SI of Police uthappanaickanur PS vs Chinnasamy and 2 Others — 401/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 12th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNMD180014942025
e-Filing Number
17-06-2025
Filing Number
1490/2025
Filing Date
17-06-2025
Registration No
401/2025
Registration Date
17-06-2025
Court
Judicial Magistrate No. II Court, Usilampatti
Judge
2-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO II, USILAMPATTI.
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
215
Police Station
UTHAPANAICKANUR
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SI of Police uthappanaickanur PS (Police Station)
Respondent(s)
Chinnasamy and 2 Others
Santhi
Keresh
Hearing History
Judge: 2-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO II, USILAMPATTI.
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Evidence
Trial
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 06-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 05-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 03-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-03-2026 | Trial |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted all three accused (Chinnasamy, Santhi, and Keresh) of charges under BNS sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and TNPHW Act section 4, finding them not guilty. The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the main victim-witness (PW1) admitted to entering into compromise with the accused and providing exaggerated facts, while other eyewitnesses turned hostile and provided no credible evidence linking the accused to the alleged assault incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted all three accused (Chinnasamy, Santhi, and Keresh) of charges under BNS sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and TNPHW Act section 4, finding them not guilty. The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the main victim-witness (PW1) admitted to entering into compromise with the accused and providing exaggerated facts, while other eyewitnesses turned hostile and provided no credible evidence linking the accused to the alleged assault incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts