Sub Inspector of Police, Maruvoor P.S. vs Senthilnathan — 460/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 392IPC. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 18th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTJ160034672025
Filing Number
3463/2025
Filing Date
09-06-2018
Registration No
460/2025
Registration Date
09-06-2018
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvaiyaru
Judge
2-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sub Inspector of Police, Maruvoor P.S.
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Senthilnathan
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Questioning
Questioning
Trial
Trial
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 11-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 03-03-2026 | Trial |
| 24-02-2026 | Trial |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Thiruvaiyaru acquitted the accused Senthilnathan of charges under Indian Penal Code Section 392 (dacoity) in case CC.460/2025, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that while a gold chain worth Rs. 75,000 was stolen from the complainant on October 26, 2017, the state could not establish the accused's direct involvement through credible witness identification or proper legal procedures, particularly noting the accused was not identified by witnesses and the confessional statement relied upon was not properly documented under legal requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Thiruvaiyaru acquitted the accused Senthilnathan of charges under Indian Penal Code Section 392 (dacoity) in case CC.460/2025, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that while a gold chain worth Rs. 75,000 was stolen from the complainant on October 26, 2017, the state could not establish the accused's direct involvement through credible witness identification or proper legal procedures, particularly noting the accused was not identified by witnesses and the confessional statement relied upon was not properly documented under legal requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts