State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,ERAINEL vs Anish Rajan Enta Anish Advocate - Adv A.Vimalan — 408/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380,457. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 18th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNKK180054852022
Filing Number
5485/2022
Filing Date
21-07-2022
Registration No
408/2022
Registration Date
28-07-2022
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Eraniel
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
483
Police Station
ERAINEL P.S
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,ERAINEL
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
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Questioning
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 13-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 11-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 09-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Judicial Magistrate of Eraniel acquitted all four accused (Anish Rajan, Jothi, Siva, and Karthik) of theft charges under IPC Sections 457 and 380. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the theft case beyond reasonable doubt, noting critical evidentiary gaps—the accused's alleged confessional statement lacked independent corroboration, witness testimonies were contradictory, and no concrete evidence directly linked the accused to the crime despite lengthy investigation and trial proceedings lasting over 3.5 years. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Judicial Magistrate of Eraniel acquitted all four accused (Anish Rajan, Jothi, Siva, and Karthik) of theft charges under IPC Sections 457 and 380. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the theft case beyond reasonable doubt, noting critical evidentiary gaps—the accused's alleged confessional statement lacked independent corroboration, witness testimonies were contradictory, and no concrete evidence directly linked the accused to the crime despite lengthy investigation and trial proceedings lasting over 3.5 years. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts