State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,VELLICHANTHAI vs Anishrajan Enta Anish Advocate - Adv A.Vimalan — 128/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457,380. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNKK180026592022

Filing Number

2659/2022

Filing Date

29-Apr-2022

Registration No

128/2022

Registration Date

29-Apr-2022

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Eraniel

Judge

1-Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 19-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

25

Police Station

VELLICHANTHAI P.S

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 457,380

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,VELLICHANTHAI

    Adv. Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Anishrajan Enta Anish Advocate - Adv A.Vimalan

  2. 2.Jothi(Karthick)

    Adv. Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam

  3. 3.Siva

    Adv. Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam

  4. 4.Karthick

    Adv. Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Eraniel acquitted all four accused persons of theft charges under Indian Penal Code Sections 457 and 380, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged theft of temple valuables worth ₹42,500. The court held that while circumstantial evidence indicated a theft occurred, the prosecution's evidence—including a confessional statement and witness testimony—was insufficient and contradictory to establish the accused's guilt, particularly noting the accused's denial and lack of corroborating physical evidence linking them to the crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  8. 09-Mar-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  9. 03-Mar-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  10. 02-Mar-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  11. 25-Feb-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  12. 18-Feb-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  13. 11-Feb-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  14. 02-Feb-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  15. 02-Feb-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  16. 12-Dec-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  17. 18-Aug-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  18. 19-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  19. 05-Jun-2025

    Framing of Charges

    Judicial Magistrate

  20. 04-Apr-2025

    Framing of Charges

    Judicial Magistrate

  21. 13-Mar-2025

    Framing of Charges

    Judicial Magistrate

  22. 20-Dec-2024

    Framing of Charges

    Judicial Magistrate

  23. 29-Nov-2024

    Copies

    Judicial Magistrate

  24. 21-Nov-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  25. 21-Nov-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  26. 12-Sep-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  27. 08-Aug-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  28. 30-May-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  29. 04-Apr-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  30. 28-Feb-2024

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  31. 23-Nov-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  32. 27-Jun-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  33. 24-Mar-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  34. 20-Dec-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  35. 27-Sep-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  36. 16-Aug-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  37. 18-Jul-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  38. 29-Apr-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  39. 29-Apr-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 128/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Eraniel acquitted all four accused persons of theft charges under Indian Penal Code Sections 457 and 380, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged theft of temple valuables worth ₹42,500. The court held that while circumstantial evidence indicated a theft occurred, the prosecution's evidence—including a confessional statement and witness testimony—was insufficient and contradictory to establish the accused's guilt, particularly noting the accused's denial and lack of corroborating physical evidence linking them to the crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case