Bombay High Court

GULFAM AHMED SAMANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Decided: 18 April 2026
Disposal: Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution
Bench: A S GADKARI KAMAL KHATA

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution.

Summary

The petitioner, Gulfam Ahmed Samani, filed a writ petition on 6 July 2018 in the Bombay High Court seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner failed to appear for the scheduled hearing and did not take any steps to advance the petition thereafter. The court noted that the petitioner appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the court examined whether the petition could continue in the absence of any prosecution by the petitioner. Finding no justification for continuation, the court dismissed the petition for non‑prosecution. The dismissal was recorded by both judges on 18 April 2026.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate course of action when a petitioner fails to appear and does not prosecute a filed writ petition?

Subjects

writ petition
non‑prosecution
dismissal
Bombay High Court
criminal appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

DTG                                                              340-WP-3053-2018.doc



                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        WRIT PETITION NO. 3053 OF 2018

Gulfam Ahmed Samani                                          …Petitioner
         V/s.
The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                              … Respondents
                    _______________________________________
None for Petitioner.
Mr. Vinod Chate, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
                 _______________________________________

                             CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
                                     KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                             DATE  : 18th April 2026

P.C. :


1)              None for Petitioner when called out for hearing.

2)              Record indicates that, since the date of filing of the Petition i.e.

6th July 2018, the 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. )



                                                                                        1/1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…