State Government vs M.Ramakrishnan Advocate - Tr.D.R.Manmadan, Tr.V.Thirunavukkarasu, Tr.V.Ilakkiya — 76/2019

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,304(A). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNCG120011352019

Evidence

Next Hearing

15th June 2026

Filing Number

76/2019

Filing Date

02-05-2019

Registration No

76/2019

Registration Date

06-05-2019

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram

Judge

1-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukazhukundram

FIR Details

FIR Number

32

Police Station

SADRAS

Year

2016

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 279,337,304(A)
MP/1/2023 Classification : 317 Cr.PC Section State Government

Petitioner(s)

State Government

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

M.Ramakrishnan Advocate - Tr.D.R.Manmadan, Tr.V.Thirunavukkarasu, Tr.V.Ilakkiya

Hearing History

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

21-05-2026

Evidence

14-05-2026

Evidence

07-05-2026

Evidence

16-04-2026

Evidence

06-04-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

10-11-2022
Oral Evidence
17-08-2023
Oral Evidence

Case Summary: CC 76/2019 This document records the deposition of Witness 2 (P.W.2) before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram on 17.08.2023. The witness testified that they had no knowledge of the disputed matter and denied providing a written statement to police, though they acknowledged answering questions when asked. The court recorded the witness statement in open court, read it back to the witness in the presence of the accused, and the witness admitted it to be correct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC 76/2019 This document records the deposition of Witness 2 (P.W.2) before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundram on 17.08.2023. The witness testified that they had no knowledge of the disputed matter and denied providing a written statement to police, though they acknowledged answering questions when asked. The court recorded the witness statement in open court, read it back to the witness in the presence of the accused, and the witness admitted it to be correct. 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