Bombay High Court

BHIMRAO BHAU MOTEversusGAJANAN BALU MORE AND ANR.

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The appeal is dismissed as infructuous because the earlier order resolved all matters.

Summary

The appellant, Bhimrao Bhau Mote, filed a criminal appeal against the respondents, Gajanan Balu More and another. The appellant's counsel argued that the order dated 09-10-2025 in Application for Leave to Appeal PBT No. 153 of 2022 left nothing for the appeal to address, and therefore the appeal should be declared infructuous. The respondent's counsel did not oppose this request. The Court considered whether any substantive issue remained for adjudication. Finding that the earlier order had resolved all matters, the Court held that the appeal was infructuous. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of without further hearing.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate disposition of an appeal when a prior order leaves no remaining issues for consideration?

Subjects

appeal
infructuous
criminal appellate jurisdiction
dismissal
procedural order

Judgment

                                                     123-APEAL-1066-2022.doc



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
               CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1066 OF 2022
Bhimrao Bhau Mote                                    … Appellant
     Versus
Gajanan Balu More And Anr.                  … Respondents
__________________________________________________________
Mr. Mahendra Deshmukh, for the Appellant through VC.
Mrs. S. N. Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent – State
__________________________________________________________

                             CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
                              DATE : 20th August, 2026.
P.C. :


1.       Mr. Mahendra Deshmukh, learned Advocate for the

Appellant states that in view of the order dated 09.10.2025 passed

in Application for Leave to Appeal PBT No. 153 of 2022, nothing

survives in this Appeal. He therefore requests for disposing of this

Appeal as infructuous.



2.       Mrs. S. N. Deshmukh, learned APP for the Respondent –

State does not oppose the request made by Mr. Mahendra

Deshmukh, learned Advocate for the Appellant.



3.       In view of the statement made by Mr. Mahendra Deshmukh,


Arjun                          1
                                                                         123-APEAL-1066-2022.doc



                      learned Advocate for the Appellant, this Appeal is disposed of as

                      infructuous.



                                                               (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)




ARJUN
KRISHNA
RODGE
Digitally signed by
ARJUN KRISHNA
RODGE
Date: 2026.08.21
19:39:44 +0530




                      Arjun                        2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…