Eashwaran vs Inspector of Police, Anti-Corruption and Vigilance Department. — 922/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNCB010018342026

Filing Number

1274/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

922/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Coimbatore

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

Police Station

Vigilance and Anti Corruption

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

1.Eashwaran

Adv. Parthasarathy.A

Respondent(s)

1.Inspector of Police, Anti-Corruption and Vigilance Department.

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
18-Mar-2026

Copy of OrderView PDF

The Principal District & Sessions Court, Coimbatore dismissed both bail petitions filed by Mohan (A-1) and Eashwaran (A-2), who were accused of demanding and accepting Rs.6,000 as an undue advantage from a complainant for processing a water connection, violating the Prevention of Corruption Act. The court rejected their bail pleas, finding that since the arrests were recent, investigation was in nascent stage, and both accused actively participated in the offense, there existed risk of witness tampering and investigation obstruction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
18-Mar-2026

Disposed

Principal District Judge
17-Mar-2026

Orders

Principal District Judge
10-Mar-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
06-Mar-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 922/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal District & Sessions Court, Coimbatore dismissed both bail petitions filed by Mohan (A-1) and Eashwaran (A-2), who were accused of demanding and accepting Rs.6,000 as an undue advantage from a complainant for processing a water connection, violating the Prevention of Corruption Act. The court rejected their bail pleas, finding that since the arrests were recent, investigation was in nascent stage, and both accused actively participated in the offense, there existed risk of witness tampering and investigation obstruction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.