State of Kerala Police vs SOURAB SHEIK Advocate - ASWIN — 1045/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380,34. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC on 17th March 2026.
CC - CALENDAR CASE
CNR: KLTR220067662025
Filing Number
4358/2025
Filing Date
14-10-2025
Registration No
1045/2025
Registration Date
14-10-2025
Court
JFCM, Chalakudy
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC
FIR Details
FIR Number
91
Police Station
KORATTY
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Kerala Police
Adv. Asst Public Prosecutor(JFCM,Chalakudy)
Respondent(s)
SOURAB SHEIK Advocate - ASWIN
Alamgir Seikh
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
FOR HEARING
Order/ Judgement
Examination of the Accused U/S 313 Cr.PC
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 12-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 03-03-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 12-02-2026 | Examination of the Accused U/S 313 Cr.PC |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 1045/2025 The Chalakudy Judicial First Class Magistrate acquitted Sourab Sheik (Accused No. 1) of theft charges under Section 380 r/w 34 IPC for an alleged Rs. 25,000 theft from Indian Coffee House. The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to: absence of proper identification of recovered items by credible witnesses, recovery witnesses contradicting prosecution claims, missing ownership documentation and inventory records, no CCTV or scientific evidence, and lack of corroboration for the accused's alleged confession. The absconding co-accused's case was separately refiled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 1045/2025 The Chalakudy Judicial First Class Magistrate acquitted Sourab Sheik (Accused No. 1) of theft charges under Section 380 r/w 34 IPC for an alleged Rs. 25,000 theft from Indian Coffee House. The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to: absence of proper identification of recovered items by credible witnesses, recovery witnesses contradicting prosecution claims, missing ownership documentation and inventory records, no CCTV or scientific evidence, and lack of corroboration for the accused's alleged confession. The absconding co-accused's case was separately refiled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts