Sub Inspector Of Police kadaladi vs Sevugaraj Advocate - Thiru. D. Raja Sekar — 1/2024
Case under Police Force (restriction of Rights) Act, 1966 Section 457,380. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNRM100011332023
Next Hearing
11th June 2026
e-Filing Number
14-12-2023
Filing Number
4584/2023
Filing Date
15-12-2023
Registration No
1/2024
Registration Date
12-01-2024
Court
District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Court, Kadaladi
Judge
100-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi
FIR Details
FIR Number
91
Police Station
KADALADI P.S
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sub Inspector Of Police kadaladi
Respondent(s)
Sevugaraj Advocate - Thiru. D. Raja Sekar
Hearing History
Judge: 100-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 05-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 15-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
This document is a deposition of witness (PW 7) in a criminal case (CC-1/2024) before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi. The witness testified on 03.02.2026 regarding a police investigation on 04.01.2023 involving alleged currency and item seizures, and provided statements about signing official documents during the investigation. The witness later contradicted key aspects of his testimony during cross-examination by the defense, claiming he did not know what was written in the documents he signed and denying prior knowledge of the alleged offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a deposition of witness (PW 7) in a criminal case (CC-1/2024) before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi. The witness testified on 03.02.2026 regarding a police investigation on 04.01.2023 involving alleged currency and item seizures, and provided statements about signing official documents during the investigation. The witness later contradicted key aspects of his testimony during cross-examination by the defense, claiming he did not know what was written in the documents he signed and denying prior knowledge of the alleged offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts