State of Kerala vs Vishnu Advocate - Georgekutty.P.C. — 100640/2016
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 143,147,148,341,323,324,294(b),506(ii),r/w149. Disposed: Uncontested--AQUITTED on 26th March 2026.
CC - CALENDAR CASE
CNR: KLKM150007802016
Filing Number
3716033/2016
Filing Date
16-07-2016
Registration No
100640/2016
Registration Date
16-07-2016
Court
Judl.First Class Magistrate Court-II, Punalur
Judge
1-Judl.First Class Magistrate-II
Decision Date
26th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--AQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
680
Police Station
Thenmala PS
Year
2015
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Kerala
Respondent(s)
Vishnu Advocate - Georgekutty.P.C.
Nijas
Sarath
Adv. GEORGEKUTTY P C
Akhil Raj
Adv. GEORGEKUTTY P C
Rince Mathew
Adv. GEORGEKUTTY P C
Bineesh
Adv. GEORGEKUTTY P C
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judl.First Class Magistrate-II
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
Call on
Show casue to Investigating Officer
82-83 Steps
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 26-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 13-03-2026 | Call on |
| 11-02-2026 | Show casue to Investigating Officer |
| 19-11-2025 | 82-83 Steps |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Kerala v. Vishnu Advocate and Others (CC 640/2016) The court acquitted five of six accused (A1, A3-A6) of charges including rioting, wrongful restraint, causing hurt, obscene language, and criminal intimidation under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 294(b), and 506(ii). The acquittal was based on the key finding that the original injured complainants, when examined as prosecution witnesses, could not identify the accused and explicitly stated the accused had not attacked them, rendering corroborating police evidence insufficient to establish guilt. The case against the sixth accused (A2) was separated and refiled separately. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Kerala v. Vishnu Advocate and Others (CC 640/2016) The court acquitted five of six accused (A1, A3-A6) of charges including rioting, wrongful restraint, causing hurt, obscene language, and criminal intimidation under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 294(b), and 506(ii). The acquittal was based on the key finding that the original injured complainants, when examined as prosecution witnesses, could not identify the accused and explicitly stated the accused had not attacked them, rendering corroborating police evidence insufficient to establish guilt. The case against the sixth accused (A2) was separated and refiled separately. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts