Allahabad High Court
CRLP/6155/2024 of BAL GOVIND Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS on 11 November 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6155 of 2024 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Case called out in revised list. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner to press this petition. However, learned counsel representing side opposite is
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6155 of 2024
Court No. - 13
HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
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. Case called out in revised list. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner to press this petition. However, learned counsel representing side opposite is present in the Court.
2. It appears that the petitioner and the counsel engaged by the petitioner both have lost the interest in the case and are not interested in pursuing the petition.
3. It would be appropriate to refer two maxims:-
(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.
4. Considering the aforesaid, this Court feels that the petition should not be disposed of on merits and should be dismissed for non-prosecution. Accordingly, it is dismissed for non-prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. November 11, 2025 Vinay/- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arun Kumar, Krishna Gopal Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Bal Govind .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench