Jawahar vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police Cholachel Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 823/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483 (1)(b). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNKK010012752026

e-Filing Number

05-03-2026

Filing Number

978/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

823/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 19-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

314

Police Station

COLACHEL P.S

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483 (1)(b)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Jawahar

    Adv. Paulraj A

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police Cholachel Advocate - Public Prosecutor

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    The Principal Sessions Judge, Kanniyakumari District granted Jawahar's petition to relax his bail conditions in a case involving offences under BNS sections 75(2) and 351(2). The court allowed complete relaxation of the weekly police reporting requirement after considering the petitioner's consistent compliance with modified conditions and his employment as a conductor, which was being hampered by the reporting obligation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 823/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal Sessions Judge, Kanniyakumari District granted Jawahar's petition to relax his bail conditions in a case involving offences under BNS sections 75(2) and 351(2). The court allowed complete relaxation of the weekly police reporting requirement after considering the petitioner's consistent compliance with modified conditions and his employment as a conductor, which was being hampered by the reporting obligation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case