Roshanai SHO vs Ramaiya — 169/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,294(b),506(2). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 25th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNVP100053992024
e-Filing Number
09-10-2024
Filing Number
5368/2024
Filing Date
14-10-2024
Registration No
169/2024
Registration Date
14-10-2024
Court
Judicial Magistrate No. I Court, Tindivanam
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate I
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
271
Police Station
Roshanai P.S.
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Roshanai SHO (Station House Officer)
Respondent(s)
Ramaiya
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate I
Disposed
Judgement
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 17-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC 169/2024 Court Decision: The court acquitted all three defendants (Ramaiya, Gandhimathi, and Sarathi) of charges under IPC Sections 341 (wrongful restraint), 294(b) (obscene speech), and 506(2) (criminal intimidation). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt and ordered their release under Section 248(1) BNSS. Key Reasoning: The court noted significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies, contradictions in the FIR (date and time altered in multiple places), prior civil disputes between the parties, and witness statements from bystanders that did not support the prosecution's case. The court determined that reasonable doubt existed regarding the alleged incident on 8 July 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CC 169/2024 Court Decision: The court acquitted all three defendants (Ramaiya, Gandhimathi, and Sarathi) of charges under IPC Sections 341 (wrongful restraint), 294(b) (obscene speech), and 506(2) (criminal intimidation). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt and ordered their release under Section 248(1) BNSS. Key Reasoning: The court noted significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies, contradictions in the FIR (date and time altered in multiple places), prior civil disputes between the parties, and witness statements from bystanders that did not support the prosecution's case. The court determined that reasonable doubt existed regarding the alleged incident on 8 July 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts