Bombay High Court
DINESH CHHOTALAL JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
A review petition cannot be entertained on a ground that goes to the merits of the case.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Chhotalal Joshi, filed a review petition seeking relief from an earlier order of the Bombay High Court, alleging that a letter from Federal Bank dated 6 March 2026 showed he ceased to be an authorized signatory from 20 October 2015. The petition was filed after a delay, for which the court considered condoning the delay in the interest of substantive justice. The court examined whether the newly discovered document could constitute a valid ground for review. It held that the issue raised pertained to the merits of the case, which is not a permissible ground for a review under the law. Consequently, the review petition was dismissed and the accompanying interim application was also disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a document obtained after the original order can be a ground for review of that order
- Whether the delay in filing the review petition can be condoned
- Whether a ground that goes to the merits of the case is maintainable in a review petition
Subjects
- review petition
- delay condonation
- merits of the case
- authorized signatory
- procedural law
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
2 REVW-5-26.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION NO. 5 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 4120 OF 2024
Dinesh Chhotalal Joshi ..Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & anr. …Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1151 OF 2026
IN
REVIEW PETITION NO. 4 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1154 OF 2026
IN
REVIEW PETITION NO. 7 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1153 OF 2026
IN
REVIEW PETITION NO. 6 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1155 OF 2026
IN
REVIEW PETITION NO. 8 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1152 OF 2026
IN
REVIEW PETITION NO. 5 OF 2026
SAINATH
SANJAY Mr. Prasad Dani, Sr. Advocate, i/b Ms. Disha Jain, for the
BODKHE
Digitally signed
by SAINATH
SANJAY BODKHE
Review Petitioner/Applicant in RPW/7/2026 a/w
Date: 2026.09.05
14:58:41 +0530
IA/1154/2026.
Mr. Omkar Kulkarni, i/b Ms. Disha Jain, for Review
Petitioner/Applicant in RPW/4/2026, RPW/5/2026,
SAINATH, PA 1/3
2 REVW-5-26.DOC
RPW/6/2026 & RPW/8/2026 a/w IA/1151/2026,
IA/1152/2026, IA/1153/2026 & IA/1155/2026.
Smt. R S Tendulkar, APP for Respondent – State in
RPW/4/2026, 6/2026, 7/2026 & 8/2026.
Mr. D J Haldankar, APP for Respondent – State in
RPW/5/2026.
Mr. Jeetendra Ranawal, for Respondent No. 2 in all.
CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.
DATE : 03rd September 2026
P.C.:
IA/1154/2026
1. For the reasons assigned in the application and to
advance the cause of substantive justice, the delay in preferring
the review petition stands condoned.
RPW/7/2026
2. Heard Mr. Dani, the learned Senior Advocate, for the
review petitioner in RPW/7/2026 alongwith IA/1154/2026.
3. Review is sought on the ground that subsequent to the
passing of order by this Court, the review petitioner came in
custody of a document i.e. letter dated 06 th March, 2026 issued
by the Federal Bank to the effect that the review petitioner
ceased to be the authorized signatory with effect from 20 th
October, 2015.
SAINATH, PA 2/3
2 REVW-5-26.DOC
4. Even if the said ground is taken at par, that issue touches
the merits of the matter and that would not be a ground to
review the order passed by this Court. Thus, there is no
substance in the review petition.
5. The Review Petition stands dismissed.
6. In view of the dismissal of Review Petition, IA/1154/2026
also stands disposed.
[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]
SAINATH, PA 3/3
Checking your session…