The Sub Inspector of Police, Sivagiri Police Station vs Arjunan S/o. Kumarasamy Advocate - V.S. Duraisamy — 130/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,304-A,. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 27th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNED130057382022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
5677/2022
Filing Date
29-12-2022
Registration No
130/2022
Registration Date
29-12-2022
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kodumudi
Judge
1-District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
198
Police Station
Sivagiri Police Station
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Sub Inspector of Police, Sivagiri Police Station
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Arjunan S/o. Kumarasamy Advocate - V.S. Duraisamy
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 18-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 10-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 06-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 02-03-2026 | Judgement |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The District Court in Kodumudi acquitted the accused, Arjunan, of charges under IPC Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304-A (causing death by negligence) in a motor vehicle accident case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving recklessly or caused the fatal collision, as witness testimony and forensic evidence were contradictory and insufficient to establish the charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The District Court in Kodumudi acquitted the accused, Arjunan, of charges under IPC Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304-A (causing death by negligence) in a motor vehicle accident case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving recklessly or caused the fatal collision, as witness testimony and forensic evidence were contradictory and insufficient to establish the charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts