Bombay High Court
JOSEPH A. MATHEWSversusELIAS C. FERNANDES AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The criminal revision application is dismissed for non‑prosecution.
Summary
Joseph A. Mathews filed a criminal revision seeking to set aside the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai dated 5 May 2018 which acquitted Elias C. Fernandes of an offence under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The revision was listed on 5 March 2021 but the applicant failed to appear and made no effort thereafter to pursue the matter. The Court observed that the applicant was not desirous of prosecuting the revision. Consequently, the Court dismissed the revision application on the ground of non‑prosecution. The order was pronounced by Justice Ashish S. Chavan on 16 September 2026.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate course of action when a revision applicant fails to appear and does not pursue the proceedings?
- Whether a criminal revision can be dismissed for non‑prosecution under the procedural law.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 500
Subjects
- criminal revision
- Section 500 IPC
- non‑prosecution
- dismissal
Judgment
Digitally signed by SMITA
SMITA JOHNSON JOHNSON GONSALVES
GONSALVES Date: 2026.09.17 18:48:13
+0530
sg 37.revn481-18.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Revision Application No.481 of 2018
Joseph A. Mathews … Applicant
versus
Elias C. Fernandes And Anr. … Respondents
----
None for the Applicant.
None for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP, for Respondent No.2/ State.
----
Coram: Ashish S. Chavan, J.
Date: 16th September, 2026.
P.C.:
1. The Applicant/original complainant has preferred the present
criminal application against order and judgment dated 5 th May, 2018
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, thereby acquitting
Respondent No.1(original accused) on the offence punishable under
Section 500 of IPC.
2. Although the revision application was filed in the year 2018, on
5th March, 2021, when it was listed before this Court, none appeared
for the Applicant. Since then, neither the Counsel for the Applicant
Page 1 of 2
__________________________________________________
16th September, 2026
sg 37.revn481-18.docx
nor the Applicant has taken any efforts to take circulation of the
matter or to obtain any reliefs as prayed for.
3. From the conduct of the Applicant it is evident that the
Applicant is not desirous of prosecuting the criminal revision
application. In light of the same, revision application stands dismissed
for non-prosecution.
(Ashish S. Chavan, J.)
Page 2 of 2
__________________________________________________
16th September, 2026
Checking your session…