Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

NEVES AGUSTA D'SOUZAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution

Holding

The petition was dismissed for non‑prosecution.

Summary

Neves Agusta D'souza filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court but failed to appear for hearing and did not circulate the petition after 31 July 2019. The record indicated that neither the petitioner nor her counsel took any steps to advance the petition thereafter, suggesting a lack of interest in pursuing the matter. The court considered whether such inaction justified dismissal for non‑prosecution. It held that the petitioner’s failure to appear and to take any further steps amounted to non‑prosecution. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. The order emphasizes that a petitioner must actively pursue a writ petition or risk dismissal for non‑prosecution.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition may be dismissed for non‑prosecution when the petitioner fails to appear and take steps to advance the petition

Subjects

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

Judgment

           ssm                                                        66-wp3850.2019.doc

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 3850 OF 2019

      Neves Agusta D'souza                                            …..Petitioner

               Vs.

      The State Of Maharashtra                                        …..Respondent

                                  ____________________________________

      None for the Petitioner.
      Mr. Ashish I. Satpute APP, for the Respondent-State.

                                  ____________________________________

                                              CORAM :      A. S. GADKARI AND
                                                           KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                                                DATE :     22nd JUNE, 2026.

      P.C.:-

      1)                  None for the Petitioner when called out for hearing.

      2)                  Record indicates that, after 31 st July, 2019, neither the

      Petitioner nor her Advocate has taken any steps to circulate the Petition,

      even 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
          by SANJIV
SANJIV    SHARNAPPA
SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR                                                                        1/1
MASHALKAR Date: 2026.06.29
               12:28:06 +0530


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.