STATE OF KERALA (POLICE), REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KORATTY POLICE STATION vs A1 THANKACHAN Advocate - KISHOR KUMAR G — 200830/2021

Case under Ipc \ Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 452, 323, 324, 308, 363, 294(b), 506(ii), 149. Disposed: Uncontested--AQUITTED on 11th March 2026.

SC - SESSIONS CASE

CNR: KLTR130005342021

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

200830/2021

Filing Date

08-09-2021

Registration No

200830/2021

Registration Date

08-09-2021

Court

Sub Court, Irinjalakuda

Judge

1-Principal Sub Judge

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--AQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

1447

Police Station

KORATTY

Year

2020

Acts & Sections

IPC \ Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 452, 323, 324, 308, 363, 294(b), 506(ii), 149
ARMS ACT Section 27
Crl.MP(Ab)/1/2026 Classification : Absent Petition Section STATE OF KERALA (POLICE), REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KORATTY POLICE STATIONA1 THANKACHAN

Petitioner(s)

STATE OF KERALA (POLICE), REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KORATTY POLICE STATION

Adv. JOGY GEORGE(Additional Govt. Pleader)

Respondent(s)

A1 THANKACHAN Advocate - KISHOR KUMAR G

RAJEEV

BIJU

SANEESH

VIJEESH

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal Sub Judge

11-03-2026

Disposed

24-02-2026

Order/ Judgement

16-02-2026

FOR HEARING

05-02-2026

repeat NBW

12-12-2025

repeat NBW

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Judgement

The Court of Session, Thrissur acquitted all five accused of charges including criminal trespass, wrongful confinement, assault, and attempted culpable homicide. The key reasoning was that the key prosecution witnesses (the injured party and his mother) disowned their statements and stated the matter had been settled between the parties, making it impossible for the prosecution to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Court of Session, Thrissur acquitted all five accused of charges including criminal trespass, wrongful confinement, assault, and attempted culpable homicide. The key reasoning was that the key prosecution witnesses (the injured party and his mother) disowned their statements and stated the matter had been settled between the parties, making it impossible for the prosecution to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Sub Court, Irinjalakuda All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case