Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9541 (BOM)

DATTATRAY CHANDRAKANT PORE v. SUREKHA DATTATRAY PORE AND ANR.

WP/672/2026 · 2026-09-21

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

6-WP-672-2026 (CR).docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 672 OF 2026 Dattatray Chandrakant Pore …...Petitioner Versus Surekha Dattatray Pore And Anr. …...Respondent —————— None for the Petitioners. Mr. C.D. Mali, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State. —————— Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. Date : 21st September 2026. PER COURT : 1. This Criminal Writ Petition is at Serial No. 6 on the ‘Daily Cause List’. 2. On 15th September 2026, the following order was passed : “1. On 3rd September, 2026, as a caution to the Petitioner /Advocate for the Petitioner that this matter may be dismissed for non-prosecution, this Petition was listed today under the caption "For Dismissal". 2. Today, again, neither the Petitioner nor the Advocate for the Petitioner were present, either physically or through V.C. mode. osk 1 of 2 6-WP-672-2026 (CR).docx 3. To afford an opportunity to the Petitioner / Advocate for the Petitioner to appear and argue the case, as a matter of last indulgence, list this matter on 21st September, 2026 under the caption "For Disposal" on Supplementary Board.” 3. Today, when this matter was called out, the names of the Petitioner and the Advocate on Record (Mr. Prathamesh Patil), were called out by the Sheristadar. Neither the Petitioner nor the Advocate for the Petitioner is present in Court either physically or through V.C. mode. 4. Mr. Mali, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State, by referring to the orders dated 3rd September 2026 and 15th September 2026, submits that the absence of the Petitioner and the Advocate for the Petitioner before this Court is an indication of the Petitioner not being interested in pursuing this Petition and therefore insists for dismissal of this Petition. 5. In view of the absence of the Petitioner and the Advocate for the Petitioner, this Court has no other option but to accept the request made by Mr. Mali, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State. 6. In view of the above, Writ Petition No. 672 of 2026 is dismissed for non-prosecution. [ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ] osk 2 of 2 OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Digitally signed by OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date: 2026.09.21 20:16:24 +0530