Sub Inspector Of Police Thirumuruganpoondi PS vs SIVA KARTHIK AND 3 OTHERS — 917/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 140(3),308(4). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 09th March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNTI130067942025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

26-12-2025

Filing Number

6794/2025

Filing Date

29-12-2025

Registration No

917/2025

Registration Date

29-12-2025

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Avinashi

Judge

2-Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 140(3),308(4)

Petitioner(s)

Sub Inspector Of Police Thirumuruganpoondi PS (Police Station)

Respondent(s)

SIVA KARTHIK AND 3 OTHERS

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Judicial Magistrate

09-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Issue of Service

04-03-2026

Issue of Service

03-03-2026

Issue of Service

26-02-2026

Issue of Service

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Decision Summary The Avinashi Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted all four accused (Sivakarthick, Vijay, Lingeswaran, and Gowtham) of charges under BNS Sections 140(3) and 308(4) for alleged abduction, threats with a knife, and chain snatching. The court found the primary witness (complainant) testified that he didn't know the complaint's contents, only signed it, and had reached a mutual settlement with the accused, completely undermining the prosecution's case. The investigator's testimony merely established procedural compliance without credible evidence proving the alleged crimes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

03-03-2026
Deposition
03-03-2026
Deposition
03-03-2026
Deposition
casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Avinashi Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted all four accused (Sivakarthick, Vijay, Lingeswaran, and Gowtham) of charges under BNS Sections 140(3) and 308(4) for alleged abduction, threats with a knife, and chain snatching. The court found the primary witness (complainant) testified that he didn't know the complaint's contents, only signed it, and had reached a mutual settlement with the accused, completely undermining the prosecution's case. The investigator's testimony merely established procedural compliance without credible evidence proving the alleged crimes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Avinashi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case