Bombay High Court

Ramesh Vasant NikumkhversusThe State of Maharashtra

Decided: 30 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court held that there was no intentional disobedience of its order and therefore no contempt.

Summary

The High Court noted that the order dated 29 June 2026, issued by the same Court, had been fully complied with by the parties. A copy of the order was furnished to the petitioner's counsel. The Court found no evidence of intentional disobedience of its order, which is the essential element for contempt. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed without any costs. The Court further clarified that any future contentions regarding the order remain open to all parties.

Issues considered

Whether the alleged non‑compliance amounted to contempt of court due to intentional disobedience of the order dated 29 June 2026.

Subjects

contempt of court
order compliance
civil appellate jurisdiction
costs
rights of parties

Judgment

                                                                                                 904- CP-531-2026.DOC



                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                           CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 531 OF 2026
                                                          IN
                                             WRIT PETITION NO. 3817 OF 2024


                       Ramesh Vasant Nikumkh                                     ...Petitioner
                             Versus
                       The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                           ...Respondents
                                                               _______

                       Mr. Anandsingh Bayas, with Ajay Sabale, for Petitioner.
                       Mr. Aditya R Deolekar, AGP for Respondents-State.
                       Mr Anand Kulkarni, for Respondent No.6.
                                                          _______

                                                            CORAM:        G. S. KULKARNI &
                                                                          DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

                                                            DATE:         30 SEPTEMBER 2026

                       P.C.

                       1.        The order dated 29th June 2026 passed by this Court has already been
                       complied. A copy of the order is also being furnished to the advocate of the
                       Petitioner.

                       2.        In this view of the matter, there is no intentional disobedience of the order
                       passed by this Court.

                       3.        The Contempt Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

                       4.        However, in regard to the contentions, if any, on the order so passed, all
                       rights and contentions of all the parties are expressly kept open.




                       (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)                                   (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)


          Digitally
          signed by
          SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH
SHIVGAN
          SHIVGAN
          Date:
                                                            Page 1 of 1
          2026.09.30
          15:40:35     Shivgan
          +0530

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.