Peraiuoor P.s. vs Perumal Advocate - AYYAPPARAJA S — 1156/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNMD010018982026

Filing Number

1492/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

1156/2026

Registration Date

13-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Madurai

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

33

Police Station

Peraiyur P.S.

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Peraiuoor P.s.

    Adv. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Perumal Advocate - AYYAPPARAJA S

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: Crl.M.P.No.1156/2026 The Madurai Principal Sessions Judge dismissed Perumal's bail petition under Section 483 of the BNSS. Perumal was arrested in connection with theft of 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.50,000 cash, charged as A2 (accused 2) for allegedly helping A1 (the neighbor-thief) pledge ornaments in his mother's name. The court denied bail because investigation remained incomplete, only 7 sovereigns had been recovered, and strong prosecution objections warranted custody continuation at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1156/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Crl.M.P.No.1156/2026 The Madurai Principal Sessions Judge dismissed Perumal's bail petition under Section 483 of the BNSS. Perumal was arrested in connection with theft of 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.50,000 cash, charged as A2 (accused 2) for allegedly helping A1 (the neighbor-thief) pledge ornaments in his mother's name. The court denied bail because investigation remained incomplete, only 7 sovereigns had been recovered, and strong prosecution objections warranted custody continuation at that 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