Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

PANDURANG ALIAS BHORYA TUKARAM DUDE AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

A writ petition is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution if the petitioner shows no interest in pursuing the remedy.

Summary

The petitioners filed writ petitions challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra, but their counsel reported that no further instructions were received. The court noted that after 26 November 2018, neither the petitioners nor their advocate took any steps to advance the petitions. It appeared that the petitioners were not interested in pursuing the matters. Consequently, the court held that the petitions could not be entertained due to lack of prosecution. The judges ordered the petitions to be disposed of for want of prosecution.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition may be dismissed for want of prosecution when the petitioner fails to take steps to advance the case?

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • want of prosecution
  • disposal
  • criminal appellate jurisdiction
  • court procedure

Judgment

     ssm                                                     128-wp4410.2017.doc

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                      WRIT PETITION NO. 4410 OF 2017

Nitin Dinkar Sathe                                              …..Petitioner

             Vs.

The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                                 …..Respondents

                                     WITH

                     WRIT PETITION NO. 4409 OF 2017

Pandurang alias Bhorya Tukaram Dude & Anr.                      …..Petitioners

             Vs.

The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                      …..Respondents
                ____________________________________

Mr. Ishan Paradkar i/by Adv. Satyavrat Joshi for the Petitioner(s).
Mr. J.P. Yagnik APP, for the Respondent-State.
                  ____________________________________

                                CORAM :       A. S. GADKARI AND
                                              KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                                   DATE :     18th APRIL, 2026.


P.C.:-

1)           Learned Advocate for the Petitioner(s) submitted that, he has

not received further instructions from the Petitioner(s) and therefore he is

unable to assist this Court in adjudicating the Petitions.

2)           Record indicates that, after 26th November, 2018, the

Petitioner(s) and/or their Advocate have not taken any steps to circulate the


                                                                                   1/2
            ssm                                                    128-wp4410.2017.doc

       Petitions, even for once.

       2.1)            It appears that, the Petitioner(s) are not interested in pursuing

       the Petitions.

       3)              Petitions are accordingly disposed off for want of prosecution.



                  (KAMAL KHATA, J.)                         (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

            Digitally signed
            by SANJIV
SANJIV      SHARNAPPA
SHARNAPPA   MASHALKAR
MASHALKAR   Date:
            2026.04.28
            10:48:39 +0530




                                                                                         2/2


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.