State Government by the Inspector of police, Thanjavur East police station. vs Karthikeyan(Absconding) — 72/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 29th April 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTJ050006702021
Filing Number
670/2021
Filing Date
15-03-2021
Registration No
72/2021
Registration Date
26-03-2021
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
1340
Police Station
Thanjavur East Police Station
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government by the Inspector of police, Thanjavur East police station.
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Karthikeyan(Absconding)
Hariprabu
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 Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Tanjore acquitted the second accused under IPC Section 379 (theft) due to insufficient evidence. The court found critical gaps in the prosecution's case: the complainant's witnesses were only the accused's friends (not independent witnesses), key documentary evidence lacked proper authentication, and the confessional statement was obtained 9 days after the alleged incident with procedural irregularities. The court concluded the theft charge against the two-wheeler could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Tanjore acquitted the second accused under IPC Section 379 (theft) due to insufficient evidence. The court found critical gaps in the prosecution's case: the complainant's witnesses were only the accused's friends (not independent witnesses), key documentary evidence lacked proper authentication, and the confessional statement was obtained 9 days after the alleged incident with procedural irregularities. The court concluded the theft charge against the two-wheeler could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts