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

Case disposed

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

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3)
Tn Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 2002 Section 4

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.

12-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Judgement

05-03-2026

Judgement

03-03-2026

Evidence

02-03-2026

Trial

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

Judicial Magistrate No. II Court, Usilampatti All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case