STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE vs VISHWANATHAN — 8/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 296(b), 351(3). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 17th April 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTV070089012024
e-Filing Number
25-10-2024
Filing Number
8897/2024
Filing Date
25-10-2024
Registration No
8/2025
Registration Date
28-10-2024
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Mannargudi
Judge
2-Judicial Magistrate II
Decision Date
17th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
133
Police Station
PERUGAVALNTHAN P.S.
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Adv. INSPECTOR OF POLICE PERUGAVALANTHAN PS
Respondent(s)
VISHWANATHAN
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Judicial Magistrate II
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 15-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 08-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 23-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Tamil Nadu v. Vishwanathan (Case 8/2025) The court acquitted accused Vishwanathan of charges under BNS sections 296(b) and 351(3), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. Though the complainant testified that Vishwanathan threatened him with a sickle on September 27, 2024, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witnesses corroborated the crime, and the investigating officer's testimony contained inconsistencies regarding the timeline and recovery procedures. The court concluded insufficient evidence established Vishwanathan's culpability for criminal intimidation with a weapon. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: State of Tamil Nadu v. Vishwanathan (Case 8/2025) The court acquitted accused Vishwanathan of charges under BNS sections 296(b) and 351(3), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. Though the complainant testified that Vishwanathan threatened him with a sickle on September 27, 2024, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witnesses corroborated the crime, and the investigating officer's testimony contained inconsistencies regarding the timeline and recovery procedures. The court concluded insufficient evidence established Vishwanathan's culpability for criminal intimidation with a weapon. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts