Bombay High Court
RAMESH GULAB CHAUDHARYversusSANGITA RANGNATH PHAPALE AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Summary
The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition in the Bombay High Court, but no representative appeared on his behalf. The respondent, represented by Advocate S. M. Mangaonkar, appeared for Respondent No.2 (the State). The Court examined the petition and found that the petitioner had not prosecuted the case. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution. No further orders were made.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition should be entertained despite the petitioner’s failure to prosecute the case
Subjects
- writ petition
- non-prosecution
- dismissal
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
10-WP-3598-2019 (CR).doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 3598 OF 2019
Ramesh Gulab Chaudhary ...Petitioner/s
Versus
Sangita Rangnath Phapale and anr. ...Respondent/s
_________________________________________________________________
None for Petitioner.
Mr. S. M. Mangaonkar, APP for Respondent No.2-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026.
P.C. :
1. None present for the petitioner. Heard learned APP for
respondent No.2-State.
2. Dismissed for non-prosecution.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
SHUBHADA
SHANKAR
KADAM
Digitally signed by
SHUBHADA
SHANKAR KADAM
Date: 2026.09.01
11:13:49 +0530 Page 1 of 1
Checking your session…