Bombay High Court
ANIL DAGDU PHALEversusDNYANDEV DATTATRAY PATIL
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- N JAMADAR
Holding
The petition may be withdrawn as prayed, with liberty to file an appropriate application before the trial court.
Summary
Anil Dagdu Phale filed Writ Petition No. 8279 of 2026 in the Bombay High Court against Dnyandev Dattatray Patil. The petitioner's counsel, Ketan A. Dhavle, sought leave of the Court to withdraw the petition and to be permitted to file a suitable application before the trial court. The Court examined whether such a withdrawal could be allowed with liberty to pursue the matter later. It held that the petition could be withdrawn as prayed, subject to the liberty to file an appropriate application later. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn, and the Court directed that any future application be heard in accordance with the law and the developments in related criminal proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition may be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application before the trial court
Subjects
- petition withdrawal
- writ petition
- Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
- Bombay High Court
- liberty to file application
Judgment
39-WP-8279-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 8279 OF 2026
Anil Dagdu Phale ..Petitioner
Versus
Dnyandev Dattatray Patil …Respondent
Mr. Ketan A Dhavle, for the Petitioner.
ARUN
RAMCHANDRA CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J.
SANKPAL
Digitally signed by
ARUN RAMCHANDRA
DATE : 7th JULY 2026
SANKPAL
Date: 2026.07.08
19:19:03 +0530
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner on instructions seeks leave
to withdraw the Petition with liberty to file an appropriate Application
before the trial Court.
3. The Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed
for.
4. In the event, such an Application is filed, the learned Judge is
requested to hear and decide the said Application in accordance with
the law, having regard to the developments which have taken place in
the intervening period, including the orders passed in the criminal
proceedings which according to the Petitioner arose out of the same
transaction.
[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]
ARS 1/1
Checking your session…