State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By Inspector Of Police vs Inbamani — 291/2024

Case under Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 Section 9, 10. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNVL110061812024

Evidence

Next Hearing

09th June 2026

e-Filing Number

09-11-2024

Filing Number

6108/2024

Filing Date

24-12-2024

Registration No

291/2024

Registration Date

24-12-2024

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Gudiyatham

Judge

3-Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham

FIR Details

FIR Number

03

Police Station

AWPS GUDIYATHAM

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

CHILD MARRIAGE RESTRAINT ACT, 1929 Section 9, 10

Petitioner(s)

State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By Inspector Of Police

Adv. Inspector of Police

Respondent(s)

Inbamani

Panneer

Mythili

Kanchana

Kanmani

Raja

Kavitha

Thamilarasi

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham

19-05-2026

Evidence

09-04-2026

Issue of Service

06-04-2026

Issue of Service

13-03-2026

Evidence

12-02-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

24-11-2025
Copy of Deposition

Case Summary: 291/2024 Court: Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham, Vellore District Date: 24 November 2025 This document records the witness depositions (P.W.3 Shankar and P.W.4 Shivakumar) in a criminal case involving child marriage allegations. Both witnesses testified that they signed a document approximately 2-3 years prior at police request but claimed no knowledge of the case details. During cross-examination by the respondents' counsel, both witnesses retracted their statements, admitting they had provided false testimony in favor of the respondents. No final judgment or order on the substantive case petition is documented in this excerpt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 291/2024 Court: Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham, Vellore District Date: 24 November 2025 This document records the witness depositions (P.W.3 Shankar and P.W.4 Shivakumar) in a criminal case involving child marriage allegations. Both witnesses testified that they signed a document approximately 2-3 years prior at police request but claimed no knowledge of the case details. During cross-examination by the respondents' counsel, both witnesses retracted their statements, admitting they had provided false testimony in favor of the respondents. No final judgment or order on the substantive case petition is documented in this excerpt. 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

Judicial Magistrate Court, Gudiyatham All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case