Alex vs Inspector of Police Thirumangalam Taluk Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — 1003/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 07th March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNMD010015802026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

28-02-2026

Filing Number

1230/2026

Filing Date

02-03-2026

Registration No

1003/2026

Registration Date

04-03-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Madurai

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

07th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

FIR Details

FIR Number

40

Police Station

Thirumangalam Taluk P.S.

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Alex

Adv. REVATHI

Vijaymanickam

Adv. REVATHI

Mukesh

Adv. REVATHI

Rajithaganthi

Adv. REVATHI

Manimaran

Adv. REVATHI

Balakrishnan

Adv. REVATHI

Ponnusamy

Adv. REVATHI

Oorakalan

Adv. REVATHI

Vignesh

Adv. REVATHI

Munisankar

Adv. REVATHI

Sasi

Adv. REVATHI

Ambspandi

Adv. REVATHI

Chellam alias Selvam

Adv. REVATHI

Jeyakumar

Adv. REVATHI

Selvakumar

Adv. REVATHI

Thangaraj

Adv. REVATHI

Balamurugan

Adv. REVATHI

Sathish

Adv. REVATHI

Mahendran

Adv. REVATHI

Sakthivel

Adv. REVATHI

Manikandan

Adv. REVATHI

Selvam

Adv. REVATHI

Manikandan

Adv. REVATHI

Ramesh

Adv. REVATHI

Ramesh

Adv. REVATHI

Pukazhenthi

Adv. REVATHI

Lakshmanan

Adv. REVATHI

Alagar

Adv. REVATHI

Sundharam

Adv. REVATHI

Muthuraj

Adv. REVATHI

Selvamkumar

Adv. REVATHI

Respondent(s)

Inspector of Police Thirumangalam Taluk Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

07-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Enquiry

05-03-2026

Enquiry

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

Court Decision Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai, granted anticipatory bail to two advocates (petitioners in Crl.M.P.No.935/2026) involved in a temple violence case, finding them unlikely to abscond given their professional status and no prior criminal records. However, the court rejected anticipatory bail for 30 other accused (petitioners in Crl.M.P.No.1003/2026), citing the serious nature of offences, ongoing communal tension, and need for custodial interrogation—the case involved a violent conflict over temple religious activities where accused allegedly assaulted complainants with weapons and damaged property worth ₹20,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai, granted anticipatory bail to two advocates (petitioners in Crl.M.P.No.935/2026) involved in a temple violence case, finding them unlikely to abscond given their professional status and no prior criminal records. However, the court rejected anticipatory bail for 30 other accused (petitioners in Crl.M.P.No.1003/2026), citing the serious nature of offences, ongoing communal tension, and need for custodial interrogation—the case involved a violent conflict over temple religious activities where accused allegedly assaulted complainants with weapons and damaged property worth ₹20,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Principal District Court, Madurai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case