Bombay High Court

FAROOQUI ANJUM JAVEDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Summary

The petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 908 of 2019 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. After filing, the petitioner failed to take any further steps in the proceedings after 1 August 2019 and remained absent from the court. The respondents, through their counsel, highlighted the petitioner's inaction. The Court examined whether the petition could continue despite the petitioner’s lack of prosecution. Finding that the petitioner was not interested in pursuing the matter, the Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal writ petition may be dismissed for want of prosecution when the petitioner remains inactive and absent?

Subjects

want of prosecution
criminal writ petition
procedural dismissal
High Court
petitioner's inactivity

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:35675-DB


                                          1                918 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 908 OF 2019



                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         918 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 908 OF 2019

                               FAROOQUI ANJUM JAVED
                                          VERSUS
                       THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                            …..
            None for the petitioner
            Adv. U. S. Bhosale, APP for Respondents-State
            Adv. S. B. Munde, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 To 7
                                            …..

                                        CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
                                                VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                                        DATED : 11/08/2026
            Per Court:

            .          None for the petitioner.


            2.         The record shows that after 01.08.2019 no steps were taken

            by the petitioner. Today, the petitioner is also absent.


            3.         As such, it appears that the petitioner is not interested in

            proceeding with the matter. Accordingly, the petition stands

            dismissed for want of prosecution.




            ( VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. )

            shivani/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…