Inspector of Police, Thiruvegampathur P.S vs Arjunan — 192/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),324,307,506(2),326,34,. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.

SC - Sessions Case

CNR: TNSV020067972024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

6441/2024

Filing Date

06-09-2024

Registration No

192/2024

Registration Date

06-09-2024

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivagangai

Judge

2-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 294(b),324,307,506(2),326,34,
TN PROHIBITION OF HARASSMENT OF WOMAN ACT, 2002 Section 4

Petitioner(s)

Inspector of Police, Thiruvegampathur P.S

Adv. Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

Arjunan

Ashwini

Dharani

Hearing History

Judge: 2-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

23-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Judgement

27-02-2026

Judgement

26-02-2026

Arguments

23-02-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

Case Summary The Assistant Sessions Judge acquitted all three accused persons of charges including attempted murder, grievous hurt, criminal intimidation, and harassment of women. The court found critical inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, including contradictory witness statements about the sequence of assaults, material gaps in the investigation (failure to seize blood-stained evidence, delayed FIR registration), and doubts surrounding the arrest, confession, and seizure of the weapon. The court concluded the prosecution miserably failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Assistant Sessions Judge acquitted all three accused persons of charges including attempted murder, grievous hurt, criminal intimidation, and harassment of women. The court found critical inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, including contradictory witness statements about the sequence of assaults, material gaps in the investigation (failure to seize blood-stained evidence, delayed FIR registration), and doubts surrounding the arrest, confession, and seizure of the weapon. The court concluded the prosecution miserably failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivagangai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case