SHO Taluk Police Station Villupuram vs Veerapathiran — 191/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),436. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 16th April 2026.

SC - Sessions Case

CNR: TNVP010046802025

Case disposed

Filing Number

4230/2025

Filing Date

20-08-2025

Registration No

191/2025

Registration Date

20-08-2025

Court

Principal District Court, Viluppuram

Judge

18-Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

Decision Date

16th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

407

Police Station

SHO Taluk Police Station Villupuram

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 294(b),436

Petitioner(s)

SHO (Station House Officer) Taluk Police Station Villupuram

Adv. Subramanian. T.S.

Respondent(s)

Veerapathiran

Hearing History

Judge: 18-Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

16-04-2026

Disposed

15-04-2026

Judgement

10-04-2026

Questioning

06-04-2026

Evidence

26-03-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

16-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary: Case 191/2025 - SHO Taluk Police Station Villupuram v. Veerapathiran Court Decision: The Additional District Judge acquitted the accused Veerapathiran of charges under IPC Sections 294(b) and 436, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that key prosecution witnesses recanted their statements during trial, and circumstantial evidence was insufficient to establish the crime. The accused is released and allowed to appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

23-01-2026
Deposition
23-01-2026
Deposition
07-02-2026
Deposition
17-03-2026
Deposition
18-03-2026
Deposition
10-04-2026
Deposition
casestatus.in Summary

Summary: Case 191/2025 - SHO Taluk Police Station Villupuram v. Veerapathiran Court Decision: The Additional District Judge acquitted the accused Veerapathiran of charges under IPC Sections 294(b) and 436, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that key prosecution witnesses recanted their statements during trial, and circumstantial evidence was insufficient to establish the crime. The accused is released and allowed to appeal. 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

Principal District Court, Viluppuram All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case