Inspector Of Police, Valangaiman ps vs VIKNESH — 1/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code 1860 Section 324,506(2),294(b). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 27th April 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTV090000642025
e-Filing Number
04-01-2025
Filing Number
61/2025
Filing Date
14-02-2025
Registration No
1/2025
Registration Date
14-02-2025
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Valangaiman
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Inspector Of Police, Valangaiman ps (Police Station)
Respondent(s)
VIKNESH
RAVI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 08-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 30-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 26-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The District Criminal Court in Valangaiman acquitted two accused persons (Vignesh and Ravi) on April 27, 2026, finding that the prosecution failed to prove charges under IPC sections 294(b) (obscene language), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt), and 506(ii) (criminal intimidation) beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that witness testimony was contradictory and insufficient to establish guilt, particularly noting that the main complainant's testimony contradicted the government's case, and no corroborating independent witnesses were examined. Consequently, both accused were acquitted and released under section 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The District Criminal Court in Valangaiman acquitted two accused persons (Vignesh and Ravi) on April 27, 2026, finding that the prosecution failed to prove charges under IPC sections 294(b) (obscene language), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt), and 506(ii) (criminal intimidation) beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that witness testimony was contradictory and insufficient to establish guilt, particularly noting that the main complainant's testimony contradicted the government's case, and no corroborating independent witnesses were examined. Consequently, both accused were acquitted and released under section 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts