The Sub Inspector of Police Jalakandapuram Police Station vs Yuvaraj — 667/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 506(1),352,294(b),354(A),509. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 01st April 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNSA180025302024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

14-07-2024

Filing Number

2528/2024

Filing Date

18-07-2024

Registration No

667/2024

Registration Date

02-12-2024

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettur

Judge

4-Judicial Magistrate - II, Mettur

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 506(1),352,294(b),354(A),509
TN PROHIBITION OF HARASSMENT OF WOMAN ACT, 2002 Section 4

Petitioner(s)

The Sub Inspector of Police Jalakandapuram Police Station

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Yuvaraj

Hearing History

Judge: 4-Judicial Magistrate - II, Mettur

01-04-2026

Disposed

27-03-2026

Judgement

26-03-2026

Questioning

10-03-2026

Evidence

27-02-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

01-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court II, Mettur acquitted all three accused (Yuvaraj, Latha, and Sathishkumar) of charges under IPC sections 294(b), 352, 354(A), 509, 506(i) and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The court found that although the prosecution examined six witnesses and presented evidence of alleged dowry demand, sexual harassment, and threats in a domestic dispute, the key witnesses (PW1—the complainant—and PW3—her father) retracted their statements during cross-examination after the accused and complainant reconciled and reunited. Since the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, all accused were acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court II, Mettur acquitted all three accused (Yuvaraj, Latha, and Sathishkumar) of charges under IPC sections 294(b), 352, 354(A), 509, 506(i) and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The court found that although the prosecution examined six witnesses and presented evidence of alleged dowry demand, sexual harassment, and threats in a domestic dispute, the key witnesses (PW1—the complainant—and PW3—her father) retracted their statements during cross-examination after the accused and complainant reconciled and reunited. Since the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, all accused were acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case