SI of Police, Thiruvaiyaru P.S. vs KARTHIK — 234/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b),351(3)BNSr/w25(1-A)ArmsAct. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 08th April 2026.

SC - Sessions Case

CNR: TNTJ010059132025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

05-02-2025

Filing Number

4408/2025

Filing Date

13-02-2025

Registration No

234/2025

Registration Date

02-07-2025

Court

Principal District Court, Thanjavur

Judge

1-Principal District Judge, Thanjavur

Decision Date

08th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

542

Police Station

Thiruvaiyaru Police Station

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b),351(3)BNSr/w25(1-A)ArmsAct

Petitioner(s)

SI of Police, Thiruvaiyaru P.S.

Respondent(s)

KARTHIK

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District Judge, Thanjavur

08-04-2026

Disposed

30-03-2026

Judgement

16-03-2026

Judgement

11-03-2026

Arguments

06-03-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

08-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The Principal Sessions Judge of Thanjavur acquitted Karthik of all charges under BNS sections 296(b) (abusing in filthy language) and 351(3) (criminal intimidation with deadly weapon), and Arms Act section 25(1-A) (possession of prohibited weapon). The court found critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witnesses testified despite being present at the occurrence site, the seizure document lacked the accused's signature creating doubt about weapon recovery, and the prosecution failed to produce any government notification establishing the sword as a prohibited weapon. Consequently, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt and acquitted him. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal Sessions Judge of Thanjavur acquitted Karthik of all charges under BNS sections 296(b) (abusing in filthy language) and 351(3) (criminal intimidation with deadly weapon), and Arms Act section 25(1-A) (possession of prohibited weapon). The court found critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witnesses testified despite being present at the occurrence site, the seizure document lacked the accused's signature creating doubt about weapon recovery, and the prosecution failed to produce any government notification establishing the sword as a prohibited weapon. Consequently, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt and acquitted him. 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

Principal District Court, Thanjavur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case