Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

DADASO ANANTO JAGDALE AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary

Petitioners Dadaso Ananta Jagdale and an associate filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The learned judge initially expressed reluctance to entertain the petition, but the petitioner's counsel was permitted to seek further instructions. After telephonic instructions, the counsel requested that the petition be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to approach the court later if needed. The court granted this liberty and ordered the petition to be dismissed as withdrawn. No substantive merits of the petition were considered.

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • withdrawal
  • procedural dismissal
  • high court

Judgment

                                                                                           11.WP.4295.2026.doc

      Ajay

                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 4295 OF 2026

                                Dadaso Ananta Jagdale and Anr.                   .. Petitioners
                                      Versus
                                State of Maharashtra and Ors.                    .. Respondents
                                                            ....................
                                 Mr. Sachin Thorat a/w. Mr. Yogesh G. Thorat, Advocates for
                                   Petitioners.
                                 Ms. Anuja S. Rao, APP for Respondent – State.
                                                              ......…...........
                                                             CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                                             DATE         : SEPTEMBER 11, 2026.
                                P.C.:
                                1.        Heard Mr. Thorat, learned Advocate for Petitioners and Ms.

                                Rao, learned APP for Respondent – State.


                                2.        After I expressed my disinclination to consider and allow the

                                present Petition to Mr. Thorat, he persuaded me to allow him to take

                                appropriate instructions from the Petitioners. He took instructions on

                                telephone and has re-mentioned the matter. He persuaded the Court to

                                allow the Petitioners to withdraw the present Petition with liberty to

                                approach the Court later in accordance with law. That leave and liberty

                                if so available to Petitioners in accordance with law is granted.


                                3.        In view of the above, Writ Petition is dismissed as

                                withdrawn.


                                                                               [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

      AjayDigitally signed
             by AJAY
AJAY         TRAMBAK
TRAMBAK      UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE   Date: 2026.09.12
             15:47:35 +0530
                                                                                                       1 of 1


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.