The State Of Maharashtra v. Madurai @ Madra Devendra Mariappan
Priya Soparkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.988 OF 2025 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 5433 OF 2024 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.467 OF 2019 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.511 OF 2019 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5433 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.506 OF 2019 Uma Mari Devendra ...Applicant/ Intervenor
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
The State of Maharashtra ...Applicant
Versus
Madurai @ Madra Devendra Mariappan
...Respondent
Mr. Vikas Tiwari with Mr. Rohit Gupta, for the Applicant/ Intervenor.
Ms. G. P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent/State.
CORAM:
SUMAN SHYAM & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.
DATED:
06th AUGUST, 2025.
PC:- 1.
Mr. Vikas Tiwari, learned counsel for the Applicant /Intervenor in Interim Application No.5433 of 2024 has tendered a Digitally signed by PRIYA RAJESH SOPARKAR Date:
2025.08.08 13:07:07 +0530 PRIYA RAJESH SOPARKAR
copy of e-mail thereby notifying the Respondent about the circulation of the aforesaid matter on today's board. Said e-mail is taken on record.
2.
The praecipe is moved for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 31st July, 2025.
3.
The aforesaid order was passed by this Court disposing of Interim Application No.5433 of 2024. On the date of hearing i.e. on 23rd July, 2025, Mr. Vikas Tiwari, learned counsel for the Intervenor had appeared in the said Interim Application No.5433 of 2024 and had also made his submissions, supporting the stand taken by the State and the submissions made by the learned APP appearing in the case. He had also made a request to the Court that in case the bail is not cancelled by the Court, then in that event, an additional condition, in the form of a restraint order, preventing the Respondent to enter the jurisdiction of Juhu Police Station be imposed by this Court as a condition of bail. However, due to inadvertence, the appearance of the learned counsel Mr. Vikas Tiwari for the Applicant/Intervenor or his above submissions did not find reflection in the order dated 31st July, 2025. 4.
Since it is not in dispute that the factual projection made in the order dated 31st July, 2025 does not suffer from any infirmity, the learned counsel for the Intervenor has fairly submitted that, on the merits of the order, he does not wish to make any further
arguments. But his presence be recorded in the order dated 31st July, 2025, alongwith a gist of his submissions. 5.
The submissions of Mr. Vikas Tiwari has not been opposed, hence, we direct that the presence of Mr. Vikas Tiwari, learned counsel be shown in the order dated 31st July, 2025 and his submissions, as noted above, be suitably reflected in the said order. 6.
In view of the above, the following may be added in the order dated 31st July, 2025 after paragraph 4 as paragraph 4(A) :- "Mr. Vikas Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor has supported the stand of the State and has adopted the arguments of the learned APP in an attempt to support the prayer for cancellation of bail. In addition to the above, Mr. Tiwari has submitted that if the Court is not inclined to allow the prayer for cancellation of bail, then, in that event, an additional condition of bail in the form of an order restraining the Respondent from entering the jurisdictional area of Juhu Police Station be passed."
7.
The order dated 31st July, 2025 be corrected accordingly and the corrected order be uploaded in the official website of the Bombay High Court. Rest of the order shall remain as it is.
8.
The praecipe stands disposed of.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.) {