Inspector of Police, Ammainaickanur PS vs Kasipandi — 69/2024
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 415 (3). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 22nd April 2026.
CRLA - Criminal Appeal
CNR: TNDG010035212024
Filing Number
2250/2024
Filing Date
23-07-2024
Registration No
69/2024
Registration Date
23-07-2024
Court
Principal District Court, Dindugul
Judge
2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
22nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
FIR Details
FIR Number
260
Police Station
Ammayanaickanur Police Station
Year
2013
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Inspector of Police, Ammainaickanur PS (Police Station)
Adv. Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Kasipandi
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 03-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 04-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul reversed the trial court's conviction of Kasipandi for rash/negligent driving causing death (IPC §279, 337, 304-A). The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to: inconsistent eyewitness testimony (PW1 admitted not facing the road; PW2's account had contradictions and admitted not witnessing rash driving), lack of independent corroboration, procedural delays in FIR forwarding and vehicle inspection, and critically, no eyewitness identified the accused as the bus driver. The conviction was set aside and the accused acquitted with fine refund. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul reversed the trial court's conviction of Kasipandi for rash/negligent driving causing death (IPC §279, 337, 304-A). The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to: inconsistent eyewitness testimony (PW1 admitted not facing the road; PW2's account had contradictions and admitted not witnessing rash driving), lack of independent corroboration, procedural delays in FIR forwarding and vehicle inspection, and critically, no eyewitness identified the accused as the bus driver. The conviction was set aside and the accused acquitted with fine refund. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts