SI of Police Karaikudi North Ps vs Karthick Subramani and 7 others — 466/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,294(b),353,506(2). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNSV190017052022

Filing Number

853/2022

Filing Date

05-Aug-2016

Registration No

466/2022

Registration Date

05-Aug-2016

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Karaikudi

Judge

5-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

Decision Date

21-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 147,294(b),353,506(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SI of Police Karaikudi North Ps (Police Station)

    Adv. App

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Karthick Subramani and 7 others

  2. 2.Eims Vijay @ Vijaykanth

  3. 3.Thirupathy

  4. 4.Dhilip Kumar

  5. 5.Sathish Kumar

  6. 6.Panju Arunachalam

  7. 7.Nambi Rajan

  8. 8.Muthupandi

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: CC No. 466/2022 Decision: The court acquitted all seven accused persons (one defendant died during trial, charges abated) of offenses under IPC Sections 147, 294(b), 353, and 506(II). The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court found critical deficiencies in the prosecution's case: (1) prosecution witnesses made only vague, collective allegations without attributing specific acts to individual accused; (2) the mahazar witness admitted signing documents at the police station rather than the crime scene; (3) the FIR registering officer admitted registering the case without proper procedure at inspector's behest; and (4) an independent eyewitness stated he knew nothing about the incident. The court held that suspicion cannot replace proof and extended the benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  5. 07-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  6. 02-Apr-2026

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  7. 02-Apr-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  8. 12-Mar-2026

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  9. 12-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  10. 27-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  11. 25-Feb-2026

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  12. 25-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  13. 16-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  14. 10-Feb-2026

    IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  15. 27-Jan-2026

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  16. 27-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  17. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  18. 19-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  19. 07-Jan-2026

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  20. 07-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  21. 24-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  22. 15-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  23. 11-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  24. 01-Dec-2025

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  25. 01-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  26. 11-Nov-2025

    Copy of depositionView PDF

  27. 11-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  28. 01-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  29. 23-Oct-2025

    Copies

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  30. 08-Oct-2025

    Copies

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  31. 07-Oct-2025

    Service Pending

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  32. 22-Sep-2025

    Service Pending-Non Bailable Warrant

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  33. 29-Jul-2025

    Service Pending-Non Bailable Warrant

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  34. 19-Jun-2025

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  35. 12-Jun-2025

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  36. 19-May-2025

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  37. 29-Apr-2025

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  38. 09-Apr-2025

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  39. 24-Feb-2025

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  40. 18-Dec-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  41. 25-Sep-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  42. 14-Aug-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  43. 04-Jul-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  44. 02-May-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  45. 14-Mar-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  46. 06-Jan-2024

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  47. 06-Dec-2023

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  48. 25-Oct-2023

    Appearance

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  49. 24-Aug-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  50. 22-Jun-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  51. 18-Apr-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  52. 10-Mar-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  53. 25-Jan-2023

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  54. 23-Nov-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  55. 20-Jul-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  56. 07-Jun-2022

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

  57. 20-Apr-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  58. 05-Aug-2016

    Case filed

    Registration No. 466/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC No. 466/2022 Decision: The court acquitted all seven accused persons (one defendant died during trial, charges abated) of offenses under IPC Sections 147, 294(b), 353, and 506(II). The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court found critical deficiencies in the prosecution's case: (1) prosecution witnesses made only vague, collective allegations without attributing specific acts to individual accused; (2) the mahazar witness admitted signing documents at the police station rather than the crime scene; (3) the FIR registering officer admitted registering the case without proper procedure at inspector's behest; and (4) an independent eyewitness stated he knew nothing about the incident. The court held that suspicion cannot replace proof and extended the benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case