Bombay High Court

YUNNUS KARIMSAB KAMBLEversusATMARAM SHIVANNA HIRAPURE AND ANR.

Disposal: Disposed off as Withdrawn
Bench: SANDESH D PATIL

Holding

The petition is allowed to be withdrawn, with liberty to approach the Sessions Court.

Summary

The petitioners sought leave to appeal in a criminal matter but, after deciding to file an appeal before the Sessions Court in accordance with the precedent set in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 SCC Online SC 1320), they requested the withdrawal of the present petition. The learned counsel argued that the petition could be withdrawn and that any delay incurred would be considered by the Sessions Court under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The Court, after considering the request, permitted the withdrawal and granted the petitioners liberty to approach the Sessions Court. It also noted that the time spent before this Court would be taken into account for condoning delay under the Limitation Act. Consequently, the petition was disposed of as withdrawn.

Issues considered

Whether the petition for leave to appeal may be withdrawn at the petitioners' request?
Whether the period spent prosecuting the petition before this Court will be considered by the Sessions Court under Section 14 of the Limitation Act?

Legislation cited

Limitation Act — s. 14

Subjects

withdrawal of petition
leave to appeal
criminal appellate jurisdiction
Limitation Act
Section 14

Judgment

                                                           15. ALP 194-2018.doc

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

      APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PVT.) NO.114 OF 2019

Yunnus Karimsab Kamble                              ..    Applicant
        Versus
Atmaram Shivanna Hirapure & Anr.                    ..    Respondents
                                       …..
Mr. Ramdas Hake Patil (Through V.C.) a/w Ms. Vaishnavi R. Gaikwad
for the Applicant.
Mr. Ashish A. Chavan i/b Mr. Raghvendra B. Kulkarni for the
Respondent No.1.
                              …..

                              CORAM : SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
                              DATED : 12th JUNE 2026


P.C.:-

1.           Mr. Ramdas Hake Patil, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners

submits that he would file an Appeal before the learned Sessions

Court, as per the Judgment and Order passed in the matter of

Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran etc., reported in 2025 SCC

OnLine SC 1320. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners, therefore,

prays to withdraw the present Petition. At his request, the Petition is

allowed to be withdrawn, with liberty to approach the Ld. Sessions

Court.


RaJesh Chittewan, PS                                                         1/2
                                                          15. ALP 194-2018.doc

2.           Needless to say that the time spent by the Petitioners in

prosecuting before this Court would be considered by the learned

Sessions Court while condoning the delay under Section 14 of the

Limitation Act.


3.           The Petition is disposed of as withdrawn.




                                               (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)




RaJesh Chittewan, PS                                                        2/2
                       Digitally signed
 RAJESH                by RAJESH
                       VASANT
 VASANT                CHITTEWAN
 CHITTEWAN             Date: 2026.06.15
                       10:22:11 +0530

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…