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.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNMD010016642026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

04-03-2026

Filing Number

1295/2026

Filing Date

05-03-2026

Registration No

1040/2026

Registration Date

06-03-2026

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

193

Police Station

Melavalavu Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Kalaiyarasi alias Kalaiselvi

Adv. MUTHU KRISHNAN P

Mathuri alias mathavi

Adv. MUTHU KRISHNAN P

Respondent(s)

Mellavalavu P.s. Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

07-03-2026

Disposed

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

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.

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.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Principal District Court, Madurai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case