State Government by Inspector of PEW PS Thanjavur. vs ANANDH Advocate - Rajeshkannn. A — 33/2025
Case under Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(A), 4(1)(C). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 12th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTJ050061252024
e-Filing Number
01-12-2024
Filing Number
6084/2024
Filing Date
03-12-2024
Registration No
33/2025
Registration Date
19-02-2025
Court
Judicial Magistrate Courts, Thanjavur
Judge
7-Judicial Magistrate No.I
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
562
Police Station
Prohibition Enforcement Wing Thanjavur
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government by Inspector of PEW PS (Police Station) Thanjavur.
Respondent(s)
ANANDH Advocate - Rajeshkannn. A
Hearing History
Judge: 7-Judicial Magistrate No.I
Disposed
Judgement
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 06-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 03-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 17-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The District Sessions Court I in Thanjavur acquitted the accused Anand under Section 4(1)(A) and 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 2024, finding the prosecution's charges not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps, including the absence of eyewitness testimony from the public, lack of the accused's own confession, and the arresting officer's failure to obtain the accused's fingerprint on the arrest memo, which substantially weakened the government's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The District Sessions Court I in Thanjavur acquitted the accused Anand under Section 4(1)(A) and 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 2024, finding the prosecution's charges not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps, including the absence of eyewitness testimony from the public, lack of the accused's own confession, and the arresting officer's failure to obtain the accused's fingerprint on the arrest memo, which substantially weakened the government's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts