SI. OF POLICE, KUNDRAKUDI PS vs PRAPU — 1876/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),323,324,324,506(2). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNSV190054372022

Case disposed

Filing Number

3564/2022

Filing Date

07-10-2022

Registration No

1876/2022

Registration Date

11-10-2022

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Karaikudi

Judge

5-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

35

Police Station

Kundrakudi Police Station

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),323,324,324,506(2)
Tn Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 2002 Section 4

Petitioner(s)

SI. OF POLICE, KUNDRAKUDI PS (Police Station)

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

PRAPU

Hearing History

Judge: 5-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi

23-03-2026

Disposed

18-03-2026

Judgement

16-03-2026

Questioning

12-03-2026

Evidence

11-03-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: CC.No.1876/2022 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused Prabhu of all charges under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(2) and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The primary complainant (PW1) and eyewitnesses (PW2, PW3) turned hostile during trial, contradicting their original statements and testifying that no offense occurred. With critical witnesses recanting and no independent corroborating evidence, the court held that the Investigating Officer's testimony alone was insufficient to sustain conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC.No.1876/2022 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused Prabhu of all charges under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(2) and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The primary complainant (PW1) and eyewitnesses (PW2, PW3) turned hostile during trial, contradicting their original statements and testifying that no offense occurred. With critical witnesses recanting and no independent corroborating evidence, the court held that the Investigating Officer's testimony alone was insufficient to sustain conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Karaikudi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case