The Inspector of Police, Forest Range, Sirkali vs Jayaseelan Advocate - S. Nithine Babu — 700100/2023

Case under Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 Section 16(a),39(1),(2),(3). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNMY020046392023

Filing Number

701665/2023

Filing Date

09-Aug-2023

Registration No

700100/2023

Registration Date

09-Aug-2023

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Mayiladuthurai

Judge

6-Judicial Magistrate No.1

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

01

Police Station

Forest Office, Nagapattinam

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 Section 16(a),39(1),(2),(3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The Inspector of Police, Forest Range, Sirkali

    Adv. Tmt P.MALATHI, B.Sc.,B.L.,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Jayaseelan Advocate - S. Nithine Babu

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    Court Summary The Magistrate Court in Mayiladuthurai acquitted the accused (Jeyaseelan, age 35) of charges under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. While government witnesses testified that three peafowls died after consuming pesticide-laced rice placed in the accused's field to kill rodents, the court found critical gaps in evidence, including lack of eyewitnesses, inconsistencies in seizure procedures, and failure to establish the accused's intent to kill protected wildlife rather than control pests. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  7. 03-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  8. 27-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  9. 25-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  10. 24-Feb-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  11. 06-Feb-2026

    Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF

  12. 06-Feb-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  13. 23-Jan-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  14. 09-Jan-2026

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  15. 18-Dec-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  16. 18-Nov-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  17. 31-Oct-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  18. 24-Oct-2025

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  19. 17-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  20. 07-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  21. 12-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  22. 22-Aug-2025

    Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF

  23. 22-Aug-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  24. 01-Aug-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  25. 25-Jul-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  26. 08-Jul-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  27. 01-Jul-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  28. 17-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  29. 03-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  30. 13-May-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  31. 08-Apr-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  32. 04-Mar-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  33. 28-Jan-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  34. 24-Dec-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  35. 19-Nov-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  36. 08-Oct-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  37. 03-Sep-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  38. 26-Jul-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  39. 28-Jun-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  40. 28-May-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  41. 30-Apr-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  42. 26-Mar-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  43. 20-Feb-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  44. 09-Jan-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  45. 02-Dec-2023

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  46. 21-Nov-2023

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  47. 19-Oct-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate No.1

  48. 11-Sep-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  49. 09-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 700100/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Magistrate Court in Mayiladuthurai acquitted the accused (Jeyaseelan, age 35) of charges under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. While government witnesses testified that three peafowls died after consuming pesticide-laced rice placed in the accused's field to kill rodents, the court found critical gaps in evidence, including lack of eyewitnesses, inconsistencies in seizure procedures, and failure to establish the accused's intent to kill protected wildlife rather than control pests. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case