Sub inspector of police vs SASIKUMAR AND 1 OTHERS — 80/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 13th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNSA180003222026
e-Filing Number
02-02-2026
Filing Number
322/2026
Filing Date
04-Feb-2026
Registration No
80/2026
Registration Date
05-Feb-2026
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettur
Judge
3-Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Last updated 08-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Sub inspector of police
Adv. Inspector of Police
Respondent(s)
-
1.SASIKUMAR AND 1 OTHERS
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Court Decision Summary The Meemathur Court acquitted defendants Sasi (Sasi Kumar) and Chitra under IPC Sections 296(b), 115(2), and 118(1), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges of criminal intimidation and causing hurt beyond reasonable doubt. The judge determined that while the victims testified about a conflict over unpaid rent, they did not appear as witnesses before the court, and the government presented insufficient corroborating evidence or circumstantial proof to establish the defendants' guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
-
12-Mar-2026
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
-
11-Mar-2026
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
11-Mar-2026
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
-
10-Mar-2026
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
10-Mar-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
-
09-Mar-2026
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
-
07-Mar-2026
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate - I, Mettur
-
05-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 80/2026
Court Decision Summary The Meemathur Court acquitted defendants Sasi (Sasi Kumar) and Chitra under IPC Sections 296(b), 115(2), and 118(1), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges of criminal intimidation and causing hurt beyond reasonable doubt. The judge determined that while the victims testified about a conflict over unpaid rent, they did not appear as witnesses before the court, and the government presented insufficient corroborating evidence or circumstantial proof to establish the defendants' guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts