State Government of Tamilnadu, its rep by Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu.P.S vs Chellamuthu(Absconding) — 71/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),323,324,506(2)IPC. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNPB090008262024

Filing Number

777/2024

Filing Date

27-May-2024

Registration No

71/2024

Registration Date

27-May-2024

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kunnam

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 18-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

385

Police Station

POLICE STATION, MANGALAMADU, PERMBALUR.

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),323,324,506(2)IPC

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Government of Tamilnadu, its rep by Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu.P.S

    Adv. THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, JM COURTS, PERAMBALUR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Chellamuthu(Absconding)

  2. 2.Ramasamy

    Adv. P. RAMESH

  3. 3.Kolanjappa

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    Court Judgment Summary The District Munsif Court in Kunnam acquitted accused Ramasamy (A2) of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, and 506(ii), finding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court found the key prosecution witnesses gave contradictory and unreliable testimony, with the complainant and injured witness providing vague accounts that didn't specifically identify the accused's role in the alleged assault. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  4. 03-Mar-2026

    Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF

  5. 03-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  7. 26-Feb-2026

    Service Pending-Summon

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  8. 23-Feb-2026

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  9. 09-Feb-2026

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  10. 28-Jan-2026

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  11. 19-Nov-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  12. 16-Oct-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  13. 17-Sep-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  14. 28-Aug-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  15. 29-Jul-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  16. 22-Jul-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  17. 01-Jul-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  18. 10-Jun-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  19. 07-Apr-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  20. 26-Feb-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  21. 31-Jan-2025

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  22. 11-Dec-2024

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  23. 06-Nov-2024

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  24. 03-Oct-2024

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  25. 05-Aug-2024

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  26. 27-Jun-2024

    Service Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Kunnam

  27. 27-May-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 27-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 71/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary The District Munsif Court in Kunnam acquitted accused Ramasamy (A2) of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, and 506(ii), finding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court found the key prosecution witnesses gave contradictory and unreliable testimony, with the complainant and injured witness providing vague accounts that didn't specifically identify the accused's role in the alleged assault. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case