ARVIND D. DESAI AND ANR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Court: Bombay High Court
Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. N. LADDHA
Judgment date:
Case summary
Bombay High Court judgment dated 2026-01-13. ARVIND D. DESAI AND ANR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2026. 01. 13 15:11:25 +0530 Chitra Sonawane 2-REVN-71-2015. doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Revision Application No. 71 of 2015 1. Arvind D Desai Age: Adult, Occ: Business Having address at : 42, Heena Smriti, NS Road, JVPD scheme, Vallabha Nagar Society, Mumbai-400 049. 2. BS Pushkar Age: Adult, Occ: Architect, Having his office at : M/s Pushkar Consultants, st 1 floor, Aditya Kutir, th 4 Road, Khar West, Mumbai-52 … Applicants. Vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Suhas S Kinjavdekar Age: Adult, Occ: Authorised representative of Jeewan CHS Ltd Plot No. 7, Janki Kutir, Juhu, Mumbai-49. … Respondents. --- Mr Hrishikesh A Joshi i/by Maniar Srivastava Assoc. for the applicant. Ms Sangeeta D Shinde, APP for the respondent / State. Ms Saili Dhuru i/by Ms Vrishali R Raje for respondent No. 2. Page No.
1 of 3 ____________________________________________ 13 January 2026 Chitra Sonawane 2-REVN-71-2015. doc Coram : R. N. Laddha, J. Date : 13 January 2026. P. C. : The present Criminal Revision Application has remained pending adjudication since the year 2015. It appears from the record that Respondent No. 2, who is the original complainant, had initially assailed the legality, propriety and correctness of order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai, whereby accepting the ‘C’ Summary Report submitted by the Investigating Officer upon completion of the investigation. Aggrieved by the said order, Respondent No. 2 preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 958 of 2013 before the learned Sessions Court.
By a reasoned order dated 5 May 2014, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, partly allowed the Revision Application and issued directions to the learned Magistrate to call upon the Investigating Officer to carry out further investigation, specifically to collect material evidence regarding the decision taken by the competent authority in compliance with the directions issued in Writ Petition No. 453 of 2010, and thereafter to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Page No. 2 of 3 ____________________________________________ 13 January 2026 Chitra Sonawane 2-REVN-71-2015. doc 2. Today, when the matter is called out for hearing, the learned Counsel appearing in the matter is not in a position to advance arguments. It is pertinent to note that the present Revision Application has been pending for a considerable period since the year 2015, and no interim relief has been granted therein till date. 3.
In view of the above, the present revision Application stands dismissed for non-prosecution. [R. N. Laddha, J. ] Page No. 3 of 3 ____________________________________________ 13 January 2026
Source: Bombay High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.