Manish Anandwardhan Trivedi v. Joint Police Commissioner (Head Quarter) C.P. Office Nagpur City And 2 Others

2026:BHC-NAG:6743-DB 23-appw-119-23.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPW) NO. 119 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPW) NO. 120 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (WP) NO. 558 OF 2022 Manish Anandwardhan Trivedi

Versus

Joint Police Commissioner (Head Quarter), C.P.Officer, Nagpur City and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Shri C.G.Barapatre, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Shri S.S.Hulke, APP for the non-applicant nos. 1 to 3/State. CORAM :

URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE & NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.

DATED : 30th APRIL, 2026.

By this application, the applicant/petitioner is seeking condonation of delay which is caused in preferring the application for restoration of Writ Petition as it was dismissed for non removing office objections. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter was listed on 05.12.2022 and on 20.12.2024 he was directed to remove office objection within four weeks, but due to inadvertence, he failed to remove office objections and as there was a conditional order, therefore, the petition came to be dismissed.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as he could not remove the office objections within stipulated period, due to inadvertence, as well as he had required to travel frequently to Bombay due to ill health of his SKNair

23-appw-119-23.odt elder sister who was a widow and there was nobody to look after, she was suffering from rare disease and was in need of complete care and attention and that was one of the reasons for not taking appropriate steps to remove the office objections.

4.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly objected the same and submitted that there is no proper, reasonable and satisfactory explanation for the condonation of delay. Hence, the application deserves to be rejected. 5.

After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the recital in the application which sufficiently shows that there is a reasonable and justifiable reason for not approaching this Court for restoration of the writ petition. 6.

In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is condoned.

7.

The criminal application no. 119 of 2026 stands disposed of. Criminal Application (APPW) No. 120 of 2023.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed.

2.

The writ petition no. 558 of 2022 be restored to its original stage. 3.

Criminal application no. 120 of 2026 stands disposed of. [JUDGE] [JUDGE] Signed by: Mr. S.K. NAIR Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 30/04/2026 18:56:04 SKNair