Rugmini.K.R vs Sudhakaran Advocate - MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM, MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM — 700152/2023
Case under Ipc \ Section 341,323,447,427r/w149. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED U/S 235 CR.PC on 23rd April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: KLPK180000362023
Filing Number
700035/2023
Filing Date
16-02-2023
Registration No
700152/2023
Registration Date
16-02-2023
Court
Special Court for SC ST cases Mannarkkad
Judge
1-Special Judge
Decision Date
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AQUITTED U/S 235 CR.PC
FIR Details
FIR Number
80
Police Station
Sholayur PS
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rugmini.K.R
Adv. PP
Respondent(s)
Sudhakaran Advocate - MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM, MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM
Firoz
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Shemeer
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Harshad
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Aboobakker,
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Sidhik
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Sulaiman
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Mallika
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Sebiya
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Selma
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Fareedha
Adv. MUHAMMED ALI MATTAMTHADAM,MUHAMMED NOUFAL K
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Special Judge
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
For further hearing
FOR HEARING
Examination of the Accused U/S 313 Cr.PC
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-04-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 27-03-2026 | For further hearing |
| 23-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 12-03-2026 | Examination of the Accused U/S 313 Cr.PC |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Sessions Case No. 152/2023 Court Decision: All 11 accused were acquitted of charges under IPC sections 341, 323, 447, 427 r/w 34 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va). Key Reasoning: The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, primarily because: (1) the caste identity of the actual victims (the complainant's parents) was not established with documentary evidence—critical for SC/ST Act charges; (2) key witness evidence was inconsistent and contradicted by defense witness testimony; (3) the underlying dispute was civil in nature involving a long-standing property/pathway rights dispute, making criminal trespass charges unfounded; and (4) conflicting witness accounts created reasonable doubt favoring the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Sessions Case No. 152/2023 Court Decision: All 11 accused were acquitted of charges under IPC sections 341, 323, 447, 427 r/w 34 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va). Key Reasoning: The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, primarily because: (1) the caste identity of the actual victims (the complainant's parents) was not established with documentary evidence—critical for SC/ST Act charges; (2) key witness evidence was inconsistent and contradicted by defense witness testimony; (3) the underlying dispute was civil in nature involving a long-standing property/pathway rights dispute, making criminal trespass charges unfounded; and (4) conflicting witness accounts created reasonable doubt favoring the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts