Koodakovil P.S. vs Alaguraja — 610/2025

Case under Arms Act, 1959 Section 25(1A). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 18th April 2026.

SC - Sessions Case

CNR: TNMD010062202025

Case disposed

Filing Number

5101/2025

Filing Date

04-09-2025

Registration No

610/2025

Registration Date

04-09-2025

Court

Principal District Court, Madurai

Judge

10-IV Additional District and sessions Judge

Decision Date

18th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

144

Police Station

Koodakovil P.S.

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

ARMS ACT, 1959 Section 25(1A)

Petitioner(s)

Koodakovil P.S.

Respondent(s)

Alaguraja

Arun

Hearing History

Judge: 10-IV Additional District and sessions Judge

18-04-2026

Disposed

07-04-2026

Judgement

30-03-2026

Arguments

25-03-2026

Evidence

16-03-2026

Questioning

Final Orders / Judgements

18-04-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

Case 610/2025 Summary The court acquitted accused Alaguraja and Arun of charges under Section 25(1A) of the Arms Act, finding that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Although police testimony indicated the accused were found carrying unauthorized swords (~70cm and ~79cm lengths) on November 3, 2024, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent civilian witnesses were presented despite the incident occurring in a populated area, police evidence procedures lacked proper documentation, and procedural irregularities undermined case reliability. The court applied the benefit of doubt to the accused and released them under BNSS Section 258(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case 610/2025 Summary The court acquitted accused Alaguraja and Arun of charges under Section 25(1A) of the Arms Act, finding that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Although police testimony indicated the accused were found carrying unauthorized swords (~70cm and ~79cm lengths) on November 3, 2024, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent civilian witnesses were presented despite the incident occurring in a populated area, police evidence procedures lacked proper documentation, and procedural irregularities undermined case reliability. The court applied the benefit of doubt to the accused and released them under BNSS Section 258(1). 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