The Inspector of Police, Moolanur Police Station vs Haridass Advocate - Chitra Ponds S — 56/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 302. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 16th March 2026.
SC - Sessions Case
CNR: TNTI030004182021
Next Hearing
16th March 2026
Filing Number
12/2021
Filing Date
28-04-2021
Registration No
56/2021
Registration Date
28-04-2021
Court
Additional District and Sessions Court, Dharapuram
Judge
1-III Additional District and Sessions Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Inspector of Police, Moolanur Police Station
Adv. Manivannan M
Respondent(s)
Haridass Advocate - Chitra Ponds S
Kavitha
Adv. Chitra Ponds S
Hearing History
Judge: 1-III Additional District and Sessions Judge
Evidence
Questioning
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 05-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 02-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: This is a witness deposition (P.W.24) in a criminal case (S.C. No: 56/2021) before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharapuram, dated 05-03-2026. The witness, a Police Inspector, testified regarding the investigation into a death case, including the collection of forensic evidence (bone samples), blood samples, and witness statements. The deposition records the witness's examination-in-chief and cross-examination by the defense, which highlighted procedural gaps including failure to obtain proper certificates, vehicle inspection omissions, and incomplete documentary evidence preservation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: This is a witness deposition (P.W.24) in a criminal case (S.C. No: 56/2021) before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharapuram, dated 05-03-2026. The witness, a Police Inspector, testified regarding the investigation into a death case, including the collection of forensic evidence (bone samples), blood samples, and witness statements. The deposition records the witness's examination-in-chief and cross-examination by the defense, which highlighted procedural gaps including failure to obtain proper certificates, vehicle inspection omissions, and incomplete documentary evidence preservation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts