State Government by the Inspector of Police, Thanjavur East Police Station vs M. Karthikeyan(Absconding) Advocate - Kannan S — 50/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 392. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 29th April 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTJ050005672021
Filing Number
567/2021
Filing Date
03-03-2021
Registration No
50/2021
Registration Date
08-03-2021
Court
Judicial Magistrate Courts, Thanjavur
Judge
7-Judicial Magistrate No.I
Decision Date
29th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
81
Police Station
Thanjavur East Police Station
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government by the Inspector of Police, Thanjavur East Police Station
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
M. Karthikeyan(Absconding) Advocate - Kannan S
Hari Prabu
Hearing History
Judge: 7-Judicial Magistrate No.I
Disposed
Questioning
Questioning
Questioning
Judgement
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 15-04-2026 | Questioning |
| 06-04-2026 | Questioning |
| 01-04-2026 | Questioning |
| 24-03-2026 | Judgement |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Tanjore District Court acquitted the second accused (Haribhirau) under IPC Section 392 (dacoity), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. While eyewitness testimonies established that a gold chain was stolen from the victim on January 24, 2021, the court determined that the evidence did not sufficiently establish the second accused's involvement in the crime, applying the benefit of doubt in his favor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The Tanjore District Court acquitted the second accused (Haribhirau) under IPC Section 392 (dacoity), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. While eyewitness testimonies established that a gold chain was stolen from the victim on January 24, 2021, the court determined that the evidence did not sufficiently establish the second accused's involvement in the crime, applying the benefit of doubt in his favor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts