The Writ Petition was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to appear or engage counsel, indicating a lack of desire to proceed.
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.
1 WP3571-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3571/2019
(JUVENA JOHN BHISE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.
Ms S.S. Jachak, Assistant Government Pleader for the R-1 to 4. Shri P.B. Patil, counsel for the R-5
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. D ATE : JANUARY 09, 2023 .
Notice for engagement of another counsel was served on the petitioner. On 24.11.2022 this Court noted the absence of the counsel for the petitioner. Today also, there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not desirous of proceeding with the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.)
(A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
APTE
Signed By: Digitally signed byROHIT DATTATRAYA APTE Signing Date:09.01.2023 14:54
JUVENA JOHN BHISE
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
A. S. CHANDURKAR
VRUSHALI V. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
