CCB Madurai City vs Yogalakshmi Advocate - PARIRAJAN R V — 1109/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNMD010018262026

Filing Number

1427/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

1109/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Madurai

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

38

Police Station

CCB Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CCB Madurai City

    Adv. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Yogalakshmi Advocate - PARIRAJAN R V

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    Summary: The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai dismissed the bail petition of Yogalakshmi under Section 483 of BNSS, who was arrested for alleged cheating (IPC Section 420) involving Rs. 50 lakhs. The court found that the accused failed to repay the borrowed amount despite executing a promissory note, investigation was incomplete, the amount remained unrecovered, and pending similar cases against the accused and her relatives suggested a habitual pattern of fraud. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1109/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai dismissed the bail petition of Yogalakshmi under Section 483 of BNSS, who was arrested for alleged cheating (IPC Section 420) involving Rs. 50 lakhs. The court found that the accused failed to repay the borrowed amount despite executing a promissory note, investigation was incomplete, the amount remained unrecovered, and pending similar cases against the accused and her relatives suggested a habitual pattern of fraud. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case