Bombay High Court

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORSversusANILKUMAR RAMNARAYAN AGRAWAL AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

Since the contempt order was complied with, the petition had no remaining relief and was therefore disposed of along with any pending civil application.

Summary

The petitioners, Anilkumar Ramnarayan Agrawal and others, filed a contempt petition (No. 224 of 2008) before the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court alleging non‑compliance with a prior contempt order. The State of Maharashtra filed a related civil application in the same proceedings. The petitioners’ counsel informed the Court that the order under contempt had been fully complied with. The Court examined whether any relief remained under the contempt petition or the civil application. Finding that the contempt order was satisfied, the Court held that nothing survived in the petition. Accordingly, the contempt petition and any pending civil application were disposed of. The order was pronounced by JJ Vaishali Patil‑Jadhav and JJ Sandipkumar C. More.

Issues considered

Whether the contempt petition should continue after the order under contempt has been complied with
Whether the pending civil application, if any, should also be disposed of in view of the compliance

Subjects

contempt of court
compliance
disposal of petition
civil application
High Court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43380

1 904 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 224 OF 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
904 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 224 OF 2008
IN WP/3950/2000
ANILKUMAR RAMNARAYAN AGRAWAL AND OTHERS
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
...
Adv. A. S. Bajaj, Advocate for the Petitioners
Adv. N. B. Patil, AGP for Respondents-State
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2588 OF 2010
IN CP/224/2008
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
VERSUS
ANILKUMAR RAMNARAYAN AGRAWAL AND ORS
…
Adv. N. B. Patil, AGP for applicant-State
Adv. A. S. Bajaj, Advocate for Respondents
...
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

DATED : 22/09/2026
Order ( Per Vaishali Patil-Jadhav, J. )

. The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the

order under contempt is complied with.

2. In view of the same, nothing survives in the contempt petition

and the same stands disposed of along with pending civil

application, if any.

( VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. )
shivani/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…