Bombay High Court

SANDEEP POPATRAO KOTHAVADE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISMISSED

Holding

The petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Summary

The petitioners, Sandeep Popatrao Kothavade and another, filed a criminal writ petition in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad bench. The court directed them on 20 June 2022 to submit written notes of arguments, which they failed to do. The petitioners also did not appear before the court thereafter. The court observed that the petitioners appeared disinterested in prosecuting the matter. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution, along with the pending criminal application.

Issues considered

Whether the criminal writ petition should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the petitioners' failure to comply with court directions and appear before the court

Subjects

writ petition
criminal procedure
want of prosecution
high court
dismissal

Judgment

                                  (1)
                                                 20 Cri.WP-1093.2021.odt
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD
     20 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1093 OF 2021
                       WITH
       CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2930 OF 2021
                  IN WP/1093/2021

      SANDEEP POPATRAO KOTHAVADE AND ANOTHER
                       VERSUS
        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                   …
                       None for the petitioners.
            Mr. S.J. Salgare, A.P.P. for respondents-State.
                            ...
                  CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
                          VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                  DATED : 7 SEPTEMBER 2026.

Per Court :

1.    None for the petitioners.

2.    The record shows that under order dated 20th June 2022,
direction was given to the learned counsel for the petitioners to
submit written notes of arguments.          However, thereafter the
petitioners neither submitted written notes of arguments nor
they circulated the matter till today.

3.    Today also none appeared for the petitioners.           Thus, it
appears that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting
the matter, and therefore, the petition stands dismissed for
want of prosecution alongwith pending criminal application.


(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV)                 (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
       JUDGE                                    JUDGE




VD_Dhirde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…