Sub Inspector Of Police vs SEENU — 81/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 329(b) 296(b)118(1)351(3). Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNTV090005182025
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
e-Filing Number
17-08-2025
Filing Number
486/2025
Filing Date
23-08-2025
Registration No
81/2025
Registration Date
23-09-2025
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Valangaiman
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
FIR Details
FIR Number
179
Police Station
Valangaiman Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sub Inspector Of Police
Adv. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VALANGAIMAN PS
Respondent(s)
SEENU
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate
Arguments
Arguments
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-05-2026 | Arguments |
| 25-05-2026 | Arguments |
| 22-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 21-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 18-05-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CC.81/2025 Court: District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Valangaiman Parties: Sub Inspector of Police (Petitioner) vs. Seenu (Respondent) Outcome: Witness deposition (PW-6) recorded and cross-examination completed. The court examined multiple witnesses including the police officer and medical personnel. The respondent's cross-examination revealed inconsistencies in the investigation—including a two-day delay in case registration without explanation, missing evidence documentation, and failure to examine hospital records or nearby witnesses. The case pertains to alleged criminal assault charges under BNS sections 329(4), 296(b), 118(1), and 351(3). The proceeding records witness testimony and challenges to the prosecution's evidence before the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC.81/2025 Court: District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Valangaiman Parties: Sub Inspector of Police (Petitioner) vs. Seenu (Respondent) Outcome: Witness deposition (PW-6) recorded and cross-examination completed. The court examined multiple witnesses including the police officer and medical personnel. The respondent's cross-examination revealed inconsistencies in the investigation—including a two-day delay in case registration without explanation, missing evidence documentation, and failure to examine hospital records or nearby witnesses. The case pertains to alleged criminal assault charges under BNS sections 329(4), 296(b), 118(1), and 351(3). The proceeding records witness testimony and challenges to the prosecution's evidence before the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts