Palai Rafi@ Mohamed Rafi vs. State Of Tamil Nadu
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Fixed Date by Court
Before:
Hon'ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal
Stage:
BAIL MATTERS
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
28 Aug 2024
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.16 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5170/2024
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-03-2024 in CRLMP(MD) No. 3413/2024 in CRLOP(MD) No.10257/2022 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras At Madurai)
PALAI RAFI @ MOHAMED RAFI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondent(s)
(IA No.88270/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.88271/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. )
Date : 28-08-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL
| For Petitioner(s) | Mr. C.R.Jaya Sukin, Adv.<br>Ms. Yasmeen, Adv.<br>Ms. Deepmala, Adv.<br>Mr. Gulab Chandra Yadav, Adv.<br>Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR | |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR<br>Mr. C Kranthi Kumar, Adv.<br>Mr. Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Adv.<br>Mr. Danish Saifi, Adv.<br>Mr. Naman Dwivedi, Adv.<br>Mr. Sarathraj B, Adv.<br>Ms. Aswani Satheesh, Adv. |
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
It is a case relating Sections 153, 294(b), 504, 505(i)(c) and 505(ii) of the Indian Penal Code initiated against the petitioner and the other accused persons by the respondent police. The order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the High Court which is presently being challenged by the petitioner before this Court whereas the Digitally signed by Nirmala Negi Date: 2024.08.30 18:17:14 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified
petitioner and other accused persons have been asked to render an apology and not only that, but after the application/petition was moved by the petitioner, even a choice has been given to the petitioner as regards the newspaper considering the expenses involved.
We see absolutely no reason to interfere with the matter, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
The present petition is, accordingly, dismissed along with pending application(s), if any.
(NIRMALA NEGI) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)