Aravinth vs State of Tamilnadu rep. by Inspector of Police, Tamil University Police Station — 1620/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 11th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNTJ010020762026
e-Filing Number
03-03-2026
Filing Number
1616/2026
Filing Date
03-Mar-2026
Registration No
1620/2026
Registration Date
04-Mar-2026
Court
Principal District Court, Thanjavur
Judge
1-Principal District Judge, Thanjavur
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed
Last updated 19-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
230
Police Station
Thanjavur Tamil University Police Station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Aravinth
Adv. Sindhuja B
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Tamilnadu rep. by Inspector of Police, Tamil University Police Station
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Thanjavur dismissed Aravinth's anticipatory bail petition under BNSS 2023. The court found that after a Consumer Court ordered him to compensate for substandard construction work, the petitioner trespassed onto the construction site, damaged property worth Rs.25,000, abused the complainant, and threatened him. Given the nature and gravity of the offences, ongoing investigation, and strong prosecution objections, the court deemed it undesirable to grant anticipatory bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge, Thanjavur
-
10-Mar-2026
Issue of Service
Principal District Judge, Thanjavur
-
07-Mar-2026
Issue of Service
Principal District Judge, Thanjavur
-
05-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 1620/2026
Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Thanjavur dismissed Aravinth's anticipatory bail petition under BNSS 2023. The court found that after a Consumer Court ordered him to compensate for substandard construction work, the petitioner trespassed onto the construction site, damaged property worth Rs.25,000, abused the complainant, and threatened him. Given the nature and gravity of the offences, ongoing investigation, and strong prosecution objections, the court deemed it undesirable to grant anticipatory bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts