Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

PARIND SUSHIL PAREKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided
Disposal
Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution

Holding

The petition was dismissed for non‑prosecution because the petitioner failed to appear or take steps to advance the petition.

Summary

The petitioner, Parind Sushil Parekh, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. After the hearing on 13 July 2015, the petitioner and his counsel failed to take any steps to circulate the petition or appear before the court. The court observed that the petitioner appeared uninterested in pursuing the relief sought. Consequently, the court noted the lack of prosecution of the petition. Relying on the petitioner's non‑appearance and inactivity, the judges dismissed the petition. The dismissal was entered as a matter of procedural non‑prosecution.

Issues considered

  • Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to appear and pursue the case?

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • non-prosecution
  • dismissal
  • high court
  • criminal appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

            ssm                                                       27-wp2062.2015.doc

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 2062 OF 2015

       Parind Sushil Parekh                                           …..Petitioner

                Vs.

       The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                                …..Respondents

                               ____________________________________

       None for the Petitioner.
       Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre APP, for the Respondent-State.
                         ____________________________________

                                             CORAM :       A. S. GADKARI AND
                                                           KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                                               DATE :      4th MARCH, 2026.

       P.C.:-

       1)                 None for Petitioner when called out for hearing.

       2)                 Record indicates that, after 13th July, 2015, Petitioner and/or

       his Advocate has not taken any steps to circulate the Petition, even for once.

       2.1)               It appears that, the Petitioner is not interested in pursuing the

       Petition.

       3)                 Dismissed for non-prosecution.



                  (KAMAL KHATA, J.)                            (A.S. GADKARI, J.)


            Digitally signed
SANJIV      by SANJIV
            SHARNAPPA
SHARNAPPA   MASHALKAR
MASHALKAR   Date: 2026.03.06
            18:54:52 +0530


                                                                                           1/1


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.