Samanthi vs Kelambakkam Police Station — 829/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b),115(2),351(2). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 23rd March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNCG010018082026

Case disposed

Filing Number

1067/2026

Filing Date

11-03-2026

Registration No

829/2026

Registration Date

12-03-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Chengalpet

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

FIR Details

FIR Number

71

Police Station

KELAMBAKKAM

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b),115(2),351(2)
SC / ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 Section 3(1)(r),3(1)(s)

Petitioner(s)

Samanthi

Adv. Logendiran B

Respondent(s)

Kelambakkam Police Station

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District Judge

23-03-2026

Disposed

18-03-2026

Orders

17-03-2026

Enquiry

16-03-2026

Enquiry

12-03-2026

Vakalat / Memo of Appearance

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: Samanthi v. State of Tamil Nadu (829/2026) The court granted bail to Samanthi, accused of assault and caste-based abuse under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and BNS, 2023. The court considered that the dispute originated between schoolchildren, the victim was discharged from hospital, and the accused had remained in custody for 13 days. The court found that whether caste-abusive words were actually uttered could only be determined after full trial, particularly given the accused's illiteracy and lack of prior knowledge of the victim's caste. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Samanthi v. State of Tamil Nadu (829/2026) The court granted bail to Samanthi, accused of assault and caste-based abuse under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and BNS, 2023. The court considered that the dispute originated between schoolchildren, the victim was discharged from hospital, and the accused had remained in custody for 13 days. The court found that whether caste-abusive words were actually uttered could only be determined after full trial, particularly given the accused's illiteracy and lack of prior knowledge of the victim's caste. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Principal District Court, Chengalpet All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case