Bombay High Court
VINAYAK CORE UNIT PROPRIETARY FIRM THROUGH PROP. SANDIP S/O BALU SHEWALEversusGOURAV S/O ARJUN PATIL AND ANR
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition was dismissed as infructuous.
Summary
Vinayak Core Unit Proprietary Firm filed a criminal writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to quash the order dated 20‑02‑2021 passed by the District and Sessions Judge‑5, Kolhapur in Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2020 arising from S.C.C. Case No. 689 of 2016. The petitioner alleged that the impugned order should be set aside. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the petition had become infructuous. The respondent State, represented by its Additional Public Prosecutor, did not oppose the request. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition as infructuous, without addressing the merits of the original relief sought.
Subjects
- Article 227
- writ petition
- infructuous
- quash order
- criminal appeal
Judgment
3-WP-1466-2021 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 1466 OF 2021
Vinayak Core Unit Proprietary Firm, … Petitioner
Through Prop. Sandip S/o Balu Shewale
Versus
Gourav S/o Arjun Patil & Anr. … Respondents
——————
Mr. Yogesh P. Morbale for the Petitioner.
Dr. A.A. Takalkar, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State.
——————
Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
Date : 3rd September 2026.
PER COURT :
1. Heard Mr. Yogesh Morbale, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Dr.
Takalkar, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State.
2. By the present Petition, the Petitioner has sought for the following
substantive relief.
“a) This Hon'ble Court by issuing appropriate writ, order and by
exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned
Impugned order dated 20/2/2021 passed by Hon'ble District
osk 1 of 2
3-WP-1466-2021 (CR).docx
and Sessions Judge-5, Kolhapur in Criminal Appeal No. 5 of
2020 arising from Judgment dated 29/11/2019 passed in
S.C.C Case No. 689 of 2016.”
3. Mr. Yogesh Morbale, learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that
this Petition is rendered infructuous and therefore seeks disposal of the same.
4. Dr. Takalkar, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State does not
oppose the said request.
5. In view of the statement made by Mr. Yogesh Morbale, learned
Advocate for the Petitioner, this Petition is dismissed as infructous.
[ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]
Digitally signed
by OMKAR
OMKAR SHIVAHAR
SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN
KUMBHAKARN Date:
2026.09.03
20:24:52 +0530
osk 2 of 2
Checking your session…