THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHOLINGHUR P.S vs GAJAPATHI VARMA — 15/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 250. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 18th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNRP050000292026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
23/2026
Filing Date
23-01-2026
Registration No
15/2026
Registration Date
23-01-2026
Court
II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam
Judge
1-2nd Additional District Judge, Arakkonam
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHOLINGHUR P.S
Adv. ASST PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Respondent(s)
GAJAPATHI VARMA
SANKAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-2nd Additional District Judge, Arakkonam
Disposed
Orders
Orders
Enquiry
For further Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 13-03-2026 | Orders | |
| 09-03-2026 | Orders | |
| 27-02-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 20-02-2026 | For further Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam dismissed the discharge petition filed by accused A4 and A5 in a murder case involving Advocate Chakaravarthy. The court found sufficient "grave suspicion" to proceed with trial, rejecting arguments that the case relied solely on a co-accused's confession and lacked independent evidence. The court held that at the discharge stage, it cannot conduct a detailed examination of evidence, and the alleged motive—retaliation for the accused's brother's murder—combined with prosecution materials, warranted continuation of proceedings under BNS Act provisions and Arms Act charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam dismissed the discharge petition filed by accused A4 and A5 in a murder case involving Advocate Chakaravarthy. The court found sufficient "grave suspicion" to proceed with trial, rejecting arguments that the case relied solely on a co-accused's confession and lacked independent evidence. The court held that at the discharge stage, it cannot conduct a detailed examination of evidence, and the alleged motive—retaliation for the accused's brother's murder—combined with prosecution materials, warranted continuation of proceedings under BNS Act provisions and Arms Act charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts