The Inspector of Police KARUMANDURAI vs VANKATESAN — 1682/2025
Case under Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(C). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 06th March 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNSA140058432025
e-Filing Number
20-11-2025
Filing Number
5843/2025
Filing Date
20-11-2025
Registration No
1682/2025
Registration Date
06-12-2025
Court
Judicial Magistrate, Attur
Judge
4-Judicial Magistrate - II, Attur
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Inspector of Police KARUMANDURAI
Adv. SI OF POLICE KARUMANDURAI PS
Respondent(s)
VANKATESAN
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Judicial Magistrate - II, Attur
Disposed
Judgement
Service Pending-Warrant
Service Pending-Warrant
Questioning
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-02-2026 | Judgement |
| 16-02-2026 | Service Pending-Warrant |
| 07-02-2026 | Service Pending-Warrant |
| 06-02-2026 | Questioning |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Judgment Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Attur acquitted Venkatesan of charges under Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court identified critical procedural failures: the seized liquor bottles were destroyed without proper documentation, no independent witnesses were examined, and required investigation protocols under TNP Act Section 32 were not followed. Applying the principle of benefit of doubt, the accused was discharged under Section 271(1) BNSS. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Judgment Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Attur acquitted Venkatesan of charges under Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court identified critical procedural failures: the seized liquor bottles were destroyed without proper documentation, no independent witnesses were examined, and required investigation protocols under TNP Act Section 32 were not followed. Applying the principle of benefit of doubt, the accused was discharged under Section 271(1) BNSS. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts