Bombay High Court
SANJAY (SANJU) BHEKHO YADAV AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The application is dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the applicants' failure to appear.
Summary
The applicants, Sanjay (Sanju) Bhekho Yadav and another, filed a criminal application seeking to quash FIR No.301 of 2016 registered at Kandivali Police Station for offences under Sections 408 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge‑sheet was filed on 12 June 2017, showing the applicant as absconding. The applicants and their counsel failed to appear before the Court on multiple dates despite adjournments. The State’s Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that the applicants were abusing the process of law and should not be indulged. Relying on the applicants’ non‑appearance and alleged absconding, the Court dismissed the application for non‑prosecution. The dismissal effectively leaves the FIR and its proceedings intact.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal application to quash an FIR can be entertained when the applicants are absent and alleged to be absconding
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 408
Subjects
- quash FIR
- non‑appearance
- default judgment
- criminal procedure
- Section 408 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- absconding litigant
Judgment
1-APL-357-2018.doc
Digitally signed
by GAYATRI
GAYATRI RAJENDRA
SHIMPI
RAJENDRA Date:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHIMPI 2026.01.12
21:04:51
+0530
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 357 OF 2018
Sanjay (Sanju) Bhekho Yadav & Anr. ... Applicants
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents
****
None present for the Applicants.
Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, APP for Respondent – State.
Mr. D. P. Mane – PSI, Kasturaba Marg Police Station.
****
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2026
P.C. :
1. By the present Application, Applicants have sought the
following substantive relief:-
“a) this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash and
set aside the FIR No.301 of 2016, registered with
Kandivali Police Station, for the offences u/s 408,34 of
Indian Penal Code and its consequential proceedings on
such terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the circumstances of the present case;”
2. On 5th January, 2026, the following order was made :-
“1. This matter was called out at 11.30 a.m. Neither
the Applicants nor the Advocate for the Applicants
appeared either physically in court or through V.C. Mode.
In order to afford an opportunity to the
Gayatri Shimpi 1
1-APL-357-2018.doc
Applicants/learned Advocate for the Applicants to appear
before this Court, this matter was kept post lunch.
2. This matter was again called out at 3.07 p.m..
Again neither the Applicants nor the Advocate for the
Applicants are present in the court either physically or
through V.C. Mode.
3. Mr. Sukanta Karmarkar, learned APP for the State
submits that charge-sheet in FIR No. 301 of 2016 has
been filed on 12th June, 2017. He submits that the
Applicant Sanjay(Sanju) Yadav is shown as absconding.
He submits that though the charge-sheet has been filed on
12th June, 2017, the Applicants have neither questioned
nor challenged the said charge-sheet in the present
Application.
4. As and by way of last indulgence, this Criminal
Application No. 357 of 2018 is adjourned to 8 th January,
2026 for dismissal.”
3. Today, this matter was called out at 11.24 a.m. Neither
the Applicants nor the Advocate for the Applicants were present
either physically or through V.C. mode, as such, the matter was
kept back. Matter was called out at 1.00 p.m. again neither the
Applicants nor the Advocate for the Applicants were present either
physically or through V. C. mode.
4. Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned APP for Respondents, on
instructions from his officer, reiterates that the Applicants are
Gayatri Shimpi 2
1-APL-357-2018.doc
absconding and therefore no indulgence be shown to such a
litigant who is abusing the process of law. He submits that the
conduct of the Applicants of not remaining present before this
Court and/or not being represented by an Advocate warrants
dismissal of the present Petition for non-prosecution.
5. Considering the request of Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned
APP and the absence of the Applicants / their Advocate before this
Court on 5th January, 2026 and today, this Court has no other
option but to dismiss the present Application for non-prosecution.
6. Criminal Application No. 357 of 2018 is dismissed.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Gayatri Shimpi 3
Checking your session…