The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by Sub Inspector of Police, Vaideeswaran Koil Police Station vs SHANMUGAM — 151/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294[b]323,354,506[1]. Status: For further Proceedings. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.

For further Proceedings Next hearing 27-Apr-2026

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNMY080045472023

Filing Number

4547/2023

Filing Date

07-Aug-2023

Registration No

151/2023

Registration Date

07-Aug-2023

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Sirkali

Judge

1-Judicial Magistrate

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

126

Police Station

Vaitheeswarankoil Police Station

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 294[b]323,354,506[1]

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by Sub Inspector of Police, Vaideeswaran Koil Police Station

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHANMUGAM

  2. 2.Santhalakshimi

  3. 3.Kaylavizhi

Case History

  1. 27-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 02-Apr-2026

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  4. 18-Feb-2026

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  5. 27-Jan-2026

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  6. 06-Jan-2026

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  7. 06-Dec-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  8. 10-Nov-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  9. 24-Oct-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  10. 24-Sep-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  11. 16-Sep-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  12. 25-Aug-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  13. 11-Aug-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Judicial Magistrate

  14. 07-Jul-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  15. 10-Jun-2025

    Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF

    This document contains witness depositions in criminal case CC.151/2023 before the Judicial Magistrate Court in Sirkali. Three prosecution witnesses testified on 10.06.2025 regarding a land dispute and assault incident from 23.07.2022, alleging that three named defendants assaulted the witnesses and their family members over disputed agricultural land; all cross-examinations by the defense were concluded as defense counsel did not participate in questioning. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  16. 10-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  17. 30-May-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  18. 28-Mar-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  19. 24-Jan-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  20. 17-Jan-2025

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  21. 14-Nov-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  22. 04-Nov-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  23. 07-Oct-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  24. 04-Sep-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  25. 02-Aug-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  26. 24-Jun-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  27. 22-May-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  28. 04-Mar-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  29. 07-Feb-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  30. 06-Jan-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  31. 18-Nov-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  32. 09-Nov-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  33. 30-Oct-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate

  34. 08-Sep-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  35. 07-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 151/2023

casestatus.in Summary

This document contains witness depositions in criminal case CC.151/2023 before the Judicial Magistrate Court in Sirkali. Three prosecution witnesses testified on 10.06.2025 regarding a land dispute and assault incident from 23.07.2022, alleging that three named defendants assaulted the witnesses and their family members over disputed agricultural land; all cross-examinations by the defense were concluded as defense counsel did not participate in questioning. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case