Anilkumar vs Vimalkumar — 724/2015

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),341,323,324,34. Disposed: Uncontested--AQUITTED U/S 248(1) CR.PC on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CALENDAR CASE

CNR: KLTV390001342015

Filing Number

724/2015

Filing Date

02-Feb-2017

Registration No

724/2015

Registration Date

02-Feb-2017

Court

JFMC FOREST Nedumangad

Judge

1-Judicial First Class Magistrate

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

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

Last updated 25-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

26

Police Station

Aruvikkara Police Station

Year

2015

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),341,323,324,34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Anilkumar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Vimalkumar

  2. 2.Manu

  3. 3.manoj

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Judicial I Class Magistrate, Nedumangad acquitted all three accused (Vimal Kumar, Manu, and Manoj @ Chinju) of charges under IPC sections 294(b), 341, 323, and 324 r/w 34. The court found that the de facto complainant (PW1) denied the accusations and failed to identify the accused as his attackers, while other prosecution witnesses either witnessed nothing or could not identify the perpetrators. With no credible evidence connecting the accused to the alleged offences, the court held all three not guilty and ordered their immediate release with bail bonds cancelled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial First Class Magistrate

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate

  5. 04-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Feb-2017

    Case filed

    Registration No. 724/2015

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Judicial I Class Magistrate, Nedumangad acquitted all three accused (Vimal Kumar, Manu, and Manoj @ Chinju) of charges under IPC sections 294(b), 341, 323, and 324 r/w 34. The court found that the de facto complainant (PW1) denied the accusations and failed to identify the accused as his attackers, while other prosecution witnesses either witnessed nothing or could not identify the perpetrators. With no credible evidence connecting the accused to the alleged offences, the court held all three not guilty and ordered their immediate release with bail bonds cancelled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case