M.R.Syed Ibrahim vs Inspector of Police Sivagangai Town P.S. — 166/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 468(2)(b). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 17th March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNSV020004322026

Case disposed

Filing Number

433/2026

Filing Date

28-01-2026

Registration No

166/2026

Registration Date

28-01-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivagangai

Judge

5-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE No.I

Decision Date

17th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

FIR Details

FIR Number

474

Police Station

Sivagangai Town Police Station

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 468(2)(b)

Petitioner(s)

M.R.Syed Ibrahim

Adv. RAMPRABAKAR.R.M.K

Respondent(s)

Inspector of Police Sivagangai Town P.S.

Hearing History

Judge: 5-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE No.I

17-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Enquiry

12-03-2026

Enquiry

04-03-2026

Enquiry

02-03-2026

Enquiry

Final Orders / Judgements

17-03-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

Case Summary: The court allowed M.R. Syed Ibrahim's petition and closed FIR No. 474/2023 (charging him under IPC sections 143, 283, 290) as barred by limitation. The Judicial Magistrate found that the police failed to file a charge sheet within the prescribed one-year limitation period under Section 468(2)(b) CrPC, as the offences were punishable with imprisonment below one year. With the case pending over four years without progress, the court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The court allowed M.R. Syed Ibrahim's petition and closed FIR No. 474/2023 (charging him under IPC sections 143, 283, 290) as barred by limitation. The Judicial Magistrate found that the police failed to file a charge sheet within the prescribed one-year limitation period under Section 468(2)(b) CrPC, as the offences were punishable with imprisonment below one year. With the case pending over four years without progress, the court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivagangai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case