Poovali Rajesh vs State of Kerala (Police) — 344/2023

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374(3). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

Crl.A - CRIMINAL APPEAL

CNR: KLKN010059912023

e-Filing Number

16-12-2023

Filing Number

3860/2023

Filing Date

19-Dec-2023

Registration No

344/2023

Registration Date

19-Dec-2023

Court

District Court and Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thalassery

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374(3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Poovali Rajesh

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  2. 2.Shamal A

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  3. 3.Siju M K

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  4. 4.Riju M K

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  5. 5.Sarath Sasi

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  6. 6.T Raghavan

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  7. 7.Aravindhakshan

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  8. 8.Jayarajan M V

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  9. 9.Satheesan A P

    Adv. SATHYAN K

  10. 10.Prasad M C

    Adv. SATHYAN K

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Kerala (Police)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    The Sessions Court in Thalassery reversed the trial court's conviction of ten appellants for unlawful assembly, rioting, and property damage related to a September 2015 incident involving a temple gate. The court found the conviction under Section 153 IPC illegal due to lack of mandatory government sanction, identified suppression of the original First Information Statement, and noted no physical evidence of damage to the gate in the scene inspection report. The appellants were acquitted of all charges and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 03-Mar-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 11-Feb-2026

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  8. 28-Jan-2026

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  9. 15-Jan-2026

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  10. 03-Jan-2026

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  11. 08-Dec-2025

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  12. 22-Nov-2025

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  13. 15-Nov-2025

    For further hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  14. 12-Nov-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  15. 18-Oct-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  16. 30-Sep-2025

    call on

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  17. 21-Jul-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  18. 21-Jun-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  19. 01-Mar-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  20. 16-Dec-2024

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  21. 26-Nov-2024

    Await Lcr

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  22. 11-Oct-2024

    Await Lcr

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  23. 04-Jul-2024

    Await Lcr

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  24. 18-May-2024

    Await Lcr

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  25. 20-Feb-2024

    Await Lcr

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  26. 19-Jan-2024

    Issue notice

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  27. 19-Dec-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 19-Dec-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 344/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Court in Thalassery reversed the trial court's conviction of ten appellants for unlawful assembly, rioting, and property damage related to a September 2015 incident involving a temple gate. The court found the conviction under Section 153 IPC illegal due to lack of mandatory government sanction, identified suppression of the original First Information Statement, and noted no physical evidence of damage to the gate in the scene inspection report. The appellants were acquitted of all charges and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case