-2025

Registration No

70/2025

Registration Date

31-05-2025

Court

Grama Nyayalaya Koduvally

Judge

1-Nyayadhikari, Koduvally

Decision Date

29th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--AQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

101

Police Station

Kodenchery Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),351(20,329(4)
Crl.mp/1/2026 Classification : Bail Application Section State of Kerala PoliceKurian

Petitioner(s)

State of Kerala Police

Adv. Adv.RANJIN BABY APP

Respondent(s)

Kurian

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Nyayadhikari, Koduvally

29-04-2026

Disposed

27-04-2026

Order/Judgement

16-03-2026

To summon witness

13-01-2026

To summon witness

19-12-2025

Appearance of Accused

Final Orders / Judgements

29-04-2026
Judgement

Case Summary: ST 70/2025 Court Decision: The accused Kurian was acquitted of all charges under BNS sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 329(4), and section 31 of the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. The court found the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt and discharged the accused under BNS section 278(1). Key Reasoning: The sole witness (PW1—the complainant) provided insufficient evidence to establish the accused's guilt. Her testimony lacked specifics regarding whether the accused trespassed, restrained her, used violence, or made threats. Without credible corroboration and clear identification of the accused as the perpetrator, the court determined the prosecution case was not adequately substantiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: ST 70/2025 Court Decision: The accused Kurian was acquitted of all charges under BNS sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 329(4), and section 31 of the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. The court found the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt and discharged the accused under BNS section 278(1). Key Reasoning: The sole witness (PW1—the complainant) provided insufficient evidence to establish the accused's guilt. Her testimony lacked specifics regarding whether the accused trespassed, restrained her, used violence, or made threats. Without credible corroboration and clear identification of the accused as the perpetrator, the court determined the prosecution case was not adequately substantiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Grama Nyayalaya Koduvally All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case