Petitioner failed to appear to press a writ petition pending since 2013. The High Court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution citing maxims regarding vigilance and ending litigation.
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution; interim order, if any, stands vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:80206
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1001270 of 2013
Petitioner :- Dwarika Prasad @ Nahey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Addl. Session Judge Ex. Cader I And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.B. Tiwari,Dileep Kumar Tiwari,Radhey Shyam Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Arvind Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
(i) Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt (The law assists only those who are vigilant, and not those who sleep over their rights); and
(ii) Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (In the interest of the society as a whole, the litigation must come to an end).
The above said two maxims are sister provisions, which would highlight and spotlight that the party seeking remedy before the Court should be vigilant, otherwise, the law would not come to their help and there should be end to litigation.
Order Date :- 3.12.2024 Jyoti/-
Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Dwarika Prasad @ Nahey
State Of U.P.
Saurabh Lavania
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
