Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Tripura · body

2025 DAILYLAW 795 (TRI)

Dhyan Foundation Gaushala v. The State of Tripura and Ors

Crl.Petn./19/2025 · 2025-04-30

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_ IA No.01 of 2025 IN Crl. Petn. No.19 of 2025(D/O) Dhyan Foundation Gaushala ...... Applicant(s) V E R S U S State of Tripura and others ..…. Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Raju Gupta, Advocate, Ms. Nidhi Mishra, Advocate, Ms. Shivani Dugam, Advocate, Mr. Anupam Baidya, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, Public Prosecutor. HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH =O=R=D=E=R= 28/05/2025 This matter has been posted on IA No.01 of 2025 for compliance of the order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Belonia in BLN P.S Case No.14 of 2025. The said order was under challenge in the Criminal Petition No.19 of 2025 which has been disposed of by the judgment dated 30.04.2025. Mr. Raju Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant has produced a copy of the order dated 23.05.2025 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.8061 of 2025 assailing the order dated 30.04.2025 in CRLP No.19 of 2025 passed by this Court wherein the Apex Court while issuing notices has stayed the operation of the impugned order. He submits that the applicant has filed this interlocutory application to enforce compliance of the stringent conditions laid down in the order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Belonia against which the Criminal Petition No.19 of 2025 was preferred. He, however, submits that the matter is pending before the Apex Court after disposal of the Criminal Petition No.19 of 2025 and there is an interim order in their favour. Therefore, he does not press the instant interlocutory application No.01 of 2025. Mr. Raju Datta, learned Public Prosecutor also submits that since the matter is pending before the Apex Court and there is an interim order in favour of the petitioner, there is no occasion for pressing the interlocutory application in the disposed of matter. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant interlocutory application is disposed of. (APARESH KUMAR SINGH) CJ DIPESH DEB Digitally signed by DIPESH DEB Date: 2025.05.29 18:24:35 +05'30'