Iyappan vs Sub-Inspector of Police — 701/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNDG010017332026

e-Filing Number

17-03-2026

Filing Number

903/2026

Filing Date

18-Mar-2026

Registration No

701/2026

Registration Date

23-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Dindugul

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 28-Jun-2026

FIR Details

Police Station

Dindigul Taluk P.S

Year

0

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Iyappan

    Adv. Siva Balan S

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sub-Inspector of Police

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case 701/2026 (Iyappan v. Sub-Inspector of Police) The Principal Sessions Judge Dindigul dismissed Iyappan's anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 482 BNSS 2023 for alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(1), and 351(3) BNS 2023. Iyappan claimed the complaint by Divya was false revenge for demanding repayment of borrowed money and jewels pledged a year prior. The court found no CSR pending and no FIR registered against the petitioner as of the hearing date, and declined to grant anticipatory bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 701/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 701/2026 (Iyappan v. Sub-Inspector of Police) The Principal Sessions Judge Dindigul dismissed Iyappan's anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 482 BNSS 2023 for alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(1), and 351(3) BNS 2023. Iyappan claimed the complaint by Divya was false revenge for demanding repayment of borrowed money and jewels pledged a year prior. The court found no CSR pending and no FIR registered against the petitioner as of the hearing date, and declined to grant anticipatory bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case