Muthanantham vs Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station — 28/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 430,415. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 24th March 2026.
CRLA - Criminal Appeal
CNR: TNRM010014892025
e-Filing Number
07-04-2025
Filing Number
1242/2025
Filing Date
09-04-2025
Registration No
28/2025
Registration Date
09-04-2025
Court
Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
FIR Details
FIR Number
652
Police Station
KENIKARAI P.S
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Muthanantham
Adv. Piranavanathan Piranavanathan
Respondent(s)
Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 03-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 25-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 07-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram, partly allowed the appeal and modified the conviction's sentence. The court upheld the conviction of Muthanandham (A1) under IPC Section 324 (causing hurt by dangerous weapon) based on consistent eyewitness testimony and medical evidence corroborating stab injuries; however, it reduced the 6-month imprisonment to fine only, considering the accused's physically challenged status. The court rejected the defense's claims that witnesses were unreliable and that non-recovery of the weapon was fatal to the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram, partly allowed the appeal and modified the conviction's sentence. The court upheld the conviction of Muthanandham (A1) under IPC Section 324 (causing hurt by dangerous weapon) based on consistent eyewitness testimony and medical evidence corroborating stab injuries; however, it reduced the 6-month imprisonment to fine only, considering the accused's physically challenged status. The court rejected the defense's claims that witnesses were unreliable and that non-recovery of the weapon was fatal to the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts