Bombay High Court
WP/1545/2024 of MAYURI GANESH KUTE AND ANR Vs GANESH SURYAKANT KUTE AND ORS on 14 October 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1545 OF 2024 Mayuri Ganesh Kute & Anr. … Petitioners V/s. Ganesh Suryakant Kute & Ors. …. Respondents ______________________ Mr. Lakshyaved R. Odhekar a /w Ms. Janki A . Bhide, Mr. Omkar Mhasde
922.WP-1545.24.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1545 OF 2024
Mayuri Ganesh Kute & Anr.
… Petitioners
V/s.
Ganesh Suryakant Kute & Ors.
…. Respondents
______________________
Mr. Lakshyaved R. Odhekar a/w Ms. Janki A. Bhide, Mr. Omkar Mhasde and Mr. Sujen R. Shaikh, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Prathamesh Deshpande, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Ms. S.M. Yadav, APP for the Respondent-State.
______________________
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 14 OCTOBER 2026
P. C. :-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Mr. Odhekar, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. Deshpande, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. By this Writ Petition, challenge is to the order dated 14 September 2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nashik (JMFC) in Criminal Misc. Application No.94 of 2021 by which the delay in filing the application for setting aside ex
922. WP-1545.24.DOC parte order has been condoned. The Appeal filed challenging the same has also been dismissed.
3. Condonation of delay is a discretionery order and nothing is pointed out to show that the said discretion is not properly exercised.
4. Apart from the merits, it is required to be noted that after filing of the petition, the Petitioner No.1 has remarried.
5. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, no interference in the impugned order is warranted particularly in Writ jurisdiction which is discretionary and extraordinary.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. [ MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
PPN