Bombay High Court

VISHAL CHANDRAKANT GAIKAWADversusKIRAN @ KERABAI W/O. VISHAL GAIKAWAD AND ANR

Disposal: DISMISSED

Holding

The criminal revision application is dismissed for want of prosecution due to the respondents' persistent non‑appearance.

Summary

Vishal Chandrakant Gaikawad filed a criminal revision application against Kiran @ Kerabai, wife of Vishal Gaikawad, and another respondent. The High Court noted that despite service of notice, the respondents failed to appear before the court on the earlier date of 28/08/2026 and again on the present date. The court observed the continued non-appearance and, after giving the applicant an opportunity, dismissed the revision application for want of prosecution. No substantive merits of the case were examined as the procedural default prevailed. The order reflects the court's discretion to dismiss proceedings where the opposite party persistently fails to cooperate.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate remedy when the opposite party repeatedly fails to appear despite service of notice in a criminal revision proceeding?

Subjects

criminal revision
want of prosecution
non‑appearance
dismissal
procedural default

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:42057


                                                                                 54.21revn
                                                    (1)

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       904 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2021

                              VISHAL CHANDRAKANT GAIKAWAD
                                          VERSUS
                       KIRAN @ KERABAI W/O. VISHAL GAIKAWAD AND ANR
                                                   …..

                                              CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.

                                               DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026

                 P. C. :


                 1.           On the last occasion i.e. on 28/08/2026, this Court had

                 observed that despite service, consistently nobody is appearing for

                 revision applicant and this matter was listed today for dismissal.

                 2.           Even after passing the aforesaid order, today also nobody

                 appears for the applicant.

                 3.           In that view of the matter, this criminal revision

                 application is dismissed for want of prosecution.




                                                      [SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.]
                 sjk

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…