Manikandan vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector of Police PUTHUKADAI P.S Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 821/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483(i)(b). Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 11th March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNKK010011792026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

27-02-2026

Filing Number

894/2026

Filing Date

27-02-2026

Registration No

821/2026

Registration Date

06-03-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

FIR Details

FIR Number

449

Police Station

PUTHUKADAI P.S

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483(i)(b)

Petitioner(s)

Manikandan

Adv. RCSUBRAMANI

Respondent(s)

State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector of Police PUTHUKADAI P.S Advocate - Public Prosecutor

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

11-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

Enquiry

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

The court dismissed the petitioner's petition to relax bail conditions requiring daily police reporting at 10:00 A.M. Despite acknowledging the petitioner's excuse of caring for his pregnant wife, the court found that he had failed to comply regularly with the imposed conditions, with multiple non-compliance dates recorded by police. The court held that given the serious nature of the alleged offenses (BNS sections 126(2), 296(b), 351(3), and Arms Act section 27), the bail condition would remain unchanged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the petitioner's petition to relax bail conditions requiring daily police reporting at 10:00 A.M. Despite acknowledging the petitioner's excuse of caring for his pregnant wife, the court found that he had failed to comply regularly with the imposed conditions, with multiple non-compliance dates recorded by police. The court held that given the serious nature of the alleged offenses (BNS sections 126(2), 296(b), 351(3), and Arms Act section 27), the bail condition would remain unchanged. 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

Principal District Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case