Mangilal Akhreraj Kothari and Ors. vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

Mangilal Akhreraj Kothari and Ors. vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim Application allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/-; upon proof of deposit of the costs in the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai within two weeks, the order dated 2nd July, 2024 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 shall stand recalled and Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 restored to file; interim application thereafter disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 2nd July, 2024 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 should be recalled and the petition restored to file, given that counsel's absence when the petition was called out on that date was a bonafide mistake. +1 more

Court's answer

The Interim Application is allowed, subject to the Applicants paying costs of Rs. 10,000/-, because Advocate Mr. Rishi Bhuta owned responsibility for the absence on 2nd July, 2024 as a bonafide mistake of the Advocates and the statements in the Application stood un-rebutted.

Ratio / Principle

Upon proof of deposit of Rs. 10,000/- being tendered to the Registry, the order dated 2nd July, 2024 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 shall stand recalled and Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 shall be restored to file.

Key takeaways

As Respondent No. 3 chose not to contest the Application, the costs of Rs. 10,000/- shall be deposited in the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai (A/c No. 000120110001337, Bank of India, Mumbai Main Branch, IFSC BKID0000001) within two weeks.ratio¶8
The photostat copy of the affidavit of service with the newspaper cuttings (2 Nos.) tendered by counsel was taken on record, evidencing the Applicants' compliance with the order dated 24th December, 2025 for service by publication.ratio¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.), by order dated 4th February, 2026, allowed Interim Application No. 1195 of 2025 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012, which sought recall of the order dated 2nd July, 2024 and restoration of the petition — the petition having been called out on 2nd July, 2024 when none appeared for the Petitioners. Counsel (Mr. Rishi Bhuta) attributed the absence to a bonafide mistake of the Advocates and owned responsibility; the statements in the Application stood un-rebutted; the learned APP left the matter to the Court. Respondent No. 3 (Mr. Pankajkumar Chopda), served by publication in 'Free Press Journal' and 'Lok Shakti' pursuant to the order dated 24th December, 2025 (affidavit of service with newspaper cuttings taken on record and marked 'X colly'), was called out but did not appear or contest. The Application was allowed subject to costs of Rs. 10,000/-, to be deposited in the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai (Bank of India, Mumbai Main Branch) within two weeks; upon proof of deposit, the order dated 2nd July, 2024 stands recalled and Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 is restored to file. The parent petition seeks quashing of FIR No. 1-106/2012 (Nizampura Police Station, Bhiwandi, Thane, dated 27/6/2012) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India — a matter not decided in this order.

38-IA-1195-2025.doc

Digitally signed GAYATRI by GAYATRIRAJENDRA RAJENDRASHIMPI SHIMPIDate:2026.02.09 19:25:41 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1195 OF 2025

IN

WRIT PETITION NO. 3456 OF 2012

Mangilal Akhreraj Kothari & Ors. … Applicants V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents

Mr. Rishi Bhuta a/w Mr. Manish Bohra & Ms. Karishma Rajesh, Advocate for Applicants.

Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP for Respondent - State.

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

DATE : 4^th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

By the present Interim Application the Applicants have

sought for the following substantive relief in prayer clause 10 (a)

& (b) :-

“a. that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari in exercise of the powers vested in this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India thereby calling upon the entire investigation papers and proceedings of the impugned Complaint being FIR bearing No. 1- 106/2012 registered with Nizampura Police Station, Bhiwandi, Thane dated 27/6/2012 and after

1

Gayatri shimpi

38-IA-1195-2025.doc

examining the legality, validity and propriety of the registration of the FIR in respect thereof against the Petitioners in the facts and circumstances of the case, may be further pleased to quashed and set aside the FIR being No. 1-106/2012 dated 27/6/2012 registered with Nizampura Police Station, Bhiwandi. Thane;

b. That pending the hearing and final disposal of this Petition this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the further investigation concerning the FIR being No. No. 1-106/2012 dated 27/6/2012 registered with Nizampura Police Station, Bhiwandi, Thane against the Petitioners;”

Vide order dated 24^th December, 2025, for the reasons recorded therein Applicants were permitted to serve the Respondent No. 3 by way of publishing notice in the English Daily “Free Press Journal” and Marathi daily “Lok Shakti” having circulation in Bhiwandi and Thane. Returnable date in this Application was fixed as 4^th February, 2026.

Mr. Rishi Bhuta, learned Advocate for Applicants

submits that the Applicants have complied with the order dated 24^th December, 2025 and filed an affidavit of service along with the newspapers in the Registry of this Court in the month of January, 2026. He tenders a photostat copy of the affidavit of service along with the newspaper cuttings (2 Nos.), same are taken on record

2

Gayatri shimpi

38-IA-1195-2025.doc

and marked ‘X colly’ for identification.

Name of the Respondent No. 3 (Mr. Pankajkumar

Chopda), was called out by the Shirestedar. None present.

Mr. Rishi Bhuta states that it was on account of a bonafide mistake on the part of the Advocates for the Petitioners that none was present before this Court on 2^nd July, 2024 when the Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 was called out. He relies on the statements made in this application.

Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned APP submits that the Advocate for the Applicants having owned the responsibility for the absence on 2^nd July, 2024, he leaves the matter to the Court.

Considering the statement of Advocate Mr. Rishi Bhuta that it was the Advocate’s fault for the absence on 2^nd July, 2024 and the statements in the Application being un-rebutted, this Application is allowed, subject to the Applicants paying costs of Rs. 10,000/-.

3

Gayatri shimpi

38-IA-1195-2025.doc

As the Respondent No. 3 has choosen not to contest

this Application, said costs of Rs. 10,000/- shall be deposited in the

following bank account within two weeks from today :-

The High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai Account No.: 000120110001337 Bank : Bank of India Branch : Mumbai Main IFSC Code : BKID0000001

Upon the proof of deposit of Rs. 10,000/- being tendered to the Registry of this Court, order dated 2^nd July, 2024 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 shall stand recalled and the Criminal Writ Petition No. 3456 of 2012 restored to file.

Interim application disposed of.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

4

Gayatri shimpi