Pandi vs Police Department rep by Inspector of police, Senthamaram PS Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 755/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 09th March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNTS010012412026

Case disposed

Filing Number

990/2026

Filing Date

05-03-2026

Registration No

755/2026

Registration Date

05-03-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Tenkasi

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

Pandi

Adv. Thiru.S.Pasumpon Selvakumar

Respondent(s)

Police Department rep by Inspector of police, Senthamaram PS (Police Station) Advocate - Public Prosecutor

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District Judge

09-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

Enquiry

05-03-2026

Enquiry

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Copy of Order

Summary: The Tenkasi Sessions Court dismissed the bail petition of Pandi (accused A2), who was arrested for forging insurance policies under IPC sections 465, 468, 469, and 420. The court found credible evidence that the accused, acting as an insurance agent, fabricated fake motor insurance policies and defrauded HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company. Rejecting bail despite 39 days of incarceration and a prior High Court dismissal, the court determined that custodial interrogation remained necessary for the ongoing investigation, considering the gravity of the offense and the accused's criminal antecedents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Tenkasi Sessions Court dismissed the bail petition of Pandi (accused A2), who was arrested for forging insurance policies under IPC sections 465, 468, 469, and 420. The court found credible evidence that the accused, acting as an insurance agent, fabricated fake motor insurance policies and defrauded HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company. Rejecting bail despite 39 days of incarceration and a prior High Court dismissal, the court determined that custodial interrogation remained necessary for the ongoing investigation, considering the gravity of the offense and the accused's criminal antecedents. 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