Town North P.S, Dindigul vs Thaarisuys Prabhu — 409/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,304(A). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 24th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNDG030781472024

e-Filing Number

14-09-2024

Filing Number

7018783/2024

Filing Date

08-Nov-2024

Registration No

409/2024

Registration Date

08-Nov-2024

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Dindugul

Judge

3-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

24-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

835

Police Station

Dindigul Town North P.S

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 279,304(A)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Town North P.S, Dindigul

    Adv. Inspector of police town north police station

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Thaarisuys Prabhu

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: CC.No.409/2024 Court's Decision: The court acquitted the defendant (Tharcius Prabhu, age 20) of charges under IPC Sections 279 and 304(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court found insufficient evidence that the defendant's rash or negligent driving directly caused the fatal accident that resulted in the victim's death on December 15, 2023. Key Reasoning: While the court acknowledged that an accident occurred and one person died, the eyewitness testimony was inconsistent and failed to establish that the defendant's alleged high-speed or negligent driving was the sole cause. The court applied the principle of "benefit of doubt," which must favor the accused when evidence is inconclusive. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  4. 16-Apr-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  5. 16-Apr-2026

    Questioning

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  6. 08-Apr-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  7. 27-Mar-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  8. 27-Mar-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  9. 24-Mar-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  10. 24-Mar-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  11. 12-Mar-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  12. 04-Mar-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  13. 17-Feb-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  14. 05-Feb-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  15. 08-Jan-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  16. 18-Dec-2025

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  17. 10-Dec-2025

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  18. 24-Nov-2025

    Service Pending-Summon

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  19. 08-Sep-2025

    Service Pending-Summon

    Judicial Magistrate No II

  20. 05-Jun-2025

    Service Pending-Summon

    Judicial Magistrate No II

  21. 14-Feb-2025

    Service Pending-Summon

    Judicial Magistrate No II

  22. 09-Dec-2024

    Service Pending-Summon

    Judicial Magistrate No II

  23. 08-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  24. 08-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 409/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC.No.409/2024 Court's Decision: The court acquitted the defendant (Tharcius Prabhu, age 20) of charges under IPC Sections 279 and 304(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court found insufficient evidence that the defendant's rash or negligent driving directly caused the fatal accident that resulted in the victim's death on December 15, 2023. Key Reasoning: While the court acknowledged that an accident occurred and one person died, the eyewitness testimony was inconsistent and failed to establish that the defendant's alleged high-speed or negligent driving was the sole cause. The court applied the principle of "benefit of doubt," which must favor the accused when evidence is inconclusive. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case