Inspector of Police Achirupakkam Police Station vs Velayutham s/o Marimuthu — 576/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b),118(1),351(3),118(2). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 27th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNCG150029292025
e-Filing Number
25-11-2025
Filing Number
2929/2025
Filing Date
03-12-2025
Registration No
576/2025
Registration Date
30-12-2025
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Maduranthakam
Judge
2-Judicial Magistrate No. II, Madurantakam
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
207
Police Station
ACHIRUPAKKAM PS
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Inspector of Police Achirupakkam Police Station
Adv. INSPECTOR OF POLICE ACHARAPAKKAM POLICESTATION
Respondent(s)
Velayutham s/o Marimuthu
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Judicial Magistrate No. II, Madurantakam
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Questioning
Questioning
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 23-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 18-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 16-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 12-03-2026 | Questioning |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 576/2025: The Judicial Magistrate acquitted accused Velayutham and Priya of charges under IPC Sections 296(b), 118(1), 118(2), 351(3) and Tamil Nadu Public Health Act Section 4, finding the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted inconsistencies in witness testimony, particularly the complainant's contradictory statements regarding injuries and their timing, combined with the parties' subsequent settlement compromise, which rendered continued prosecution futile and an abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary of Case 576/2025: The Judicial Magistrate acquitted accused Velayutham and Priya of charges under IPC Sections 296(b), 118(1), 118(2), 351(3) and Tamil Nadu Public Health Act Section 4, finding the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted inconsistencies in witness testimony, particularly the complainant's contradictory statements regarding injuries and their timing, combined with the parties' subsequent settlement compromise, which rendered continued prosecution futile and an abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts