SI of Police, Valparai vs Nisha — 50/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),323,324,506(2). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 09th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNCB150003842022
Filing Number
333/2022
Filing Date
20-10-2022
Registration No
50/2022
Registration Date
20-10-2022
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Valparai
Judge
1-DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SI of Police, Valparai
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Nisha
Rajammal
Hearing History
Judge: 1-DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Disposed
Judgement
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 06-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 02-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 18-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a witness deposition document (not a final court judgment) in a criminal case (CC No. 50/2022) from Valpuram Magistrate Court in Tamil Nadu. The retired Assistant Sub-Inspector testified about his investigation into Case No. 57/2021 involving charges under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harmful Publications Act. The defense cross-examination raised significant procedural irregularities: the investigating officer failed to independently examine the injured victim (Jegan), did not separately document witness statements despite conflicting accounts about the number of attackers (one vs. three), and mechanically filed charges without thorough investigation despite contradictions in medical records and injury documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a witness deposition document (not a final court judgment) in a criminal case (CC No. 50/2022) from Valpuram Magistrate Court in Tamil Nadu. The retired Assistant Sub-Inspector testified about his investigation into Case No. 57/2021 involving charges under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harmful Publications Act. The defense cross-examination raised significant procedural irregularities: the investigating officer failed to independently examine the injured victim (Jegan), did not separately document witness statements despite conflicting accounts about the number of attackers (one vs. three), and mechanically filed charges without thorough investigation despite contradictions in medical records and injury documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts