State Government rep by SI of Police madathukulam vs Sivaraj — 242/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,304(a). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTI220007872019
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
Filing Number
242/2019
Filing Date
21-03-2019
Registration No
242/2019
Registration Date
21-03-2019
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. Arunpandian S
Respondent(s)
Sivaraj
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 19-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 20-11-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No.: CC 242/2019 | Court: District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Madathukulam Witness Deposition Recorded: Muthukumar (MV Inspector), PW-4, testified via Microsoft Teams on 12.02.2026 regarding a two-wheeler vehicle (TN 66 D 5861) involved in an accident case registered under IPC Sections 279 and 304(A) at Madathukulam Police Station (Crime No. 31/2018). The witness provided evidence about vehicle damage assessment and confirmed the accident resulted from negligent driving rather than mechanical failure. The deposition was recorded, read back to the witness, and accepted by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No.: CC 242/2019 | Court: District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Madathukulam Witness Deposition Recorded: Muthukumar (MV Inspector), PW-4, testified via Microsoft Teams on 12.02.2026 regarding a two-wheeler vehicle (TN 66 D 5861) involved in an accident case registered under IPC Sections 279 and 304(A) at Madathukulam Police Station (Crime No. 31/2018). The witness provided evidence about vehicle damage assessment and confirmed the accident resulted from negligent driving rather than mechanical failure. The deposition was recorded, read back to the witness, and accepted by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts