Bombay High Court
NEHA RAVINDRA JAISWAL Through her OP A holder Mr Ravindra JaiswalversusYashwant Uttamrao Jaiswal
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court restored the leave to appeal, holding that the prompt filing and sufficient cause justified setting aside the dismissal.
Summary
Neha Ravindra Jaiswal filed an application seeking restoration of a leave to appeal that had been dismissed for non‑prosecution on 13‑Nov‑2025. The restoration application was filed promptly on 3‑Dec‑2025. The respondent argued that the dismissal was due to consistent default and that restoration should not be permitted. The Court examined whether there was any undue delay and whether sufficient cause existed to set aside the dismissal. Finding no delay and accepting the applicant’s averments of sufficient cause, the Court allowed the restoration, recalled the dismissal order, and restored the leave to appeal. The interim application was thereafter disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a leave to appeal dismissed for non‑prosecution can be restored despite alleged default
- Whether the restoration application was filed within a permissible time frame
Subjects
- restoration of leave
- non‑prosecution
- default
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
- interim application
Judgment
51-IA-1830-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1830 OF 2026
IN
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PVT.) NO. 346 OF 2019
Neha Ravindra Jaiswal Through Her GPA Holder ...Applicant
Mr Ravindra Jaiswal
Versus
Yashwant Uttamrao Jaiswal and Anr. ...Respondents
SNEHA
NITIN ****
CHAVAN Mr. Satishkumar Chettiyar for the Applicant.
Digitally signed by
SNEHA NITIN
CHAVAN
Ms. Rahul Arote a/w Jay Suryavanshi, Nikita Gawai for Respondent
Date: 2026.09.11
10:40:43 +0530
No.1.
Ms. Sharmila Kaushik, APP for Respondent/State.
****
CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J.
DATE : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :
IA/1830/2026
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. This is an application by complainant seeking restoration of
leave application, which was dismissed for non prosecution on
13.11.2025. The restoration application is filed immediately on
03.12.2025.
3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 original accused
opposed the application contending that order of dismissal was
pursuant to consistent default and therefore restoration should not be
allowed.
4. Considering that there is no delay in filing application and
averments in the application, sufficient cause is made out.
Sneha Chavan 1
51-IA-1830-2026.doc
5. The application is allowed. Order dated 13.11.2025 is
recalled. Leave-application is restored. Interim Application is disposed
of in above terms.
ALP/346/2019
6. Stand over to 17.09.2026. To be listed for disposal after
urgent/circulated matters.
(M.M. SATHAYE, J.)
Sneha Chavan 2
Checking your session…