This single-judge order dismisses a writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging a 1996 negative final report. The Court rejected the petition due to inordinate delay, laches, and lack of maintainability.
The writ petition was dismissed due to inordinate delay, laches, and non-maintainability.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17451/2018
----Petitioners Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.P. Soni For Respondent(s) : -
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
01/07/2019
By way of the present writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have laid a challenge to an order passed way back on 20.06.1996, being a negative final report (Annexure-4).
Concededly, the said final report was given by the Investigating Officer Circle Inspector, Police Station Gotan in
(2 of 2)
[CW-17451/2018]
furtherance of an FIR filed by the petitioner No.2 Ram Prakash (son of petitioner No.1).
As the petitioners have not stated any reason for approaching the Court so belatedly, this Court on 24.05.2019 granted two weeks’ time to the petitioners for explaining the delay. However, neither any affidavit has been filed, nor any explanation for the delay has been put forward.
Upon question regarding delay was posed by the Court, Mr. C.P. Soni, learned counsel for the petitioners took the Court through the averments made in the Grounds (E) and (F) of the memo of writ petition. Needless to observe that the assertions made in the grounds, which are not supported by the affidavit, cannot be treated to be the facts pleaded in the writ petition. Be that as it may, even if these averments are taken into account, then also the same hardly convey any reason for the delay, much less giving explanation of such inordinate delay.
That apart a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugning the FR filed by the Investigating Officer is not maintainable.
The writ petition filed by the petitioners suffers from inordinate delay and laches, on the one hand and is misconceived on the other, for which it is dismissed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
10-Ramesh/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition impugning a final report of an Investigating Officer filed under Article 226 is maintainable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raghunath Ram
Ram Prakash
Bhanwari Devi
State Of Rajasthan
Gram Panchayat Gotan
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
