THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NATTRAMPALLI P.S. vs SRINIVASAN Advocate - SIVA M — 123/2020

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),324,506(ii). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 24th March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNTU020027912020

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

2787/2020

Filing Date

23-09-2020

Registration No

123/2020

Registration Date

24-09-2020

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Tirupathur

Judge

9-Judicial Magistrate No.III, Thirupathur

Decision Date

24th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Section 294(b),324,506(ii)

Petitioner(s)

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NATTRAMPALLI P.S.

Adv. ASST PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Respondent(s)

SRINIVASAN Advocate - SIVA M

Hearing History

Judge: 9-Judicial Magistrate No.III, Thirupathur

24-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Questioning

17-03-2026

Questioning

10-03-2026

Evidence

03-03-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

24-03-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

SUMMARY: The Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the defendant (Srinivasan) of charges under IPC sections 294(b) (obscene language), 324 (causing hurt), and 506(ii) (criminal intimidation), finding the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Although the complainant initially testified about being abused and stabbed with a knife, the court found that the investigating officer's testimony alone was insufficient to establish guilt, especially when key witnesses contradicted or failed to corroborate the allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the defendant (Srinivasan) of charges under IPC sections 294(b) (obscene language), 324 (causing hurt), and 506(ii) (criminal intimidation), finding the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Although the complainant initially testified about being abused and stabbed with a knife, the court found that the investigating officer's testimony alone was insufficient to establish guilt, especially when key witnesses contradicted or failed to corroborate the allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Tirupathur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case