Bombay High Court

BHAUSAHEB SADASHIV JOGASversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution by the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Bhausaheb Sadashiv Jogas, filed a contempt petition (No. 303 of 2020) alleging that the State of Maharashtra and another party had revoked his rights. The court issued a simple notice to the respondents, but the petitioner failed to appear thereafter and did not pursue the matter. The court observed that the petitioner’s continuous absence indicated a lack of interest in prosecuting the petition. Consequently, the judges held that there was no basis to continue the contempt proceeding. The petition was therefore dismissed for non‑prosecution. The order was pronounced by Judges Sandipkumar C. More and Vaishali Patil‑Jadhav of the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court.

Issues considered

Whether the contempt petition should be dismissed on account of the petitioner’s failure to appear and prosecute the case?

Subjects

contempt of court
non‑prosecution
petition dismissal
court procedure
notice

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:37467-DB

                                                                           303.20CP

                                                 1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          910 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.303 OF 2020
                                   IN WP/14698/2019

                               BHAUSAHEB SADASHIV JOGAS
                                          VERSUS
                          THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANOTHER
                                              ...
                           AGP for Respondent-State : Mr.S.J.Salgare
                                              …
                                     CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                  VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ.

                                       DATE      :   18.08.2026
                 P.C. :


                               None for the petitioner. The order under contempt

                 is in respect of revocation of the petitioner by respondent

                 no.2. However, record shows that after issuance of simple

                 notice   to    the   respondents,    the   petitioner   remained

                 continuously absent and did not circulate this matter. It

                 appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting

                 the matter. In view of the same, the Contempt Petition stands

                 dismissed for non-prosecution.




                 [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]              [SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE]
                         JUDGE                             JUDGE

                 DDC

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…