The State Government of Represent by Inspector of Police in Alangulam ps vs ESAKKIMUTHU — 3/2026

Case under Arms Act, 1959 Section 25(1)(a) ARMS ACT. Disposed: Uncontested--CLOSED on 05th March 2026.

CRLR - Criminal Revision Petition

CNR: TNTS010004402026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

11-08-2025

Filing Number

342/2026

Filing Date

14-08-2025

Registration No

3/2026

Registration Date

23-01-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Tenkasi

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

05th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--CLOSED

Acts & Sections

Arms Act, 1959 Section 25(1)(a) ARMS ACT
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b), 132, 351(3),BNS

Petitioner(s)

The State Government of Represent by Inspector of Police in Alangulam ps (Police Station)

Adv. Inspector of police Alangulam police station

Respondent(s)

ESAKKIMUTHU

KARUTHAPANDI

Adv. Thiru.K.V.K.Appuranantham

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District Judge

05-03-2026

Disposed

23-02-2026

Issue of Service

07-02-2026

Issue of Service

23-01-2026

Issue of Service

Final Orders / Judgements

05-03-2026
Copy of Order

Summary The Principal Sessions Judge set aside the committal order against Esakkimuthu and Karuthapandi, finding that the Judicial Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to commit the case to Session Court. The court reasoned that the offences charged—weapon possession and threats under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Arms Act—are triable only by a First Class Magistrate, not exclusively by Session Courts, and thus committal was statutorily improper. The case was remitted back to the Judicial Magistrate for trial at the appropriate level. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal Sessions Judge set aside the committal order against Esakkimuthu and Karuthapandi, finding that the Judicial Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to commit the case to Session Court. The court reasoned that the offences charged—weapon possession and threats under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Arms Act—are triable only by a First Class Magistrate, not exclusively by Session Courts, and thus committal was statutorily improper. The case was remitted back to the Judicial Magistrate for trial at the appropriate level. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Principal District Court, Tenkasi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case