Ahamed Mustafa vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep by Inpector of Police, Veeracholan PS — 98/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497. Disposed: Uncontested--Allowed on 18th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNVR200004712026
Filing Number
464/2026
Filing Date
03-Mar-2026
Registration No
98/2026
Registration Date
03-Mar-2026
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tiruchuli
Judge
1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
18-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Allowed
Last updated 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Ahamed Mustafa
Adv. S.Premkumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep by Inpector of Police, Veeracholan PS (Police Station)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-Mar-2026
MiscellaneousView PDF
The court ordered that the Samsung Galaxy A54 5G mobile phone, which is the subject matter of criminal case No. 46/2023 filed under IPC sections 143, 294(b), 427, 323, 452, and 506(2) at Veeracholan Police Station, be released to petitioner Ahamed Mustafa on conditions including a ₹10,000 bond and restrictions on selling or transferring the device during pendency of the case. The court found no evidence that Mustafa committed any crime using the phone and permitted its release subject to compliance with procedural safeguards such as submission of photographs, CDs, and certificates under Indian Evidence Act Section 65B. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
-
06-Mar-2026
Orders
District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
-
04-Mar-2026
Await Reports
District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
-
03-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 98/2026
-
02-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
The court ordered that the Samsung Galaxy A54 5G mobile phone, which is the subject matter of criminal case No. 46/2023 filed under IPC sections 143, 294(b), 427, 323, 452, and 506(2) at Veeracholan Police Station, be released to petitioner Ahamed Mustafa on conditions including a ₹10,000 bond and restrictions on selling or transferring the device during pendency of the case. The court found no evidence that Mustafa committed any crime using the phone and permitted its release subject to compliance with procedural safeguards such as submission of photographs, CDs, and certificates under Indian Evidence Act Section 65B. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts