The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court acquitted a Madurai man (A4), who had been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment plus Rs 1 lakh fine by the I Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai on 15.03.2023 for alleged possession of 24 kg ganja seized on 26.06.2021. The Court found that P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 conspired to secure the conviction by giving false evidence, noting the Section 42 information memo was a typed copy though P.W.2 claimed handwriting, the mahazar bore no signature of the appellant, and P.W.4 falsely claimed to have signed the memo. It set aside the conviction, ordered the fine refunded, directed the three officers to jointly pay Rs 10 lakh compensation within one month, and directed the Director General of Police to complete an independent conduct enquiry within one month. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →By judgment dated 15 October 2025 in Crl.A.(MD) No. 351 of 2023, the Madras High Court (Coram: K.K. Ramakrishnan, J., J.) returned findings adverse to 3 police personnel, namely: Sub-Inspector, C1 Thideer Nagar Police Station, Madurai; Police personnel, Thideer Nagar Police Station, Madurai; Police personnel, Thideer Nagar Police Station, Madurai, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 10 lakh (Rs 10,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Judgment dated 15 October 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Holding not recorded separately.
“From the above circumstances, this Court holds that the prosecution not only failed to prove the compliance of Section 42 but has also maneuvered to get conviction by leading false evidence. Therefore this Court is inclined to accept the argument …” (para 18)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 1,000,000.
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.
