SHO KKM PEW CR NO 481 2025 vs CHANDRASEKAR — 806/2025

Case under Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(C) 4(1)(A) 14A. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 09th June 2026.

Case disposed

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNVP360036452025

e-Filing Number

29-10-2025

Filing Number

3644/2025

Filing Date

01-Nov-2025

Registration No

806/2025

Registration Date

07-Nov-2025

Court

Judicial Magistrate Court, Vanur

Judge

3-Judicial Magistrate Vanur

Decision Date

09-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

481

Police Station

P.E. Wing Kottakuppam

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Tn Prohibition Act Section 4(1)(C) 4(1)(A) 14A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHO (Station House Officer) KKM PEW CR NO 481 2025

    Adv. Sun Inspector of Police

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CHANDRASEKAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: 806/2025 Court Decision: The court acquitted the respondent Chandrasekar of charges under Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act 2024, sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A), and 14(A), finding insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court determined that the prosecution witnesses' testimonies contained material contradictions and inconsistencies regarding the seizure of 40 bottles of MC Dowells Gold Indian Brandy on 11-10-2025. Specifically, witness statements about the vehicle registration number, seizure procedures, and handling of evidence lacked credibility. The court concluded that the respondent was not established as the person in possession of the contraband liquor, as the evidence did not definitively prove his culpability beyond doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  4. 04-Jun-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  5. 21-May-2026

    Judgement

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  6. 20-May-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  7. 19-May-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  8. 18-May-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  9. 15-May-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  10. 15-May-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  11. 12-May-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  12. 07-May-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  13. 29-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  14. 28-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  15. 17-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  16. 09-Apr-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  17. 26-Mar-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  18. 18-Mar-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  19. 17-Mar-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  20. 16-Mar-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  21. 13-Feb-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  22. 11-Feb-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  23. 28-Jan-2026

    Orders

    Judicial Magistrate Vanur

  24. 07-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 01-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 806/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 806/2025 Court Decision: The court acquitted the respondent Chandrasekar of charges under Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act 2024, sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A), and 14(A), finding insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court determined that the prosecution witnesses' testimonies contained material contradictions and inconsistencies regarding the seizure of 40 bottles of MC Dowells Gold Indian Brandy on 11-10-2025. Specifically, witness statements about the vehicle registration number, seizure procedures, and handling of evidence lacked credibility. The court concluded that the respondent was not established as the person in possession of the contraband liquor, as the evidence did not definitively prove his culpability beyond doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case