Bombay High Court

KAILAS KASHINATH PATIL AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 14 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The revision application is abated and disposed of because all applicants have expired.

Summary

The applicants, Kailas Kashinath Patil and another, filed Revision Application No. 66 of 2013 challenging an order of conviction. During the hearing, counsel informed the court that Applicant No.1 had died in 2013 and Applicant No.2 had died in 2024. The court examined whether a revision could continue when all parties seeking relief are deceased. Relying on the principle that pending proceedings abate upon the death of all parties, the bench held that the revision could not proceed. Consequently, the revision application was disposed of as abated. The decision was delivered by Justice M.M. Sathaye on 14 August 2026.

Issues considered

Does the death of all applicants abate a pending revision against an order of conviction?

Subjects

revision
abated proceedings
death of parties
criminal appellate jurisdiction
order of conviction

Judgment

                                                                   35-REVN-66-2013.doc



                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                      REVISION APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2013

                   Kailas Kashinath Patil And Anr.                      ...Applicants

NAVNATH                       Versus
SITARAM            The State Of Maharashtra                             ...Respondent
WAGHMARE
                                                     ****
Digitally signed   Mr. Tushar Nikam i/b Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal for the Applicant Nos. 1 and
by NAVNATH
SITARAM            2.
WAGHMARE
Date: 2026.08.14   Mr. D.J. Haldankar, APP for the Respondent/State.
20:05:31 +0530
                                                     ****
                                             CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J.
                                                DATE : 14th AUGUST, 2026
                   P.C. :

                   1.          Learned counsel for the Applicants submitted on instructions
                   that Applicant No.1 has expired in 2013 and Applicant No.2 has expired
                   in 2024.
                   2.          Considering that revision was filed against the order of
                   conviction and since both the Applicants have expired, the revision
                   application is disposed of as abated.


                                                             (M.M. SATHAYE, J.)




                   Navnath Waghmare                                                      1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…