MOHAMMED HAJI vs The Inspector of Police, Perambur — 40/2024
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 415&423. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 09th March 2026.
CRLA - Criminal Appeal
CNR: TNMY010040012024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
3028/2024
Filing Date
18-11-2024
Registration No
40/2024
Registration Date
18-11-2024
Court
District and Sessions Court, Mayiladuthurai
Judge
8-District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
FIR Details
Police Station
Perambur Police Station
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MOHAMMED HAJI
Adv. Thiru T. CHANDRASEKARAN
Respondent(s)
The Inspector of Police, Perambur
Hearing History
Judge: 8-District and Sessions Judge, Mayiladuthurai
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Reopen
Reopen
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 03-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 02-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 18-02-2026 | Reopen | |
| 12-02-2026 | Reopen |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The District and Sessions Judge reversed the trial court's conviction of Mohamed Haaji for offences under IPC sections 294(b), 342, and 307, finding critical evidentiary gaps including unexplained 15-hour delay in FIR registration, absence of medical evidence for alleged injuries, and failure to examine key witnesses like the village counselor and the police officer who registered the case. The appellate court held the trial court's conviction lacked sufficient evidentiary basis and ordered acquittal with refund of any fine paid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The District and Sessions Judge reversed the trial court's conviction of Mohamed Haaji for offences under IPC sections 294(b), 342, and 307, finding critical evidentiary gaps including unexplained 15-hour delay in FIR registration, absence of medical evidence for alleged injuries, and failure to examine key witnesses like the village counselor and the police officer who registered the case. The appellate court held the trial court's conviction lacked sufficient evidentiary basis and ordered acquittal with refund of any fine paid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts