State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,MANAVALAKURICHY vs Anish Rajan Enta Anish Advocate - Adv A.Vimalan — 205/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 16th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNKK180038282022
Filing Number
3828/2022
Filing Date
09-06-2022
Registration No
205/2022
Registration Date
09-06-2022
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Eraniel
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
45
Police Station
MANAVALAKURICHY P.S
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,MANAVALAKURICHY
Adv. Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Anish Rajan Enta Anish Advocate - Adv A.Vimalan
Jothi (Karthick)
Adv. Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam
Siva
Adv. Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam
Kartick(Chinna Karthick)
Adv. Adv. Y. Nalany Chellam
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Questioning
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 11-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 09-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 03-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court at Eraniel acquitted four accused persons (Anish Rajan, Jothi, Shiva, and Karthik) charged under IPC sections 457 and 380 (theft from a temple) on March 16, 2026. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged theft of temple lamps and donation money, as the confessional statement provided by one witness contradicted the testimony of the main prosecution witnesses and lacked corroborating evidence linking the accused to the crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court at Eraniel acquitted four accused persons (Anish Rajan, Jothi, Shiva, and Karthik) charged under IPC sections 457 and 380 (theft from a temple) on March 16, 2026. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged theft of temple lamps and donation money, as the confessional statement provided by one witness contradicted the testimony of the main prosecution witnesses and lacked corroborating evidence linking the accused to the crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts