Single judge High Court dismissed a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition for non-prosecution, noting the petitioner and counsel had lost interest, citing legal maxims on vigilance and ending litigation.
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:82512
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12119 of 2017
Petitioner :- Mateen Ahmad Respondent :- Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda And Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
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 :- 10.12.2024
Anand/-
Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Mateen Ahmad
Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda
Saurabh Lavania
Anand Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
