Bombay High Court
RAJENDRA BANSI DOKHEversusREKHA RAJENDRA DOKHE AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The court allowed the restoration of the dismissed criminal application upon acceptance of the cost payment within the stipulated extended period.
Summary
The applicant sought restoration of Criminal Application No.3443/2023, which had been dismissed for failure to pay costs of Rs.1500 by the deadline of 06/07/2026. The court had earlier condoned a 140‑day delay in filing the revision, subject to that payment, and later extended the deadline by one week. The applicant tendered a demand draft, but the registry did not accept it, leading to dismissal. The applicant argued the non‑compliance was not deliberate and requested the court to allow restoration. After hearing both sides, the court permitted the restoration, directing the office to accept the demand draft if deposited within a week and to reinstate the criminal application to its original position.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal application dismissed for non‑compliance with a cost‑payment order can be restored upon subsequent payment.
- Whether the court may extend the time for payment of costs in such circumstances.
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- restoration of dismissed application
- non‑compliance
- extension of time
- costs payment
- demand draft
Judgment
3524.26appln
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
4 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3524 OF 2026
IN
IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3443 OF2023
IN REVNST/9471/2023
RAJENDRA BANSI DOKHE
VERSUS
REKHA RAJENDRA DOKHE AND ANOTHER
WITH
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 174 OF 2023
REKHA W/O. RAJENDRA DOKHE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
RAJENDRA S/O. BANSI DHOKE
…..
Mr H. P. Randhir, Advocate for Applicants in Cr.Appln/3524/2026
Mr P. H. Patil, Advocate h/f Mr P. B. Patil, Advocate for Respondents
in Cr.Appln/3524/2026
…..
CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.
DATE : 24th AUGUST, 2026
P. C. :
1. This is an application for restoration of Criminal
Application No.3443/2023 which was dismissed for non-compliance
of the order of this Court dated 22/06/2026.
2. This Court vide order dated 22/06/2026 was condoned the
delay of 140 days in filing criminal revision application, subject to
condition of payment of costs of Rs.1500/- to respondent No.2 on or
3524.26appln
(2)
before 06/07/2026, failing which, the application was stated to be
dismissed without further reference to the Court. Since the applicant
could not pay the said amount on or before 06/07/2026, he prayed for
extension of time. This Court, vide its order dated 14/07/2026,
extended time of one week to deposit the amount. However, the
despite tendering a demand draft for the same amount to the Registry,
the same was not accepted by the office. Learned Advocate for the
applicant submits that the since the demand draft was not accepted by
office, Criminal Application No.3443/2023 came to be dismissed. He
submits that non-compliance of the order of this Court is neither
deliberate nor intentional. He, therefore, submits that this application
may be allowed and Criminal Application No.3443/2023 may be
directed to be restored.
3. Learned Advocate for respondent strongly opposes this
application for restoration.
4. In view of submissions of learned Advocates for the
respective parties and for the reasons stated in the present application,
the same is allowed.
5. Demand draft of amount of Rs.1500/- be accepted by the
office, if deposited within a period of one week from today. After
3524.26appln
(3)
deposit of the said demand draft, Criminal Application No.3443/2023
be restored to its original position.
[SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.]
sjk
Checking your session…