Sub Inspector of police, sikkal P.s. vs Govindaraj — 211/2024
Case under Mp/2/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section GovindarajSub Inspector of police, sikkal P.s. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNRM100051502024
e-Filing Number
03-11-2024
Filing Number
5105/2024
Filing Date
07-11-2024
Registration No
211/2024
Registration Date
28-11-2024
Court
District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Court, Kadaladi
Judge
100-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
102
Police Station
Sikkal
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sub Inspector of police, sikkal P.s.
Adv. Sub Inspector of Police Sikkal PS
Respondent(s)
Govindaraj
Hearing History
Judge: 100-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kadaladi
Disposed
Judgement
Questioning
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 12-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-03-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
The District Magistrate's court acquitted the accused Kavindharaj of charges under Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act 2024, finding reasonable doubt regarding the case. The court noted that the accused possessed only 180 ML of liquor (approximately 18 bottles), which falls below the permissible 4.5-liter limit for personal consumption under Tamil Nadu rules, and ruled that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt through credible witness testimony and evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The District Magistrate's court acquitted the accused Kavindharaj of charges under Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act 2024, finding reasonable doubt regarding the case. The court noted that the accused possessed only 180 ML of liquor (approximately 18 bottles), which falls below the permissible 4.5-liter limit for personal consumption under Tamil Nadu rules, and ruled that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt through credible witness testimony and evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts