Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

NAREN AVINASH JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Decided
Disposal
Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution.

Summary

The petitioner, Naren Avinash Joshi, filed a writ petition on 7 January 2019 in the Bombay High Court. No appearance was made by the petitioner or his counsel at any hearing, and no steps were taken to circulate the petition. The court observed that the petitioner appeared disinterested in pursuing the relief sought. Consequently, the judges considered the petition to be abandoned. The petition was therefore dismissed for non‑prosecution, with no further orders.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition that remains unattended and uncirculated by the petitioner should be dismissed for non‑prosecution

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • non‑prosecution
  • dismissal
  • Bombay High Court
  • criminal appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

                   ssm                                                         44-wp899.2019.doc

                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                        WRIT PETITION NO. 899 OF 2019

             Naren Avinash Joshi                                        …..Petitioner

                      Vs.

             The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                            …..Respondents

                                     ____________________________________

             None for the Petitioner.
             Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre APP, for the Respondent-State.
                               ____________________________________

                                                    CORAM :      A. S. GADKARI AND
                                                                 KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                                                      DATE :     22nd JUNE, 2026.


             P.C.:-

             1)                 None for the Petitioner when called out for hearing.

             2)                 Record indicates that, since the date of filing of the Petition i.e.

             7th January, 2019, neither the Petitioner nor his Advocate has taken any

             steps to circulate the Petition, even once.

             2.1)               It appears that, the Petitioner is not interested in pursuing the

             Petition.

             3)                 Dismissed for non-prosecution.



                         (KAMAL KHATA, J.)                             (A.S. GADKARI, J.)


             Digitally signed
SANJIV    by SANJIV                                                                                1/1
          SHARNAPPA
SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR
MASHALKAR Date: 2026.06.29
             12:22:51 +0530


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.