State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,ERAINEL vs Karthick Enta Jothi(Absconding) Advocate - Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam — 78/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457,380,511. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 25th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNKK180011222021
Filing Number
1122/2021
Filing Date
17-03-2021
Registration No
78/2021
Registration Date
07-04-2021
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Eraniel
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
399
Police Station
ERAINEL P.S
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,ERAINEL
Adv. APP JM ERANIEL
Respondent(s)
Karthick Enta Jothi(Absconding) Advocate - Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam
Venkadesh
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Questioning
Questioning
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 23-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 18-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 16-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Judicial Magistrate of Eraniel acquitted both accused persons (Karthik and Venkatesh) of charges under IPC Sections 457 and 380/511 on March 25, 2026, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the burglary attempt beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that while a theft attempt incident was established, the evidence did not sufficiently establish the accused's involvement in the crime, particularly noting contradictions in confession statements and lack of corroborating witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Judicial Magistrate of Eraniel acquitted both accused persons (Karthik and Venkatesh) of charges under IPC Sections 457 and 380/511 on March 25, 2026, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the burglary attempt beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that while a theft attempt incident was established, the evidence did not sufficiently establish the accused's involvement in the crime, particularly noting contradictions in confession statements and lack of corroborating witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts