Bombay High Court
SHAHIDA PASCAL POSTELversusPASCAL MICHEL POSTEL AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed To be withdrawn
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable where an alternate remedy under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is available, and the petition may be withdrawn.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonali Milind Patil, filed a criminal writ petition challenging an order dated 22 June 2026 passed by a Judicial Magistrate First Class. The respondents, Pascal Michel Postel and others, contended that the writ petition was not maintainable because an appeal under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was the appropriate remedy. The petitioner’s counsel sought to withdraw the writ petition and pursue the alternate remedy. The Court allowed the withdrawal and ordered the petition to be disposed of, expressly stating that it had not examined the merits of the case. It further clarified that the petitioner would benefit from the limitation period under the Limitation Act, 1963 from the date of filing (3 July 2026) to the date of disposal (17 September 2026).
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternate remedy under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is available.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- writ petition
- maintainability
- alternate remedy
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- Limitation Act
- withdrawal
Judgment
19-WP-3437-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3437 OF 2026
signed by
SONALI
SONALI MILIND
MILIND PATIL
PATIL Date: Shahida Pascal Postel …Petitioner
2026.09.17
18:40:24
+0530 Versus
Pascal Michel Postel nee Omar Michel Postel & …Respondents
Ors.
Mr. Ghanshyam Mishra a/w. Ms. Ekta Bhalerao and Mr. Sujeet
Chaudhary, for the Petitioner.
Dr. Sujay Kantawala a/w. Ms. Mrunalini Deshmukh, Mr. Subhash
Jadhav, Ms. Aishwarya Kantawala, Mr. Rishabh Jadhav and Mr. Om
Gupte i/b. Parinam Law Associates, for the Respondents.
Mrs. M. R. Tidke, APP, for the Respondent-State.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 17th SEPTEMBER 2026
PC:-
1. At the outset, Mr. Kantawala, learned Counsel appearing for
the Respondents raises an objection to the maintainability of the
Writ Petition on the ground that there is an alternate remedy of an
Appeal under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
2. In view of the said contention raised by Mr. Kantawala,
learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, Mr. Mishra,
Page 1
Sonali
19-WP-3437-2026.DOC
learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks withdrawal of
the Writ Petition with liberty to adopt an alternate remedy.
3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed to be withdrawn
and disposed of with liberty as sought.
4. It is clarified that this Court has not considered the merits
and all contentions, on merits are expressly kept open.
5. It is further clarified that as the impugned order is dated 22 nd
June 2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class
and the Writ Petition has been filed on 3 rd July 2026 and being
disposed of today, the Petitioner will get the benefit of the
Limitation Act, 1963 from 3rd July 2026 till 17th September 2026.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 2
Sonali
Checking your session…