State Government rep by SI of police madathukulam vs nagarajan and 1 other — 64/2020
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),323,506(ii). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 02nd April 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTI220003032020
Next Hearing
02nd April 2026
Filing Number
64/2020
Filing Date
13-07-2018
Registration No
64/2020
Registration Date
13-07-2018
Court
District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Court, Madathukulam
Judge
1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government rep by SI of police madathukulam
Adv. Ramakrishnan K
Respondent(s)
nagarajan and 1 other
Selvaraj
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Service Pending-Non Bailable Warrant
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 09-01-2026 | Service Pending-Non Bailable Warrant |
| 11-12-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: This document contains depositions of two witnesses (Jaya - PW1 and Prakash - PW2) recorded on 10.07.2025 in Criminal Case No. 64/2020 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madathukulam. Both witnesses testified regarding allegations of extortion, threats, and physical violence perpetrated by accused Nagaraj, who allegedly demanded ₹5,000 and threatened violence when payment was refused. The witnesses' statements were recorded, cross-examination was not conducted by the opposing party, and the depositions were transcribed, verified, and signed by the witnesses in open court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: This document contains depositions of two witnesses (Jaya - PW1 and Prakash - PW2) recorded on 10.07.2025 in Criminal Case No. 64/2020 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madathukulam. Both witnesses testified regarding allegations of extortion, threats, and physical violence perpetrated by accused Nagaraj, who allegedly demanded ₹5,000 and threatened violence when payment was refused. The witnesses' statements were recorded, cross-examination was not conducted by the opposing party, and the depositions were transcribed, verified, and signed by the witnesses in open court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts