State of Kerala - Karukachal Police vs Aseena — 991/2017

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 451, 323, 34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 23rd March 2026.

CC - CALENDAR CASE

CNR: KLKT190040322025

Case disposed

Filing Number

5891/2025

Filing Date

21-06-2025

Registration No

991/2017

Registration Date

06-10-2017

Court

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-2, Kanjirappally

Judge

1-JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE - II, KANJIRAPPALLY

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

55

Police Station

Karukachal Police Station

Year

2013

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 451, 323, 34

Petitioner(s)

State of Kerala - Karukachal Police

Adv. Assistant Public Prosecutor, JFCM 2, Kanjirappally

Respondent(s)

Aseena

Aneesh

Hearing History

Judge: 1-JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE - II, KANJIRAPPALLY

23-03-2026

Disposed

17-03-2026

Order/Judgement

16-03-2026

For Hearing

11-03-2026

For Hearing

02-03-2026

Adjourned

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Judgement

Summary of CC No. 991/2017 The court acquitted the first accused (Aseena) of charges under IPC sections 323, 451 r/w 34 (causing hurt and criminal trespass) due to significant discrepancies and contradictions in prosecution witness statements, lack of recovered material objects, and the possibility of false implication arising from civil disputes. The second accused's case was split up as he did not appear. The court applied the principle that guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and granted the accused the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CC No. 991/2017 The court acquitted the first accused (Aseena) of charges under IPC sections 323, 451 r/w 34 (causing hurt and criminal trespass) due to significant discrepancies and contradictions in prosecution witness statements, lack of recovered material objects, and the possibility of false implication arising from civil disputes. The second accused's case was split up as he did not appear. The court applied the principle that guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and granted the accused the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-2, Kanjirappally All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case