1/3 2- WP-1054-2024 (CR).DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 1054 OF 2024 Manpasand Textile Processors Private Limited And Anr. …...Petitioners VERSUS State Of Maharashtra And Anr. …...Respondents _________________________________________________________________ None for Petitioners. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for Respondent No.1 - State. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. 1. None present for the Petitioners. 2. Heard Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State. 3. On 16th September 2026, the following order was passed: “1. On 04.09.2026, the Petitioners / Advocate for the Petitioners were cautioned that on the returnable date, this Petition would be dismissed for non-prosecution and as such, this Petition is listed today under the caption “For Dismissal”. Shantanu S. Dhudum SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date: 2026.09.22 20:19:19 +0530 2/3 2- WP-1054-2024 (CR).DOC 2. Today, when this Petition was called out, neither the Petitioners nor the Advocate for the Petitioners are present in Court either physically or through VC mode. 3. As a matter of indulgence and as a last and final opportunity to the Petitioners / Advocate for the Petitioners to appear and argue the case, list this Petition on 22.09.2026, under the caption “For Disposal”.” 4. Today, when this Petition was called out, the name of the Petitioners (Manpasand Textile Processors Private Limited and Rajgopal Bhimkaran Chhaparwal) and the Advocate-on-Record (Gaurav Nankar) were called out by the Court Sheristedar. None present, either physically or through V.C. mode. 5. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned A.P.P. for Respondent No.1 – State, by referring to the order dated 16th September, 2026, submit that the Petitioners / Advocate for the Petitioners have chosen to remain absent not only on 16th September, 2026, but also on the earlier date as mentioned in the said order. He submits that the absence of the Petitioners / Advocate for the Petitioners is a clear indication that they are not interested in pursuing this Petition. He therefore insist upon dismissal of this Petition. 6. In view of the absence of the Petitioners / Advocate for the Petitioners and taking note of the submissions made by Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned A.P.P. for Respondent No.1 – State, this Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss this Writ Petition for non-prosecution. Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/3 2- WP-1054-2024 (CR).DOC 7. Criminal Writ Petition No.1054 of 2024 is dismissed. ( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum