State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police vs MURUGESAN — 441/2025

Case under Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(C). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNED140020942025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

08-11-2025

Filing Number

2094/2025

Filing Date

10-11-2025

Registration No

441/2025

Registration Date

12-11-2025

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Bhavani

Judge

4-Judicial Magistrate No.1

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

262

Police Station

Ammapettai Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

TN PROHIBITION ACT Section 4(1)(C)

Petitioner(s)

State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police

Adv. Inspector of Police AMMAPETTAI POLICE STATION

Respondent(s)

MURUGESAN

Hearing History

Judge: 4-Judicial Magistrate No.1

23-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

Judgement

10-03-2026

Questioning

07-03-2026

Trial

04-03-2026

Trial

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court (Bhavani) acquitted the defendant Murugesan of charges under Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Amendment Act for possessing 10 bottles of Veeran Brandy, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical procedural violations, including the seizure memo lacking civilian witness signatures, absence of proper sampling procedures as mandated by Section 32 of the TN Prohibition Act 1937, and lack of corroborating civilian testimony, warranting the defendant's acquittal under the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court (Bhavani) acquitted the defendant Murugesan of charges under Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Amendment Act for possessing 10 bottles of Veeran Brandy, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical procedural violations, including the seizure memo lacking civilian witness signatures, absence of proper sampling procedures as mandated by Section 32 of the TN Prohibition Act 1937, and lack of corroborating civilian testimony, warranting the defendant's acquittal under the benefit of doubt. 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

Judicial Magistrate Court, Bhavani All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case