Inspector of Police,Dindigul Town South Ps vs Rajiv Gandhi — 328/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(B),307,342,506(II),34. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 26th March 2026.

SC - Sessions Case

CNR: TNDG030079432025

Case disposed

Filing Number

7903/2025

Filing Date

15-10-2025

Registration No

328/2025

Registration Date

15-10-2025

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Dindugul

Judge

3-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

26th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

245

Police Station

Dindigul Town South Police Station

Year

2018

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 294(B),307,342,506(II),34

Petitioner(s)

Inspector of Police,Dindigul Town South Ps (Police Station)

Adv. Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

Rajiv Gandhi

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Chief Judicial Magistrate

26-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Service Pending-Summon

17-03-2026

Service Pending-Summon

12-03-2026

Service Pending-Summon

26-02-2026

Service Pending-Summon

Final Orders / Judgements

26-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Decision Summary The Tirunelveli Sessions Court acquitted four defendants of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 342, 307, and 506(2) in a 2016 stabbing case, finding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that key government witnesses, including the victim-complainant, either contradicted the case or testified that they had no knowledge of the incident, rendering the prosecution's evidence insufficient for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Tirunelveli Sessions Court acquitted four defendants of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 342, 307, and 506(2) in a 2016 stabbing case, finding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that key government witnesses, including the victim-complainant, either contradicted the case or testified that they had no knowledge of the incident, rendering the prosecution's evidence insufficient for conviction. 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

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Dindugul All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case