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

Case disposed

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

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 392IPC
MP/1/2025 Classification : Others Section SenthilnathanSub Inspector of Police, Maruvoor P.S

Petitioner(s)

Sub Inspector of Police, Maruvoor P.S.

Adv. App

Respondent(s)

Senthilnathan

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Judicial Magistrate

18-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Questioning

11-03-2026

Questioning

03-03-2026

Trial

24-02-2026

Trial

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

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

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvaiyaru All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case