Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

GOVIND TATERAO SURYAWANSHI C NO 50versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The High Court may issue a direction to the respondent to decide the pending appeal within a reasonable time to prevent undue delay.

Summary

The petitioner, Govind Taterao Suryawanshi, filed a criminal writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent (the court handling his appeal) to decide his pending appeal, which has been outstanding since 14 July 2026. The petition raised the issue of undue delay in the disposal of the appeal. The High Court examined whether it could intervene and impose a deadline for the respondent to render a decision. Considering that the prayer was innocuous and aimed at expediting justice, the Court found it appropriate to issue such a direction. Consequently, the Court directed the respondent to decide the appeal by the end of August 2026 and disposed of the writ petition.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can direct a lower court or authority to decide a pending appeal within a specified time frame

Subjects

  • procedural law
  • appeal
  • court direction
  • writ petition
  • delay

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:34643-DB
                                                            942 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1130 OF 2026




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         942 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1130 OF 2026

                              Govind Taterao Suryawanshi C/No. 50
                                               Versus
                              The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                   __________________________________________________________
                   Adv. G. R. Karhale h/f. Adv. Sharada Pundlik Chate for the
                   Petitioner
                   Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for State
                   __________________________________________________________

                                        CORAM       : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                      VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
                                        DATE        : 06.08.2026

                   PER COURT :
                   1]              Heard.

                   2]              By way of the present petition, the petitioner

                   seeks a direction to Respondent No. 4 to decide his appeal,

                   which is pending since 14.07.2026.

                   3]              Considering the innocuous prayer made in the

                   petition, we deem it appropriate to direct Respondent No. 4

                   to     decide       the   petitioner's   appeal       by      the      end       of

                   August, 2026.

                   4]              With the above direction, the Criminal Writ

                   Petition stands disposed of.



                   (VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV)                  (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
                             JUDGE                                  JUDGE

                        Komal Kamble                                                      Page|1


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.