Bombay High Court
SUBHASH MAHANTAPPA MALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SANDESH D PATIL
Holding
The petition seeking quash of the FIR is dismissed in default due to the petitioner’s failure to appear.
Summary
The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition on 22 December 2015 seeking the quashing of FIR No. 395 of 2015. The petition remained uncirculated since its filing in 2015. The respondent State filed that charges had already been framed against the petitioner. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner on the date of hearing. In view of the petitioner’s failure to appear, the Court dismissed the petition in default.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when a criminal writ petition seeking quash of an FIR remains uncirculated and the petitioner fails to appear?
- Whether the petition can be entertained despite the default of non‑appearance?
Subjects
- quash of FIR
- default dismissal
- criminal writ petition
- High Court of Bombay
- procedural default
Judgment
22-WP-5020-2015 (CR).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5020 OF 2015
Subhash Mahantappa Mali ] Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and another ] Respondents
…..
None for the Petitioner.
Mr. Avinash A. Naik, A.P.P, for Respondent No.1 – State.
…..
Digitally
signed by
SHAILAJA CORAM: SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
SHAILAJA SHRIKANT
SHRIKANT HALKUDE
HALKUDE Date: DATED: 22nd JUNE 2026.
2026.06.24
13:00:49
+0530 P. C. :
1. The present petition was filed on 22nd December, 2015 seeking
quashing of F.I.R. bearing No. 395 of 2015. Since 2015, the petition has
not been circulated.
2. Learned A.P.P. submits that charges have already been framed in
the said matter.
3. Today, none appears for the petitioner.
4. In these circumstances, the petition is dismissed in default.
[SANDESH D. PATIL, J.]
Shailaja 1
Checking your session…