State Of Tamilnadu Rep by SI of Police,ERAINEL vs Anish Rajan Enta Anish Advocate - Adv A.Vimalan — 440/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380,457. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 25th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNKK180054882022
Filing Number
5488/2022
Filing Date
21-07-2022
Registration No
440/2022
Registration Date
30-07-2022
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Eraniel
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
484
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
Siva
Karthick
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Questioning
Questioning
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 24-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 18-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 16-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Eraniel acquitted all four accused persons (Anish Rajan, Jothi, Shiva, and Karthik) of theft charges under IPC sections 457 and 380, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that the evidence, consisting primarily of a confession statement by one accused, lacked corroboration through credible witness testimony and circumstantial evidence, and thus was insufficient to establish guilt according to established legal standards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Eraniel acquitted all four accused persons (Anish Rajan, Jothi, Shiva, and Karthik) of theft charges under IPC sections 457 and 380, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that the evidence, consisting primarily of a confession statement by one accused, lacked corroboration through credible witness testimony and circumstantial evidence, and thus was insufficient to establish guilt according to established legal standards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts