Inspector Of Police vs Rajkumar — 29/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,304(A)IPC. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 14th May 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNCB150012182025
Next Hearing
14th May 2026
e-Filing Number
05-09-2025
Filing Number
1166/2025
Filing Date
05-09-2025
Registration No
29/2025
Registration Date
22-09-2025
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Valparai
Judge
1-DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
FIR Details
FIR Number
87
Police Station
Valparai police station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Inspector Of Police
Respondent(s)
Rajkumar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 24-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 07-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 17-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: In Case No. 29/2025 before the District Civil and Judicial Magistrate Court, Valparai (dated 07-03-2026), the witness (108 ambulance driver Dhiagu) deposed under Chapter XXIII of the CrPC. The witness was permitted to be treated as a hostile witness by the prosecution and was cross-examined. The witness initially denied involvement in case FIR 87/2024 but later admitted to providing false testimony supporting the accused instead of the prosecution, contradicting his earlier police statement. No cross-examination was conducted by the defense side. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In Case No. 29/2025 before the District Civil and Judicial Magistrate Court, Valparai (dated 07-03-2026), the witness (108 ambulance driver Dhiagu) deposed under Chapter XXIII of the CrPC. The witness was permitted to be treated as a hostile witness by the prosecution and was cross-examined. The witness initially denied involvement in case FIR 87/2024 but later admitted to providing false testimony supporting the accused instead of the prosecution, contradicting his earlier police statement. No cross-examination was conducted by the defense side. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts