The Inspector of Police, Perambur vs Anantharaj — 253/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b), 118(1), 74, 351(3). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 02nd April 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNMY090020922025
e-Filing Number
29-11-2025
Filing Number
1937/2025
Filing Date
11-12-2025
Registration No
253/2025
Registration Date
24-12-2025
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi
Judge
1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
414
Police Station
Perambur Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Inspector of Police, Perambur
Adv. PERAMBUR POLICE STATION
Respondent(s)
Anantharaj
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi
Disposed
Judgement
Questioning
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 01-04-2026 | Judgement | |
| 27-03-2026 | Questioning | |
| 24-03-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The District Criminal Court in Tarangambadi acquitted the defendant of charges under BNS sections 296(b), 118(1), 74, and 351(3) (causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and endangering life). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as the government witnesses (particularly witness 1) contradicted the complaint allegations and later reconciled with the defendant, undermining case credibility. The court applied the benefit of doubt to the accused and ordered his release under section 271(1) BNSS. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The District Criminal Court in Tarangambadi acquitted the defendant of charges under BNS sections 296(b), 118(1), 74, and 351(3) (causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and endangering life). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as the government witnesses (particularly witness 1) contradicted the complaint allegations and later reconciled with the defendant, undermining case credibility. The court applied the benefit of doubt to the accused and ordered his release under section 271(1) BNSS. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts