Bombay High Court
VYANKAT DATTARAO GUTTEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution as the petitioner showed no interest in diligently pursuing the matter.
Summary
The petitioner, Vyankat Dattarao Gutte, filed a criminal writ petition and initially obtained documents and a brief from his counsel. However, he failed to engage any further lawyer or advance the matter in court. The court observed that this inaction indicated a lack of interest in prosecuting the case diligently. Consequently, the court held that the petitioner’s neglect amounted to non‑prosecution. The petition was therefore dismissed. The dismissal was based solely on procedural inactivity, not on the merits of the underlying criminal allegations.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner’s failure to engage counsel and pursue the writ petition constitutes non‑prosecution warranting dismissal?
Subjects
- criminal writ petition
- non-prosecution
- dismissal
- procedural default
- court procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41738-DB
1 917 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 699 OF 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
917 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 699 OF 2021
VYANKAT DATTARAO GUTTE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Adv. S. B. Madde, Advocate for the Petitioner
Adv. M. N. Ghanekar, APP for Respondents-State
...
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
DATED : 09/09/2026
Per Court:
. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has taken all the documents along with the brief
from him, but the petitioner thereafter did not engage any other
lawyer as well did not try to circulate the matter till today.
2. Under such circumstances, it is clearly evident that the
petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter diligently.
Thus, the petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
( VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. )
shivani/
Checking your session…