Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SAYYED AMJADKHAN PATHANversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Decided
Disposal
Allowed To be withdrawn

Holding

An interim application is dismissed where the applicant expressly indicates that it is not to be pressed.

Summary

The applicant, Sayeed Amjadkhan Pathan, filed an interim application in a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. Counsel for the applicant informed the court that the applicant no longer wished to pursue the application. The court noted this instruction and considered whether there was any reason to proceed despite the withdrawal. Since the applicant expressly indicated that the application was not to be pressed, the court found no basis to entertain it. Consequently, the interim application was dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether an interim application should be entertained when the applicant withdraws it

Subjects

  • interim application
  • withdrawal
  • court procedure
  • writ petition

Judgment

                                           1/1          15-IA-2009-26-IN-WP-4722-25.odt



                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                           INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2009 OF 2026
                                           IN
                              WRIT PETITION NO.4722 OF 2025

            Sayeed Amjadkhan Pathan                            .... Applicant

                          versus

            The Commissioner of Police,
            Pune City & Ors.                                   .... Respondents
                                              …....

            •     Ms. Aisha Z. Ansari, Advocate for Applicant.
            •     Ms. M. M. Deshmukh, APP for the State/Respondent.

                                   CORAM      : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
                                                ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
                                   DATE       : 22nd JUNE, 2026

            P.C. :


            1.            Learned counsel for the Applicant, on instructions,

                 states that the Applicant does not want to press this application.



            2.            Therefore, the application is dismissed as not pressed.




                     (ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.)              (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)


Nesarikar


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.