Pappathi Alias Papathy A2 vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep by Inspector of Police Arumbavur PS Advocate - THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PDC PERAMBALUR — 197/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 05th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNPB010003272026
e-Filing Number
18-02-2026
Filing Number
221/2026
Filing Date
18-02-2026
Registration No
197/2026
Registration Date
19-02-2026
Court
Principal District Court, Perambalur
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Perambalur.
Decision Date
05th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Pappathi Alias Papathy A2
Adv. Rajkumar M Advocate
Ramamoorthy A3
Adv. Rajkumar M Advocate
Respondent(s)
State of Tamil Nadu Rep by Inspector of Police Arumbavur PS (Police Station) Advocate - THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PDC PERAMBALUR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Perambalur.
Disposed
Appearance
Appearance
Appearance
Appearance
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 04-03-2026 | Appearance |
| 27-02-2026 | Appearance |
| 24-02-2026 | Appearance |
| 23-02-2026 | Appearance |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Perambalur dismissed the anticipatory bail petition filed by two accused persons (Pappathi and Ramamoorthy) charged under Section 105 BNS read with Sections 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(e) of the Indian Electricity Act 2003. The court found that the accused allegedly committed illegal electricity theft and erected an electric fence that resulted in one person's death, and considering the serious nature of charges, pending investigation, and prosecution's concerns about potential absconding and witness tampering, bail was denied in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Perambalur dismissed the anticipatory bail petition filed by two accused persons (Pappathi and Ramamoorthy) charged under Section 105 BNS read with Sections 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(e) of the Indian Electricity Act 2003. The court found that the accused allegedly committed illegal electricity theft and erected an electric fence that resulted in one person's death, and considering the serious nature of charges, pending investigation, and prosecution's concerns about potential absconding and witness tampering, bail was denied in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts