Bombay High Court
BHAIAYALAL BABULAL AHIRE CORRECT NAME PRAKASH ALIAS BHAIYALAL BABULAL AHIRE ALIAS NAND AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The order dismissing the application is recalled and the criminal application is restored to its original file.
Summary
The applicant, Bhaiyalal Babulal Ahire, sought restoration of Criminal Application No. 2129 of 2026 after the court had dismissed it for non‑prosecution following a missed deadline to file an amendment. The court had earlier, on 18 June 2026, granted a two‑week period to file the charge‑sheet, which the applicant missed, filing the amendment on 2 July 2026, one day late. The applicant filed a petition requesting recall of the dismissal, arguing a bonafide reason for the delay. The bench examined the explanation, found it satisfactory, and held that the dismissal could be set aside in the interest of justice. Consequently, the court restored the criminal application to its original file, directed acceptance of the amendment, and disposed of the petition in the applicant’s favour.
Issues considered
- Whether a dismissal for non‑prosecution can be recalled when the amendment is filed after the stipulated deadline but with a bonafide explanation.
- Whether the court may restore a criminal application to its original position in the interest of justice.
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- amendment of charge-sheet
- restoration of proceedings
- non‑prosecution dismissal
- interest of justice
Judgment
1 901criappln3721.26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
901 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3721 OF 2026
IN APPLN/2129/2026
BHAIAYALAL BABULAL AHIRE CORRECT NAME PRAKASH ALIAS
BHAIYALAL BABULAL AHIRE ALIAS NAND AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Kulkarni Rashmi S.
APP for Respondents/State : Ms. Ashlesha S. Deshmukh
…
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATE : 07.09.2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicants and the
learned APP for the respondent- State.
2. The learned Advocate for the applicants submits that the
present application is for restoration of the Criminal Application bearing
No. 2129 of 2026, to its original position. She submits that by order
dated 18.06.2026, this Court had granted leave to carry out the
amendment, by filing of the charge-sheet within a period of 2 weeks.
However, the date on which the amendment is to be carried out that
period granted was expired, as she did not carry out the amendment.
However, the amendment has been carried out one day thereafter.
Though, the amendment is carried out, the effect of order dated
18.06.2026 has already taken place and the application stood dismissed
for non prosecution, as mentioned by the Court, vide order dated
2 901criappln3721.26
18.06.2026. She further submits that the present application is for
recalling of the said order.
3. I have perused the order passed by this Court on
18.06.2026, as well as the contents of the application as to the
explanation given in paragraph No. 3, as to why the amendment is
directed could not be carried out. The explanation is bonafide and
sufficient for the order to be recalled in the interest of justice, the
application be decided on merits.
4. For the aforesaid reasons the application stands allowed in
terms of prayer Clause (B).
5. The Criminal Application No. 2129 of 2026 stands restored
to its original file.
6. The office is directed to accept the amendment, which is
carried out by the applicant on 02.07.2026.
7. The application stands allowed and disposed of.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)
mahajansb/
Checking your session…