S.I vs Abdul Jaleel — 200397/2020
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,324,34. Disposed: Uncontested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC on 16th March 2026.
CC - CALENDAR CASE
CNR: KLTR200015582020
Filing Number
200397/2020
Filing Date
29-04-2020
Registration No
200397/2020
Registration Date
15-05-2020
Court
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur
Judge
1-MAGISTRATE KODUNGALLUR
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
S.I
Respondent(s)
Abdul Jaleel
Hearing History
Judge: 1-MAGISTRATE KODUNGALLUR
Disposed
Defence Evidence
Further evidence
No sitting notified
To summon witness
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 02-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 27-02-2026 | Further evidence |
| 13-02-2026 | No sitting notified |
| 07-01-2026 | To summon witness |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC No. 397/2020 Court Decision: Abdul Jaleel was acquitted of all charges under IPC sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), and 506(1). The court found no credible evidence to prove the allegations of wrongful restraint, causing hurt with a Bluetooth speaker, criminal intimidation, or obscene language. Key Reasoning: The sole prosecution witness (the first informant/wife) retracted her statement, testifying she had filed the complaint due to marital misunderstanding and had since reconciled with the accused. With no incriminating evidence and the complainant unwilling to proceed, the prosecution abandoned examination of remaining witnesses. The court found absolutely no material connecting the accused to the alleged incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC No. 397/2020 Court Decision: Abdul Jaleel was acquitted of all charges under IPC sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), and 506(1). The court found no credible evidence to prove the allegations of wrongful restraint, causing hurt with a Bluetooth speaker, criminal intimidation, or obscene language. Key Reasoning: The sole prosecution witness (the first informant/wife) retracted her statement, testifying she had filed the complaint due to marital misunderstanding and had since reconciled with the accused. With no incriminating evidence and the complainant unwilling to proceed, the prosecution abandoned examination of remaining witnesses. The court found absolutely no material connecting the accused to the alleged incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts