Kalaiyarasi alias Kalaiselvi vs Mellavalavu P.s. Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — 1040/2026

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

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNMD010016642026

e-Filing Number

04-03-2026

Filing Number

1295/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

1040/2026

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

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 05-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

193

Police Station

Melavalavu Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Kalaiyarasi alias Kalaiselvi

    Adv. MUTHU KRISHNAN P

  2. 2.Mathuri alias mathavi

    Adv. MUTHU KRISHNAN P

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Mellavalavu P.s. Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai dismissed bail and anticipatory bail petitions filed by three accused (Thennarasu, Kalaiyarasi, and Mathuri) in a dowry-related suicide case under Section 80(2) of BNS. The court found that despite being the third petition, the investigation was incomplete, specific overt acts were attributed to the accused (physical assault, theft of gold chain, demanding dowry), and custodial interrogation was necessary—warranting continued detention at this stage. 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. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1040/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai dismissed bail and anticipatory bail petitions filed by three accused (Thennarasu, Kalaiyarasi, and Mathuri) in a dowry-related suicide case under Section 80(2) of BNS. The court found that despite being the third petition, the investigation was incomplete, specific overt acts were attributed to the accused (physical assault, theft of gold chain, demanding dowry), and custodial interrogation was necessary—warranting continued detention at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case