Chandrakant C Shah v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3197 OF 2025 Chandrakant C. Shah

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_______________________________________________________________ Mr. Chandrakant C. Shah, Petitioner, in-person. Mr. D. J. Haldankar, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Dnyaneshwar Ladse, PSI, Mulund Police Station, Mumbai. _______________________________________________________________ CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED: 23rd JUNE 2025 P.C.:

1.

Heard Mr. Shah, who appears as party-in-person and Mr. Haldankar, learned APP for the Respondent-State. 2.

In this Writ Petition the following prayer is sought.

21. In the facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: a) issue Rule;

b) allow the present petition;

c) call for the record and proceedings in Criminal Revision Application No. 323 of 2023 from the file of the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge of 88th Court of Sessions for Greater Mumbai at Mazgaon, Mumbai, and after examining the legality and validity thereof, this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to (i) issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature to the Ld. Presiding Officer of the said Court to expedite the hearing and disposal of the aforesaid revision Page No. 1

application pending before him, and decide the same within a period not exceeding 3 months from the date of issue of such order or directions; (ii) issue writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature to the Ld. Presiding Officer of the said Court not to adjourn the aforesaid matter without sufficient and reasonable cause, and without recording proper reasons; and d) pass such other, incidental and further orders, and grant other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3.

Thus, in effect the Petitioner who appears in-person has sought relief that the learned Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Mumbai at Mazgaon, Mumbai, be directed to dispose of Criminal Revision Application No.323 of 2023 pending before the said Court and decide the same within a period not exceeding three weeks. 4.

The Supreme Court in the case of High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh1 has specifically observed that no such direction should be issued.

5.

The Petitioner states that he has not filed such Application seeking expeditious disposal of said Criminal Revision Application No.323 of 2023 before the concerned learned Additional Sessions Judge, for Greater Mumbai, at Mazgaon.

6.

Accordingly, although no relief can be granted in this Writ Petition, the Petitioner is at liberty to file such Application before the (2024) 6 SCC 267 Page No. 2

learned Additional Sessions Judge. If such Application is filed the same be decided in accordance with law.

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Page No. 3