SI of Police,Devakottai Taluk PS vs Muthumanickkam Advocate - Mr.S.Meenakshisundaram,B.L., — 189/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 452IPC,294(b)IPC,323,506(ii)IPCand4ofTNHWAct. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 08th May 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNSV070055442024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
5489/2024
Filing Date
20-07-2015
Registration No
189/2024
Registration Date
20-07-2015
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Devakkottai
Judge
3-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
08th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
545
Police Station
Devakottai Taluk Police Station
Year
2014
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SI of Police,Devakottai Taluk PS (Police Station)
Adv. APP Gr.II
Respondent(s)
Muthumanickkam Advocate - Mr.S.Meenakshisundaram,B.L.,
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Judgement
Appearance
For further Proceedings
For further Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Disposed | |
| 05-05-2026 | Judgement | |
| 29-04-2026 | Appearance | |
| 27-04-2026 | For further Proceedings | |
| 20-04-2026 | For further Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused (Muthu Manickkam) of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 452, 323, 506(2) and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Hartal and Bandh Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined the alleged assault occurred inside the complainant's private residence (not a public place), negating applicability of Section 4 of TNPHW Act, and noted inconsistencies and lack of credible corroborating evidence in witness testimonies. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused (Muthu Manickkam) of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 452, 323, 506(2) and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Hartal and Bandh Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined the alleged assault occurred inside the complainant's private residence (not a public place), negating applicability of Section 4 of TNPHW Act, and noted inconsistencies and lack of credible corroborating evidence in witness testimonies. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts