D. KISHORE KUMAR vs The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur - 602001. Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 2/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438, r/w 440. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 27th April 2026.

Case disposed

CRLR - Criminal Revision Petition

CNR: TNTR010004652026

e-Filing Number

19-01-2026

Filing Number

326/2026

Filing Date

20-Jan-2026

Registration No

2/2026

Registration Date

27-Jan-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Tiruvallur

Judge

3-I Additional District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

27-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 20-May-2026

FIR Details

Police Station

Thiruvallur Town Police Station

Year

0

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438, r/w 440

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.D. KISHORE KUMAR

    Adv. Adam S.K

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur - 602001. Advocate - Public Prosecutor

  2. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Opposite to Combined Court Campus

    Adv. Public Prosecutor

  3. 3.The Inspector of Police, B1, Thiruvallur Town Police Station, Thiruvallur.

    Adv. Public Prosecutor

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 27-Apr-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Summary: The court allowed the criminal revision petition and set aside the trial court's dismissal order. Finding prima facie evidence of criminal trespass, the court directed police to register an FIR after individuals allegedly surveyed the petitioner's land without authorization on two occasions (May 9 and 12, 2025), despite the petitioner having valid title confirmed by revenue authorities. The court held that FIR registration is mandatory when a complaint discloses a cognizable offense, and police should not be prevented from investigating at the initial stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  4. 22-Apr-2026

    Orders

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  5. 21-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  6. 09-Apr-2026

    Await Records

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  7. 30-Mar-2026

    Await Records

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  8. 11-Mar-2026

    Await Records

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  9. 27-Feb-2026

    Issue of Service

    I Additional District and Sessions Judge

  10. 27-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 20-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court allowed the criminal revision petition and set aside the trial court's dismissal order. Finding prima facie evidence of criminal trespass, the court directed police to register an FIR after individuals allegedly surveyed the petitioner's land without authorization on two occasions (May 9 and 12, 2025), despite the petitioner having valid title confirmed by revenue authorities. The court held that FIR registration is mandatory when a complaint discloses a cognizable offense, and police should not be prevented from investigating at the initial stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case