Gingee P.S vs Mayakannan — 110/2020

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,294(b),323,354,506(1). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNVP180002852020

Filing Number

285/2020

Filing Date

25-Sep-2020

Registration No

110/2020

Registration Date

28-Sep-2020

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Gingee

Judge

1-Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

417

Police Station

Gingee P.S.

Year

2019

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 147,294(b),323,354,506(1)
Mp/1/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section MayakannanGingee P.S
Mp/2/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section Gingee P.S
Mp/3/2025 Classification : 320 Cr.pc Section MayakannanGingee P.S
Mp/4/2025 Classification : 311 Cr.pc Section MayakannanGingee P.S
Mp/5/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section Gingee P.S
Mp/7/2026 Classification : 311 Cr.pc Section Gingee P.SMayakannan
Mp/8/2026 Classification : 294 Cr.pc Section Gingee P.SMayakannan

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Gingee P.S

    Adv. APP.Gr.II

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Mayakannan

  2. 2.Lenin

  3. 3.Tamilvanan

  4. 4.Santhosh

  5. 5.Thirumurugan

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary of Case 110/2020 Case: Criminal Case No. 110/2020, Gingee Police Station (Crime No. 417/2019) Parties: Petitioner: Gingee P.S. | Respondents: Mayakannan, Lenin, Tamilvanan, and two others Decision: The court acquitted all five accused under IPC Sections 147 and 323 (and Section 506(i) and 294(b) for the first accused) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as government witnesses gave contradictory testimonies and lacked consistency. The court found credibility issues between the complainant and eyewitnesses, and noted that the investigating officer's evidence alone was insufficient to establish guilt. All accused were released under Section 248(1) CrPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  5. 17-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  7. 25-Feb-2026

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  8. 29-Dec-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  9. 17-Dec-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  10. 10-Dec-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  11. 10-Dec-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  12. 12-Nov-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  13. 07-Nov-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  14. 27-Oct-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  15. 27-Oct-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  16. 27-Oct-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  17. 27-Oct-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  18. 08-Sep-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  19. 21-Aug-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  20. 18-Aug-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  21. 02-Jul-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  22. 06-May-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  23. 10-Mar-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  24. 28-Jan-2025

    Part Heard

    Judicial Magistrate

  25. 24-Dec-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  26. 06-Nov-2024

    DepositionView PDF

  27. 06-Nov-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  28. 13-Sep-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  29. 22-Jul-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  30. 13-Jun-2024

    Trial

    Judicial Magistrate

  31. 15-May-2024

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  32. 30-Apr-2024

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  33. 15-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  34. 16-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  35. 10-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  36. 06-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  37. 03-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  38. 19-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  39. 16-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  40. 19-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  41. 12-Jun-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  42. 24-May-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  43. 12-Apr-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  44. 20-Feb-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  45. 20-Jan-2023

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  46. 04-Nov-2022

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  47. 21-Sep-2022

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  48. 03-Aug-2022

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate

  49. 15-Jun-2022

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  50. 04-May-2022

    Questioning

  51. 05-Apr-2022

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  52. 11-Jan-2022

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  53. 16-Dec-2021

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  54. 06-Dec-2021

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate

  55. 27-Sep-2021

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate

  56. 16-Jul-2021

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate

  57. 24-May-2021

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate

  58. 01-Apr-2021

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate

  59. 05-Feb-2021

    Issue of Process

    Judicial Magistrate

  60. 28-Dec-2020

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  61. 25-Sep-2020

    Case filed

    Registration No. 110/2020

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 110/2020 Case: Criminal Case No. 110/2020, Gingee Police Station (Crime No. 417/2019) Parties: Petitioner: Gingee P.S. | Respondents: Mayakannan, Lenin, Tamilvanan, and two others Decision: The court acquitted all five accused under IPC Sections 147 and 323 (and Section 506(i) and 294(b) for the first accused) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as government witnesses gave contradictory testimonies and lacked consistency. The court found credibility issues between the complainant and eyewitnesses, and noted that the investigating officer's evidence alone was insufficient to establish guilt. All accused were released under Section 248(1) CrPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case