State Government vs Shanmugam — 90/2021

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,304(A). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 30th March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNCG120002722021

Case disposed

Filing Number

167/2021

Filing Date

29-12-2021

Registration No

90/2021

Registration Date

29-12-2021

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram

Judge

1-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukazhukundram

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

171

Police Station

SADRAS

Year

2018

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 279,304(A)

Petitioner(s)

State Government

Adv. APP I

Respondent(s)

Shanmugam

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukazhukundram

30-03-2026

Disposed

26-03-2026

Judgement

23-03-2026

Evidence

16-03-2026

Evidence

19-02-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: CC 90/2021 Court Decision: The District Criminal Court acquitted respondent Shanmugam of charges under IPC Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304(A) (causing death by negligence). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as the only eyewitness (PW3) could not identify the vehicle's registration number or driver, and other witnesses were merely hearsay witnesses who heard about the accident secondhand. The court applied the benefit of doubt to the accused and ordered his acquittal under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

23-03-2026
Oral Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC 90/2021 Court Decision: The District Criminal Court acquitted respondent Shanmugam of charges under IPC Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304(A) (causing death by negligence). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as the only eyewitness (PW3) could not identify the vehicle's registration number or driver, and other witnesses were merely hearsay witnesses who heard about the accident secondhand. The court applied the benefit of doubt to the accused and ordered his acquittal under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case