PEWing Kottakuppam vs Senthilkumar — 253/2025

Case under Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(h),4(1)(a),14A,4(1)(C),4(1)(A). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 26th March 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNVP360016932025

Case disposed

Filing Number

1693/2025

Filing Date

20-05-2025

Registration No

253/2025

Registration Date

20-05-2025

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Vanur

Judge

3-Judicial Magistrate Vanur

Decision Date

26th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

31

Police Station

P.E. Wing Kottakuppam

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(h),4(1)(a),14A,4(1)(C),4(1)(A)
Mp/2/2026 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section PEWing Kottakuppam
Mp/3/2026 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section PEWing Kottakuppam

Petitioner(s)

PEWing Kottakuppam

Respondent(s)

Senthilkumar

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Judicial Magistrate Vanur

26-03-2026

Disposed

18-03-2026

Evidence

16-03-2026

Evidence

05-03-2026

Evidence

08-01-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

26-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary of Case 253/2025 The Magistrate Court in Kottakuppam acquitted respondent Senthilkumar of charges under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Amendment Act 2024 (Sections 4(1)(a), 4(1)(C), 4(1)(h), 4(1)(A), 14(A)) for alleged illegal liquor possession. The court found significant evidentiary gaps: investigating officers failed to provide credible witness testimonies, the chain of custody for seized brandy bottles was compromised, and conflicting police statements undermined the case. The court held that without reliable corroboration and given procedural irregularities, the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, rendering the accused not the offender in this case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

05-03-2026
Deposition
casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 253/2025 The Magistrate Court in Kottakuppam acquitted respondent Senthilkumar of charges under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Amendment Act 2024 (Sections 4(1)(a), 4(1)(C), 4(1)(h), 4(1)(A), 14(A)) for alleged illegal liquor possession. The court found significant evidentiary gaps: investigating officers failed to provide credible witness testimonies, the chain of custody for seized brandy bottles was compromised, and conflicting police statements undermined the case. The court held that without reliable corroboration and given procedural irregularities, the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, rendering the accused not the offender in this case. 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

Judicial Magistrate Court, Vanur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case