Arun Prasath vs Inspector ofPolice udumalpet — 60/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 311. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 05th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNTI170001472026

Filing Number

147/2026

Filing Date

20-Jan-2026

Registration No

60/2026

Registration Date

20-Jan-2026

Court

Judicial Magistrate No. I Court, Udumalpet

Judge

3-Judicial Magistrate No. I, Udumalpet

Decision Date

05-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Dismissed

Last updated 12-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 311

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Arun Prasath

    Adv. Chidambarasamy C

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Inspector ofPolice udumalpet

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    The court dismissed the petitioner's Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 60/2026 filed under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, finding that the underlying case filed in 2019 had already been pending for seven years with the complainant cross-examined three times. The court determined that dismissing the petition was in the interest of justice, as the respondent had already filed written arguments and the petitioner had no legal right to demand bank account details or passbooks of a private individual. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate No. I, Udumalpet

  4. 20-Feb-2026

    Orders

    Judicial Magistrate No. I, Udumalpet

  5. 11-Feb-2026

    Counter

    Judicial Magistrate No. I, Udumalpet

  6. 03-Feb-2026

    Counter

    Judicial Magistrate No. I, Udumalpet

  7. 20-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 20-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 60/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the petitioner's Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 60/2026 filed under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, finding that the underlying case filed in 2019 had already been pending for seven years with the complainant cross-examined three times. The court determined that dismissing the petition was in the interest of justice, as the respondent had already filed written arguments and the petitioner had no legal right to demand bank account details or passbooks of a private individual. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case