Bombay High Court

RAVI AMARCHAND DALMIAversusThe State of Maharashtra

Decided: 24 September 2026
Disposal: Allowed To be withdrawn

Holding

The Court held that where the parties have settled the dispute and the complainant has withdrawn the complaint, the writ petition may be withdrawn and disposed of.

Summary

The petitioners, represented by Mr. Himanshu V. Pradhan, sought to withdraw three criminal writ petitions filed against the State of Maharashtra, alleging that the matters were similar to a pending writ petition (Seetharam Narayan Shetty v. State of Maharashtra). The petitioners informed the Court that the dispute had been settled between the parties and that the Export‑Import Bank of India had withdrawn the underlying complaint. The respondents, through Mrs. M.R. Tidke, did not oppose the withdrawal. The Court examined whether a writ petition could be withdrawn after settlement and withdrawal of the complaint. Finding no impediment, the Court allowed the withdrawal and ordered the petitions to be disposed of. Consequently, the writ petitions were formally withdrawn and dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal writ petition may be withdrawn when the parties have settled the dispute and the complainant has withdrawn the underlying complaint

Subjects

withdrawal of writ petition
settlement of dispute
criminal appellate jurisdiction
complaint withdrawal
court disposal

Judgment

                                                     P-1-WP-5158-2024.DOC
skt



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5158 OF 2024
                             AND
          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 8520 OF 2025
                             AND
          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 9769 OF 2025
Ravi Amarchand Dalmia & Ors.                           …Petitioner(s)
            Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                        …Respondents


Mr. Himanshu V. Pradhan i/b Crawford Bayley & Co., for the
Petitioner(s).
Mrs. M.R Tidke, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.


                       CORAM:      MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                       DATE :      24th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P. C.:

1.       Not on board. Taken on Board.


2.       Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners

states that the above matters are similar to the Writ Petition which

is listed on today’s board at Serial No. 926 (Seetharam Narayan

Shetty Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr.). He states that the

parties have settled the dispute and subject complaint has been

withdrawn by the Export-Import Bank of India. He, therefore,

seeks withdrawal of the Writ Petition.




                                    Page 1 of 2
                              24th September, 2026
                                                   P-1-WP-5158-2024.DOC
skt



3.    Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are allowed to be withdrawn

and disposed of as such.

                                          [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                                  Page 2 of 2
                            24th September, 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.