Suresh vs State Government the Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi — 99/2026
Case under Sc / St (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 4(2)Provisio. Disposed: Contested--CLOSED on 21st April 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNTS010000532026
e-Filing Number
04-12-2025
Filing Number
37/2026
Filing Date
03-01-2026
Registration No
99/2026
Registration Date
12-01-2026
Court
Principal District Court, Tenkasi
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
21st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--CLOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Suresh
Adv. C Sureshkumar
Respondent(s)
State Government the Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge
Disposed
Appearance
Appearance
Appearance
Appearance
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-04-2026 | Appearance | |
| 26-03-2026 | Appearance | |
| 17-03-2026 | Appearance | |
| 10-03-2026 | Appearance |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi dismissed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition as not maintainable, holding that the petitioner failed to establish "wilful neglect" under Section 4(1) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which requires clear material indicating intentional or deliberate neglect supported by prior administrative findings. The court found the petition procedurally defective for impleading high-ranking officials without specific allegations, failing to exhaust statutory remedies, and seeking relief beyond the court's jurisdiction; however, it permitted the petitioner to approach the Special Court under Section 200 Cr.P.C. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Principal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi dismissed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition as not maintainable, holding that the petitioner failed to establish "wilful neglect" under Section 4(1) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which requires clear material indicating intentional or deliberate neglect supported by prior administrative findings. The court found the petition procedurally defective for impleading high-ranking officials without specific allegations, failing to exhaust statutory remedies, and seeking relief beyond the court's jurisdiction; however, it permitted the petitioner to approach the Special Court under Section 200 Cr.P.C. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts