SIP vs Aswin Ganga — 200324/2019

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457, 427. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC on 25th March 2026.

CC - CALENDAR CASE

CNR: KLTR200010742019

Case disposed

Filing Number

200324/2019

Filing Date

08-03-2019

Registration No

200324/2019

Registration Date

08-03-2019

Court

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur

Judge

1-MAGISTRATE KODUNGALLUR

Decision Date

25th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 457, 427

Petitioner(s)

SIP (Sub-Inspector of Police)

Respondent(s)

Aswin Ganga

Hearing History

Judge: 1-MAGISTRATE KODUNGALLUR

25-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Order/ Judgement

16-03-2026

For further hearing

10-02-2026

No sitting notified

23-01-2026

FOR HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

25-03-2026
Judgement

Summary of Case 200324/2019 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate acquitted Aswin Ganga of charges under IPC sections 457 (criminal trespass) and 427 (mischief) after finding the prosecution failed to establish his involvement beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: Although a bronze idol was stolen from Kuruppath Sree Bhadrakali Temple in February 2019 and later recovered from a canal, the prosecution provided no direct evidence linking the accused to the theft—no proof of forced entry, access to the temple sanctum, or circumstantial evidence connecting him to the crime. Suspicion alone cannot constitute conviction. Order: Bail bond cancelled; accused released unconditionally and property restored. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 200324/2019 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate acquitted Aswin Ganga of charges under IPC sections 457 (criminal trespass) and 427 (mischief) after finding the prosecution failed to establish his involvement beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: Although a bronze idol was stolen from Kuruppath Sree Bhadrakali Temple in February 2019 and later recovered from a canal, the prosecution provided no direct evidence linking the accused to the theft—no proof of forced entry, access to the temple sanctum, or circumstantial evidence connecting him to the crime. Suspicion alone cannot constitute conviction. Order: Bail bond cancelled; accused released unconditionally and property restored. 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, Kodungallur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case