Muthulingam vs Valathy SHO — 111/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 480. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNVP180006562026

Filing Number

655/2026

Filing Date

03-Mar-2026

Registration No

111/2026

Registration Date

03-Mar-2026

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Gingee

Judge

1-Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 25-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 480

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Muthulingam

    Adv. Tr. V.Sakthivel., M.Sc.,B.L.,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Valathy SHO (Station House Officer)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Bail OrderView PDF

    The Judicial Magistrate Court, Gingee granted bail to Muthulingam, who was arrested for offences under BNS sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) and TNPHW Act. The court found that the injured person was discharged from hospital, investigation was partially complete with no serious objections from police, and continued detention was unnecessary after 9 days in custody. Bail was granted with conditions including Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties, restrictions on tampering with evidence/witnesses, and prohibition on absconding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Enquiry

    Judicial Magistrate

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    Service Pending-Notice

    Judicial Magistrate

  6. 03-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 03-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 111/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Judicial Magistrate Court, Gingee granted bail to Muthulingam, who was arrested for offences under BNS sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) and TNPHW Act. The court found that the injured person was discharged from hospital, investigation was partially complete with no serious objections from police, and continued detention was unnecessary after 9 days in custody. Bail was granted with conditions including Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties, restrictions on tampering with evidence/witnesses, and prohibition on absconding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case