The High Court dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear despite multiple notices. No substantive legal argument was considered by the bench. The order contains no general application of law.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
rsk
3-WP-4151-17.doc
1 / 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4151 OF 2017
Mustufa Firoz Tinwala
...Petitioner
vs.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
...Respondents
None for the Petitioner.
Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & N. R. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 11/12/2019.
P.C.:
.Nobody for the petitioner even today. There was no
appearance on 15/11/2019 also and hence the matter was kept for
dismissal today.
2. Learned APP appears for the State Government.
3. We dismiss the petition for want of prosecution.
(N. R. BORKAR, J.)
(B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Mustufa Firoz Tinwala
The State of Maharashtra
B. P. DHARMADHIKARI
N. R. BORKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court