Disposed¶29

Yashoda Manjunath Gowda and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Apr 2026WP/2150/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of Criminal Writ Petition with liberty; Bombay High Court; Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.; FIR No. 13 of 2012; Section 173(8) Cr. P. C.; Charge-Sheet Exhibit-D pages 176-190; no material against Petitioners; Magistrate rejection order dated 2nd March 2026; Criminal Revision Application pending before Sessions Court; Respondent No. 1; State of Maharashtra; Navi Mumbai; contentions left open.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the Criminal Writ Petition with liberty as prayed - to file appropriate proceedings upon any adverse order in the pending Criminal Revision Application or if a Petitioner is named in the crime; all contentions left open. ¶29

Yashoda Manjunath Gowda and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

904-WP-2150-2026.doc

¶2

Digitally signed GAYATRI by GAYATRI RAJENDRA RAJENDRA SHIMPI SHIMPI Date: 2026.04.23 21:13:04 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2150 OF 2026

¶5

Yashoda Manjunath Gowda & Anr. … Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents ---

¶6

Mr. Akhilesh Dubey a/w Mr. Vagish Mishra, Mr. Amit Dubey, Mr. Uttam Dubey, Mr. Varad Dubey, Mr. Shubham Sharma, Alex Dsouza, Mr. Shubham Mishra and Ms. Mohini Gavd i/b Jainendra Sheth, Advocates for Petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Sameer Nangare, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶8

Ms. Rajeshree Newton, APP for Respondent – State.

¶9

Mr. Nitin Thakare – Sr. PI, Navi Mumbai.

¶10

¶11

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 23^rd APRIL, 2026

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Mr. Akhilesh Dubey, learned Advocate for the Petitioners, by referring to the Charge-Sheet (Exhibit -D at page Nos. 176 to 190 of the paper book), states that the Investigation

¶14

Officer has concluded that there is no material against the Petitioners in the crime registered as FIR No. 13 of 2012. He

¶15

submits that the Application under Section 173 (8) of Cr. P. C. filed

Gayatri shimpi

904-WP-2150-2026.doc

by the Respondent No. 1 was rejected by the Magistrate on 2^nd March, 2026. He states that against the said rejection order dated 2^nd March 2026, the Respondent No. 1 has preferred a Criminal Revision Application before the Sessions Court, which is pending as on date.

¶20

Based on the above submissions, Mr. Akhilesh Dubey learned Advocate for the Petitioners, on instructions from the Petitioners, seeks leave to withdraw the present Petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings in the event of any order adverse to the Petitioners being passed in the afore-referred Criminal Revision Application or in the event the Petitioner is named in the crime.

¶21

The request made by Mr. Akhilesh Dubey learned Advocate for the Petitioners, is not objected to by Mr. Sameer Nangare, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, and Ms. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the State.

¶22