Manikandan vs Sub Inspector of Police, Gandarvakkottai. — 138/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 07th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNPD110002092026

Filing Number

199/2026

Filing Date

20-Feb-2026

Registration No

138/2026

Registration Date

20-Feb-2026

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gandarvakkottai

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

07-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 04-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

122

Police Station

Gandharvakkottai

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Manikandan

    Adv. R.Deepa

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sub Inspector of Police, Gandarvakkottai.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The District Court at Gandarvakkottai dismissed the petitioner's application (Cr.M.P.No.138/2026) seeking temporary custody of a JCB earth-moving machine (TN 60 L 6357) that was seized in a criminal case. The court found it lacked authority to relax the conditions imposed by the High Court's order (Crl.R.C.(MD)No.872/2025) which had placed the vehicle in court custody, and therefore rejected the petition as legally unsustainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

  4. 02-Mar-2026

    Orders

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    Orders

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

  6. 20-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 20-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 138/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The District Court at Gandarvakkottai dismissed the petitioner's application (Cr.M.P.No.138/2026) seeking temporary custody of a JCB earth-moving machine (TN 60 L 6357) that was seized in a criminal case. The court found it lacked authority to relax the conditions imposed by the High Court's order (Crl.R.C.(MD)No.872/2025) which had placed the vehicle in court custody, and therefore rejected the petition as legally unsustainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case