Inspector of Police, Kalaiyarkovil P.S vs Dhineshkumar — 150/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457,397,120(b),411. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
SC - Sessions Case
CNR: TNSV020062562024
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
5968/2024
Filing Date
01-08-2024
Registration No
150/2024
Registration Date
01-08-2024
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivagangai
Judge
2-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
FIR Details
FIR Number
49
Police Station
Kalayarkovil Police Station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Inspector of Police, Kalaiyarkovil P.S
Adv. Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Dhineshkumar
Ganapathy
Kumar
Hearing History
Judge: 2-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: In Case S.C. 150/2024 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sivagangai, witness P.W. 16 (Dr. Hariharan) testified on 26.03.2026 regarding injuries to two victims from 26.01.2024. The witness, a pediatric physician, examined a 72-year-old woman and 70-year-old man who sustained lacerated injuries (2cm x 4cm cuts) to the head/parietal region caused by a sharp/blunt weapon (sickle or knife). Both victims were treated and referred to higher medical care. The court recorded the witness deposition and cross-examination by the first accused's counsel, who challenged the witness's characterization of injuries as lacerated rather than cut injuries and questioned timing of injury occurrence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: In Case S.C. 150/2024 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sivagangai, witness P.W. 16 (Dr. Hariharan) testified on 26.03.2026 regarding injuries to two victims from 26.01.2024. The witness, a pediatric physician, examined a 72-year-old woman and 70-year-old man who sustained lacerated injuries (2cm x 4cm cuts) to the head/parietal region caused by a sharp/blunt weapon (sickle or knife). Both victims were treated and referred to higher medical care. The court recorded the witness deposition and cross-examination by the first accused's counsel, who challenged the witness's characterization of injuries as lacerated rather than cut injuries and questioned timing of injury occurrence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts