S I of Police, Kunnamkulam vs Suresh Advocate - Prathapan CS — 103046/2017
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 143,147,148,341,323,324,149. Disposed: Uncontested--AQUITTED on 24th March 2026.
CC - CALENDAR CASE
CNR: KLTR250042422017
Filing Number
103046/2017
Filing Date
12-Oct-2017
Registration No
103046/2017
Registration Date
12-Oct-2017
Court
JFCM Court, Kunnamkulam
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Decision Date
24-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--AQUITTED
Last updated 15-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
902
Police Station
KUNNAMKULAM
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.S I of Police, Kunnamkulam
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Suresh Advocate - Prathapan CS
-
2.Nikhil
Adv. Prathapan CS
-
3.Raju
Adv. Prathapan CS
-
4.Sukumaran
Adv. Prathapan CS
-
5.Prabhash
Adv. Prathapan CS
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Mar-2026
JudgementView PDF
Case Summary: CC 3046/2017 The Kunnamkulam Magistrate Court acquitted all five accused persons (Suresh, Nikhil, Raju, Sukumaran, and Prabhash) of charges under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 r/w 149 (unlawful assembly, rioting, and assault). The court found the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt because the two examined witnesses stated they had not witnessed the alleged April 4, 2017 incident and the matter had been settled between parties. The original complainant had deceased, and the Assistant Public Prosecutor abandoned remaining witnesses, leaving no incriminating evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
16-Mar-2026
Order/ Judgement
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
23-Jan-2026
Repeat NBW
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
11-Nov-2025
Return of warrant
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
07-May-2025
Return of warrant
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
10-Jan-2025
Return of warrant
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
30-Oct-2024
Return of warrant
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
13-Aug-2024
Return of warrant
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
11-Mar-2024
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
15-Feb-2024
Issue Bailable Warrant
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
11-Jan-2024
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
10-Oct-2023
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
01-Sep-2023
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
17-Mar-2023
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
17-Oct-2022
No sitting notified
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
06-May-2022
No sitting notified
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
04-Feb-2022
No sitting notified
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
24-Sep-2021
No sitting notified
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
20-May-2021
No sitting notified
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
05-Apr-2021
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
23-Jan-2021
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
22-Apr-2020
No sitting notified
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
09-Mar-2020
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
07-Feb-2020
Await summons
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
30-Dec-2019
To summon witness
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
15-Nov-2019
For framing charge
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
23-Sep-2019
For framing charge
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
28-Feb-2019
call on
Judicial First Class Magistrate
-
07-Nov-2017
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Oct-2017
Case filed
Registration No. 103046/2017
Case Summary: CC 3046/2017 The Kunnamkulam Magistrate Court acquitted all five accused persons (Suresh, Nikhil, Raju, Sukumaran, and Prabhash) of charges under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 r/w 149 (unlawful assembly, rioting, and assault). The court found the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt because the two examined witnesses stated they had not witnessed the alleged April 4, 2017 incident and the matter had been settled between parties. The original complainant had deceased, and the Assistant Public Prosecutor abandoned remaining witnesses, leaving no incriminating evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts