Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SUBHASH H. LODHAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Decided
Disposal
Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Summary

The petitioner, Subhash H. Lodha, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. He failed to appear for the hearing and, after September 4, 2019, neither he nor his counsel took any steps to circulate the petition. The court observed that the petitioner appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the court considered whether the petition could continue despite the lack of prosecution. Finding no justification for continuation, the court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution. The dismissal was recorded by both judges on February 12, 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition should 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                                                      23-wp4181.2014.doc

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 4181 OF 2014

           Subhash H. Lodha                                        …..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
                                                              R.M. JOSHI, JJ.
                                                  DATE :      12th FEBRUARY, 2026.


           P.C.:-

           1)                None for Petitioner when called out for hearing.

           2)                Record indicates that, after 4th September, 2019, 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.



                      (R.M. JOSHI, J.)                            (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

          Digitally signed
          by SANJIV
          SHARNAPPA
SANJIV    MASHALKAR                                                                           1/1
SHARNAPPA
MASHALKAR Date:
          2026.02.16
          18:00:57
          +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.