Anna Nagar P.s. vs Bhavani Advocate - RANICHANDRA S — 1031/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483(1). Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 07th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNMD010016562026

Filing Number

1289/2026

Filing Date

04-Mar-2026

Registration No

1031/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Madurai

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

07-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Dismissed

Last updated 05-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

20

Police Station

Anna Nagar Police Station

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Anna Nagar P.s.

    Adv. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Bhavani Advocate - RANICHANDRA S

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai dismissed the petition of accused Bhavani seeking relaxation of bail conditions requiring daily appearance at the police station. The court found insufficient grounds for relaxation, noting the petitioner had complied for only 18 of 30 ordered days without concrete reasons, the charge sheet remained unfiled, and the prosecution objected strongly based on the serious nature of the alleged offences under BNS sections 75, 296(b), 115(2), 133, 351(3) and TNPWH Act section 4. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 04-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1031/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai dismissed the petition of accused Bhavani seeking relaxation of bail conditions requiring daily appearance at the police station. The court found insufficient grounds for relaxation, noting the petitioner had complied for only 18 of 30 ordered days without concrete reasons, the charge sheet remained unfiled, and the prosecution objected strongly based on the serious nature of the alleged offences under BNS sections 75, 296(b), 115(2), 133, 351(3) and TNPWH Act section 4. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case