SHO Taluk Police Station Villupuram vs Deenadhayalan — 259/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 328. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

SC - Sessions Case

CNR: TNVP010055502025

Filing Number

5006/2025

Filing Date

09-Oct-2025

Registration No

259/2025

Registration Date

09-Oct-2025

Court

Principal District Court, Viluppuram

Judge

18-Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 25-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 328
Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products Acts 2003 Section 24(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHO (Station House Officer) Taluk Police Station Villupuram

    Adv. Subramanian. T.S.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Deenadhayalan

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The Additional District Court (Fast Track), Villupuram found the accused Deenadayalan NOT GUILTY of charges under Section 328 read with Section 24(1) of the COTPA Act 2003 (selling harmful tobacco products). The court determined the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to significant evidentiary gaps, inconsistent police witness testimonies, lack of private complainant witnesses, and procedural deficiencies in the investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  8. 06-Mar-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  9. 05-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  10. 05-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  11. 05-Mar-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  12. 24-Feb-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  13. 18-Feb-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  14. 11-Feb-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  15. 09-Feb-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  16. 05-Feb-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  17. 05-Feb-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  18. 05-Feb-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  19. 27-Jan-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  20. 20-Jan-2026

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  21. 11-Dec-2025

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  22. 08-Dec-2025

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  23. 27-Nov-2025

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  24. 19-Nov-2025

    Trial

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  25. 13-Nov-2025

    Questioning

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  26. 25-Oct-2025

    Appearance

    Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court)

  27. 09-Oct-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 09-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 259/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional District Court (Fast Track), Villupuram found the accused Deenadayalan NOT GUILTY of charges under Section 328 read with Section 24(1) of the COTPA Act 2003 (selling harmful tobacco products). The court determined the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to significant evidentiary gaps, inconsistent police witness testimonies, lack of private complainant witnesses, and procedural deficiencies in the investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case