Vengadachalam vs Ayyasamy — 1107/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 175(3). Disposed: Uncontested--Allowed on 05th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNTS090065022025
Filing Number
6501/2025
Filing Date
03-Dec-2025
Registration No
1107/2025
Registration Date
03-Dec-2025
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Sankarankovil
Judge
4-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
05-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Allowed
Last updated 12-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Vengadachalam
Adv. KARUPPASAMY.S
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ayyasamy
-
2.Thamizharasi
-
3.Krishnasamy
-
4.S.I.of Police, Kuruvikulam P.S.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
The court directed Kuruvikulam Police Station to register an FIR against the three accused parties for allegedly assaulting the complainant, uttering obscene words, threatening to kill him, and demolishing his compound wall. The magistrate rejected the police's argument that the case could be closed based on encroachment findings, holding that civil property disputes do not justify closing criminal investigations into alleged assault and threats, and that detailed investigation into the cognizable offences is necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial Magistrate
-
03-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate
-
02-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate
-
26-Feb-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate
-
13-Feb-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate
-
30-Jan-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate
-
20-Jan-2026
Enquiry
Judicial Magistrate
-
17-Dec-2025
Issue of Process
Judicial Magistrate
-
03-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1107/2025
The court directed Kuruvikulam Police Station to register an FIR against the three accused parties for allegedly assaulting the complainant, uttering obscene words, threatening to kill him, and demolishing his compound wall. The magistrate rejected the police's argument that the case could be closed based on encroachment findings, holding that civil property disputes do not justify closing criminal investigations into alleged assault and threats, and that detailed investigation into the cognizable offences is necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts