Sub Inspector of Police Adhanakottai. vs Valarmathi Advocate - V.S.Murugesan — 2/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),324,326,506(ii). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 25th May 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNPD110000652023
Filing Number
61/2023
Filing Date
06-Jan-2023
Registration No
2/2023
Registration Date
06-Jan-2023
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gandarvakkottai
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
25-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Last updated 22-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
194
Police Station
Adhanakkottai
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Sub Inspector of Police Adhanakottai.
Adv. APP.Gr.I.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Valarmathi Advocate - V.S.Murugesan
-
2.Selvaraj
Adv. Murugesan V.S
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-May-2026
Copy of Judgement
Case Summary: CC.No.02/2023 Court Decision: The District Criminal Court, Kandarkottai acquitted both accused persons. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges against them beyond reasonable doubt and ordered their acquittal under Section 248(1) BNSS. Key Reasoning: Although the accused were charged under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, 326, and 506(2) for a violent altercation involving assault with a wooden stick and death threats, the court determined that the victims' contradictory testimony—claiming they filed complaints based on suspicion rather than certainty about the accused's involvement—and the absence of corroborating evidence rendered the prosecution's case insufficiently proven. The court emphasized that benefit of doubt must go to the accused when evidence is equivocal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-May-2026
Disposed
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
19-May-2026
Copy of deposition
-
19-May-2026
Judgement
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
12-May-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
27-Apr-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
08-Apr-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
25-Mar-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
18-Mar-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
10-Mar-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
03-Mar-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
17-Feb-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
03-Feb-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
12-Jan-2026
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
17-Dec-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
09-Dec-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
19-Nov-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
05-Nov-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
22-Oct-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
13-Oct-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
06-Oct-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
22-Sep-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
16-Sep-2025
Copy of deposition
-
16-Sep-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
26-Aug-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
05-Aug-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
22-Jul-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
09-Jul-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
01-Jul-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
23-Jun-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
29-May-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
20-May-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
15-May-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
12-May-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
01-Apr-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
24-Feb-2025
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
30-Dec-2024
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
07-Oct-2024
Part Heard
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
18-Sep-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
28-Aug-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
14-Aug-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
16-Jul-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
19-Jun-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
11-Jun-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
22-May-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
14-May-2024
Copy of deposition
-
14-May-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
08-May-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
22-Apr-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
02-Apr-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
26-Mar-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
12-Mar-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
27-Feb-2024
Copy of deposition
-
27-Feb-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
21-Feb-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
19-Feb-2024
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
19-Dec-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
15-Nov-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
10-Oct-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
19-Sep-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
07-Aug-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
29-May-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
11-Apr-2023
Trial
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
05-Apr-2023
Questioning
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
25-Mar-2023
Service Pending
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
13-Mar-2023
Service Pending
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
-
06-Feb-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Jan-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 2/2023
Case Summary: CC.No.02/2023 Court Decision: The District Criminal Court, Kandarkottai acquitted both accused persons. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges against them beyond reasonable doubt and ordered their acquittal under Section 248(1) BNSS. Key Reasoning: Although the accused were charged under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, 326, and 506(2) for a violent altercation involving assault with a wooden stick and death threats, the court determined that the victims' contradictory testimony—claiming they filed complaints based on suspicion rather than certainty about the accused's involvement—and the absence of corroborating evidence rendered the prosecution's case insufficiently proven. The court emphasized that benefit of doubt must go to the accused when evidence is equivocal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts