Maraimalai Nagar Police Station vs xxxx — 45/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 316(2),318(4),296(b),351(2). Disposed: Uncontested--CLOSED on 20th April 2026.
RCS - Referred Charge Sheet
CNR: TNCG060051402025
e-Filing Number
07-07-2025
Filing Number
5109/2025
Filing Date
21-08-2025
Registration No
45/2025
Registration Date
21-08-2025
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet
Judge
9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu
Decision Date
20th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--CLOSED
FIR Details
FIR Number
630
Police Station
MARAIMALAINAGAR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Maraimalai Nagar Police Station
Adv. INSPECTOR OF POLICE MARAIMALAINAGAR CRIME
Respondent(s)
xxxx
Hearing History
Judge: 9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu
Disposed
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
Issue of Service
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 01-04-2026 | Enquiry |
| 18-03-2026 | Enquiry |
| 16-03-2026 | Enquiry |
| 24-02-2026 | Issue of Service |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case 45/2025 Summary The Judicial Magistrate dismissed the protest petition filed by Rani against a "Mistake of Fact" closure report in a case involving alleged assault and jewelry disputes with pawnshop operator Mangalram. The court found no credible evidence of the alleged attack—witnesses stated they saw nothing—and noted Rani produced no receipts proving loan repayment or jewel redemption, characterizing the complaint as exaggerated with imaginary incidents. The court accepted the investigation officer's closure report and determined the underlying dispute over jewelry transactions was a civil matter requiring a proper civil forum, not criminal prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 45/2025 Summary The Judicial Magistrate dismissed the protest petition filed by Rani against a "Mistake of Fact" closure report in a case involving alleged assault and jewelry disputes with pawnshop operator Mangalram. The court found no credible evidence of the alleged attack—witnesses stated they saw nothing—and noted Rani produced no receipts proving loan repayment or jewel redemption, characterizing the complaint as exaggerated with imaginary incidents. The court accepted the investigation officer's closure report and determined the underlying dispute over jewelry transactions was a civil matter requiring a proper civil forum, not criminal prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts