Bombay High Court
SWAMI KRUPA DEVELOPERS THROUGH SUNIL VASANT CHAWANDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution
Holding
The court dismissed the interim application for restoration of the petition on the ground of non‑prosecution.
Summary
The applicant, Swami Krupa Developers, filed an interim application seeking restoration of a writ petition. The court directed the applicant's counsel to consider the recent Supreme Court judgment in Sujal Vishwas Attavar v. State of Maharashtra before proceeding. The applicant failed to appear for the second hearing, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the application in light of the Supreme Court decision. Consequently, the court dismissed the interim application for non‑prosecution. The dismissal was based on the applicant's non‑appearance and the controlling precedent set by the Supreme Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the interim application for restoration of the writ petition should be entertained in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Sujal Vishwas Attavar v. State of Maharashtra.
- Whether the applicant's failure to appear constitutes grounds for dismissal for non‑prosecution.
Subjects
- restoration of petition
- interim application
- non‑prosecution
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
DTG /TSB 11-Ia-147-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 147 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 4222 OF 2023
Swami Krupa Developers … Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
_______________________________________
Adv. Tej Singh a/w Adv. Jaiprarkash Rajbhar and Adv. Prived Malushte for
Applicant in Ist Session.
None for Applicant in IInd Session.
Smt. P.P. Shinde, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
_______________________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATE : 5th October 2026
P.C. :
1) By a praecipe dated 27th September 2026, learned Advocate for
the Applicant sought urgent circulation to seek an order of restoration of the
Petition.
2) During the course of hearing, upon perusal of the record and
particularly the prayers sought in the Petition, we drew attention of learned
Advocate for the Applicant to the recent Supreme Court judgment in the case
of Sujal Vishwas Attavar vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2026 SCC
1/2
DTG /TSB 11-Ia-147-2026.doc
OnLine SC 798 and asked him to consider the same before seeking
restoration of the Petition.
3) At his request, the matter was kept back, to be called out in the
second session.
4) In the second session, when the matter was called out for
hearing, none appeared on behalf of the Applicant.
5) It appears that, the Applicant is not interested in pursuing the
Application in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Sujal Vishwas Attavar (supra).
6) Accordingly, Application is dismissed for non-prosecution.
( KAMAL KHATA, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
Digitally signed
by
DNYANESHWAR DNYANESHWAR
TULSHIRAM TULSHIRAM
GHUMNAR GHUMNAR
Date: 2026.10.08
15:54:08 +0530
2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.