SI of Police vs Seran — 111/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 394,397. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.
SC - Sessions Case
CNR: TNKI020063492021
Filing Number
5673/2021
Filing Date
14-09-2021
Registration No
111/2021
Registration Date
14-09-2021
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Krishnagiri
Judge
3-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
317
Police Station
MAHARAJAKADAI POLICE STATION
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SI of Police
Adv. APp
Respondent(s)
Seran
Suman
Arunkumar
Minsarakannan
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 04-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 19-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY OF CASE 111/2021 The court acquitted all four accused (Seran, Suman, Arunkumar, and Minsarkannan) of charges under IPC Section 394 r/w 397 (dacoity and wrongful restraint). The court found that although a robbery allegedly occurred on November 8, 2019, where the victim was assaulted and ₹25,000 stolen, the prosecution failed to prove the accused's involvement beyond reasonable doubt. Key weaknesses included: lack of proper identification procedure, no weapon recovered as evidence, inconsistent victim testimony, and conflicting witness accounts. The court ordered the accused's release under Section 248 CrPC and mandated return of seized items, including ₹25,000, a wooden stick, and a Bajaj Discover motorcycle. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
SUMMARY OF CASE 111/2021 The court acquitted all four accused (Seran, Suman, Arunkumar, and Minsarkannan) of charges under IPC Section 394 r/w 397 (dacoity and wrongful restraint). The court found that although a robbery allegedly occurred on November 8, 2019, where the victim was assaulted and ₹25,000 stolen, the prosecution failed to prove the accused's involvement beyond reasonable doubt. Key weaknesses included: lack of proper identification procedure, no weapon recovered as evidence, inconsistent victim testimony, and conflicting witness accounts. The court ordered the accused's release under Section 248 CrPC and mandated return of seized items, including ₹25,000, a wooden stick, and a Bajaj Discover motorcycle. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts