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
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
Petitioner(s)
Koodakovil P.S.
Respondent(s)
Alaguraja
Arun
Hearing History
Judge: 10-IV Additional District and sessions Judge
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Evidence
Questioning
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 30-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 25-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-03-2026 | Questioning |
Final Orders / Judgements
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
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
Explore other courts