Bombay High Court
MOHAMMED IRFAN CHOUDAHRYversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The revision application is dismissed for non‑prosecution.
Summary
The applicant, Mohammed Irfan Choudhary, filed a criminal revision challenging an order of the Additional Sessions Judge that partially allowed his discharge application and framed charges under multiple sections of the IPC and the Bombay Police Act. The revision was filed in 2018, but neither the applicant nor his counsel took any steps to advance the matter. The court observed that the applicant showed no desire to prosecute the application. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the revision for non‑prosecution. The judgment was delivered by Justice Ashish S. Chavan on 16 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the revision application should be dismissed on the ground of non‑prosecution by the applicant
Legislation cited
- Bombay Police Act — s. 135, 37(1)(a)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 332, 353, 504
Subjects
- non‑prosecution
- criminal revision
- discharge application
- charge framing
- dismissal
Judgment
Digitally signed by SMITA
SMITA JOHNSON JOHNSON GONSALVES
GONSALVES Date: 2026.09.17 18:48:12
+0530
sg 38.revnst554-18.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Revision Application (Stamp) No.554 of 2018
With
Criminal Application No. 530 of 2018
In
Criminal Revision Application (Stamp) No.554 of 2018
Mohammed Irfan Choudhary … Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra And Ors. … Respondents
----
None for the Applicant.
Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP, for Respondent No.1/ State.
None for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
PSI Waikar, Byculla Police Station, is present.
----
Coram: Ashish S. Chavan, J.
Date: 16th September, 2026.
P.C.:
1. The present revision application challenges an order dated 6 th
September, 2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai,
whereby the discharge application of the present Applicant was partly
allowed. The challenge is to the framing of charge under Sections
326, 324, 323, 332, 353, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 504 of IPC
Page 1 of 2
__________________________________________________
16th September, 2026
sg 38.revnst554-18.docx
and Section 37(1)(a) read with 135 of Bombay Police Act.
2. Although the petition was filed in the year 2018 till date, neither
the Counsel for the Applicant nor the Applicant has made any efforts
to get the matter circulated or obtain appropriate reliefs as prayed for.
3. From the conduct of the Applicant it is evident that the
Applicant is not desirous of prosecuting the application. Hence, the
application is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(Ashish S. Chavan, J.)
Page 2 of 2
__________________________________________________
16th September, 2026
Checking your session…