Kelambakkam Police Station vs SANJAY SRIRAM — 1/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),296(b). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNCG110047072025
e-Filing Number
27-12-2025
Filing Number
4567/2025
Filing Date
31-12-2025
Registration No
1/2026
Registration Date
02-01-2026
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruporur
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
466
Police Station
KELAMBAKKAM
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kelambakkam Police Station
Adv. INSPECTOR OF POLICE KELAMBAKKAM LAW AND ORDER
Respondent(s)
SANJAY SRIRAM
GOKUL
KRISHNA MOORTHY
GOWTHAM
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Judgement
Questioning
Trial
Trial
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 16-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 12-03-2026 | Trial |
| 10-03-2026 | Trial |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC.NO.1/2026 Court Decision: The District Magistrate Court in Tirupporur acquitted all four defendants (Sanjay Sriram, Gokul, Krishna Moorthy, and Goutham) of charges under IPC Sections 296(b) and 115(2), invoking the benefit of doubt. The court found that while the complainant and injured party initially accused the defendants of abusive language and assault, their later testimony contradicted the prosecution's case, rendering the government's evidence insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CC.NO.1/2026 Court Decision: The District Magistrate Court in Tirupporur acquitted all four defendants (Sanjay Sriram, Gokul, Krishna Moorthy, and Goutham) of charges under IPC Sections 296(b) and 115(2), invoking the benefit of doubt. The court found that while the complainant and injured party initially accused the defendants of abusive language and assault, their later testimony contradicted the prosecution's case, rendering the government's evidence insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts