Bombay High Court
ABDUL LRAHIM IBRAHIM KAHIMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The application is infructuous and is therefore dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners filed a criminal application in 2010 seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra. The matter was adjourned multiple times, and the original criminal case (S.C.C. No. 213 of 2009) was disposed on 16 February 2016 because the complainant was absent and no steps were taken to restore the complaint. The petitioners did not appear for the hearing, and the State’s counsel submitted that the original proceedings were conclusively closed. The Court examined whether any cause of action survived after the disposal of the original case. Finding that the complainant had not sought restoration and no subsequent orders existed, the Court held that the pending application was infructuous. Consequently, the application was dismissed as having no surviving basis.
Issues considered
- Whether the pending criminal application survives after the original complaint was disposed due to the complainant’s absence and no restoration was sought.
Subjects
- infructuous application
- complaint restoration
- criminal procedure
- case disposal
- adjournment
Judgment
1 937APPLN2837.2010.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
937 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2837 OF 2010
Abdul Lrahim Ibrahim Kahim
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
...
Mr. S. A. Gaikwad APP for the State
Adv. Khan M.B.W. for Respondent No. 2
...
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 10TH SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. None appears for the Applicants even on the second call.
When the matter was called out in the morning, Advocate D. P.
Ghorpade appeared on behalf of the Applicants, holding for Mr. Bhosale,
and requested an adjournment. As the Application has been pending
before this Court since 2010, the learned Advocate for the Applicants
and the learned APP were directed to take instructions and ascertain
whether the cause raised in the Application survives.
2. In the second session, when the matter was again called
out, the learned APP submits that, on 16.02.2016, the original
proceedings came to be disposed of on the ground that the Complainant
was not present. From 16.02.2016 till date, no steps appear to have
been taken by the Original Complainant for restoration of the
Complaint. According to the learned APP, the record also does not
indicate that any such steps have been taken or that any subsequent
2 937APPLN2837.2010.odt
orders have been passed in the proceedings. The present proceedings
arise out of the order issuing process against the Applicants and the
Complaint. As the original S.C.C. No. 213 of 2009 pending before the
learned Jt. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nilanga, District Latur, itself
has been disposed of, nothing survives in the present Application. In
view of the above, the Application stands disposed of as infructuous.
3. The order dated 16.02.2016 passed by the learned JMFC,
Nilanga, Court No. 3, in the original proceedings is taken on record and
marked as “Exhibit X” for the purpose of identification.
[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ]
JUDGE
SG Punde
Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 11/09/2026 15:56:41
Checking your session…