Bombay High Court
SHAHRUKH AYUB KURESHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous because the matter has already been decided by the Divisional Commissioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Shahrukh Ayub Kureshi, filed a criminal writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash orders dated 20‑02‑2025 passed by respondent No.3 in a criminal matter. The petitioner alleged that the orders were illegal and requested a stay of their execution pending the petition. The State, through its Additional Public Prosecutor, informed the Court that the petitioner had already filed an Externment Appeal (No. 95 of 2025) before the Divisional Commissioner, Pune, which had been disposed of. On that basis, the State contended that the writ petition was rendered infructuous. The petitioner’s counsel agreed to the submission and asked for the petition to be dismissed as infructuous. The Court accordingly dismissed Writ Petition No. 448 of 2026 as infructuous.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of a prior disposal of an Externment Appeal on the maintainability of a subsequent writ petition?
- Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as infructuous in view of the earlier decision?
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- infructuous
- externment appeal
- High Court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
911-WP-448-2026 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 448 OF 2026
Shahrukh Ayub Kureshi … Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors … Respondent
——————
Mr. Saurabh P. Tandale for the Petitioner.
Mr. Nitin B. Patil, A.P.P. for the Respondents-State.
——————
Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
Date : 17th September 2026.
PER COURT :
1. By this Petition, the Petitioner has sought for the following substantive
reliefs :
“B. This hon'ble court please to issuing writ of Certiorari or any
other writ or order in the like nature, the impugned orders
dated 20.02.2025 passed by the respondent no.3 in रमांक
जवाबी/हदपार/एसआर/२४/२०२४ may kindly be quashed and set
aside and for that purpose issue necessary orders;
This hon'ble court please to Pending the hearing and
final hearing of this Writ Petition, the effect, execution and
implementation of the impugned orders dated 20.02.2025
passed by the respondent no.3 in रमांक
osk 1 of 2
911-WP-448-2026 (CR).docx
जवाबी/हदपार/एसआर/२४/२०२४ may kindly be stayed and for
that purpose issue necessary orders.”
2. Heard Mr. Saurabh Tandale, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and
Mr. Nitin Patil, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State.
3. Mr. Nitin Patil, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State, on instructions,
submits that the Petitioner had filed an Externment Appeal bearing No. 95 of
2025 before the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune, in the month
of May 2025. He submits that the said Appeal has been disposed of by the
Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune.
4. Mr. Nitin Patil, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State, therefore,
submits that this Petition is rendered infructuous.
5. In view of the statement made by Mr. Nitin Patil, learned A.P.P. for the
Respondents-State, Mr. Saurabh Tandale, learned Advocate for the Petitioner
states that this Petition be disposed of as infructuous.
6. In view of the above, Writ Petition No. 448 of 2026 is dismissed as
infructuous.
Digitally signed
by OMKAR [ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]
OMKAR SHIVAHAR
SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN
KUMBHAKARN Date:
2026.09.17
15:49:24 +0530
osk 2 of 2
Checking your session…