Chengalpattu taluk police vs Boobalan Poomalai — 270/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNCG060026062024
Next Hearing
23rd June 2026
e-Filing Number
06-06-2024
Filing Number
2571/2024
Filing Date
07-06-2024
Registration No
270/2024
Registration Date
07-06-2024
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet
Judge
9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu
FIR Details
FIR Number
54
Police Station
CHENGALPATTU TALUK
Year
2016
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Chengalpattu taluk police
Adv. Inspector Of Police Chengalpattu Taluk Police Station
Respondent(s)
Boobalan Poomalai
Hearing History
Judge: 9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Copies
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-06-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 14-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-05-2026 | Copies |
Interim Orders
This document is a witness deposition record, not a case order. It records the testimony of witness Sathashivam (age 62) in Criminal Case 270/2024 before Judicial Magistrate Court II, Chengalpattu on 26.05.2026. The witness testified regarding theft allegations and police investigation involving an accused named Boobalan, and confirmed his signatures on related documents (Ext. A2, A3, A4). During cross-examination, the witness stated he could not recall details about the accused's identification and denied giving false testimony. No substantive order (bail/verdict/adjournment) was issued—this is merely a procedural record of witness examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a witness deposition record, not a case order. It records the testimony of witness Sathashivam (age 62) in Criminal Case 270/2024 before Judicial Magistrate Court II, Chengalpattu on 26.05.2026. The witness testified regarding theft allegations and police investigation involving an accused named Boobalan, and confirmed his signatures on related documents (Ext. A2, A3, A4). During cross-examination, the witness stated he could not recall details about the accused's identification and denied giving false testimony. No substantive order (bail/verdict/adjournment) was issued—this is merely a procedural record of witness examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts