State Government vs Kalpana Advocate - Tr.R.Velu,Tr.K.Karthikeyan — 2/2018
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 454,380, 34. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNCG120001202018
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
Filing Number
2/2018
Filing Date
03-01-2018
Registration No
2/2018
Registration Date
03-01-2018
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram
Judge
1-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukazhukundram
FIR Details
FIR Number
303
Police Station
ALANDUR
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government
Adv. APP I
Respondent(s)
Kalpana Advocate - Tr.R.Velu,Tr.K.Karthikeyan
Seetha
Seethalakshmi
Vittobai
Rajeswari @ Eswari
Adv. E.Chellamuthu
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukazhukundram
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-06-2026 | Evidence |
| 21-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 11-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
This document is a witness deposition (P.W.2) in criminal case CC. 2/2018 before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram. The witness, a village administrative officer, testified about witnessing the accused Seethalakshmi's confessional statement on 20.08.2017 regarding stolen items, and about the seizure of those items by police. The defendant's cross-examination challenged the witness's credibility, questioning the voluntariness of the confession and the witness's presence at various locations. The witness denied the defense allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a witness deposition (P.W.2) in criminal case CC. 2/2018 before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram. The witness, a village administrative officer, testified about witnessing the accused Seethalakshmi's confessional statement on 20.08.2017 regarding stolen items, and about the seizure of those items by police. The defendant's cross-examination challenged the witness's credibility, questioning the voluntariness of the confession and the witness's presence at various locations. The witness denied the defense allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts