The Sub Inspector of Police, Kavarapettai PS vs Alex A — 315/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b),118(1),351(3). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 11th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTR360026702025
e-Filing Number
28-08-2025
Filing Number
2566/2025
Filing Date
29-08-2025
Registration No
315/2025
Registration Date
06-10-2025
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gummidipoondi
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Gummidipoondi
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Sub Inspector of Police, Kavarapettai PS (Police Station)
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Alex A
Sarathi Alias appu A2
Priyan Alias jeba A3
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Gummidipoondi
Disposed
Judgement
Questioning
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 06-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 04-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 02-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 13-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The District Criminal Court acquitted three accused persons of charges under BNS sections 296(b), 118(1), 351(3) (causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and criminal intimidation with death threat), finding reasonable doubt about whether the alleged assault and threats actually occurred. The court determined that prosecution witnesses, including the complainant and victim, provided inconsistent statements, the investigating officer's testimony lacked credibility regarding evidence collection procedures, and the material facts of the incident remained unproven beyond reasonable doubt. Applying the principle that doubt benefits the accused, the court discharged the defendants and ordered destruction of seized articles after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The District Criminal Court acquitted three accused persons of charges under BNS sections 296(b), 118(1), 351(3) (causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and criminal intimidation with death threat), finding reasonable doubt about whether the alleged assault and threats actually occurred. The court determined that prosecution witnesses, including the complainant and victim, provided inconsistent statements, the investigating officer's testimony lacked credibility regarding evidence collection procedures, and the material facts of the incident remained unproven beyond reasonable doubt. Applying the principle that doubt benefits the accused, the court discharged the defendants and ordered destruction of seized articles after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts