Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SANTOSH PANDHARINATH DIVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Decided
Disposal
Dissmiss For Default/Non-Prosecution

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution.

Summary

Santosh Pandharinath Dive filed a writ petition on 29 October 2020 in the Bombay High Court seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner failed to appear for the hearing and did not take any steps to circulate the petition after filing. The court observed that the petitioner appeared disinterested in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the court considered the petition to be abandoned. The judges dismissed the petition on the ground of non‑prosecution, without addressing any substantive merits.

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                                                      64-wp980.2021.doc

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   WRIT PETITION NO. 980 OF 2021

            Santosh Pandharinath Dive                                    …..Petitioner

                     Vs.

            State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                                  …..Respondents

                                ____________________________________

            None for the Petitioner.
            Shri. S. V. Gavand APP, for the Respondent-State.
                              ____________________________________

                                               CORAM :      A. S. GADKARI AND
                                                            KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                                                 DATE :     29th AUGUST, 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.

            29th October, 2020, 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
          by SANJIV
SANJIV    SHARNAPPA
SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR                                                                           1/1
MASHALKAR Date:
          2026.09.07
          17:01:07 +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.