Sub Inspector of Police Sikkal PS vs Gopi,karuppaiya Advocate - Thiru. M.Alagumuthu Ariyappan — 117/2024

Case under Police Force (Restriction of Rights) Act, 1966 Section 294(b),323,506(2). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 06th March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNRM100033722024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

19-07-2024

Filing Number

3345/2024

Filing Date

20-07-2024

Registration No

117/2024

Registration Date

30-07-2024

Court

District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Court, Kadaladi

Judge

100-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Acts & Sections

Police Force (Restriction of Rights) Act, 1966 Section 294(b),323,506(2)
Mp/1/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section Gopi,karuppaiyaSub Inspector of Police Sikkal PS
Mp/2/2026 Classification : 320 Cr.pc Section Gopi,karuppaiyaSub Inspector of Police Sikkal PS

Petitioner(s)

Sub Inspector of Police Sikkal PS (Police Station)

Adv. APP

83/24 Sikkal Ps (Police Station)

Adv. Sub Inspector of Police Sikkal PS

Respondent(s)

Gopi,karuppaiya Advocate - Thiru. M.Alagumuthu Ariyappan

Karuppaiya

Hearing History

Judge: 100-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi

06-03-2026

Disposed

04-03-2026

Judgement

02-03-2026

Questioning

08-01-2026

Trial

30-10-2025

Trial

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Judgment Summary The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court of Kadaladi acquitted both defendants of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 323, and 506 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, noting inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony and incomplete witness examination, thus applying the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court of Kadaladi acquitted both defendants of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 323, and 506 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, noting inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony and incomplete witness examination, thus applying the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Court, Kadaladi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case