Back
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
BISWANATH SOMADDER, MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI
Mani Kumar Subba – Appellant
Versus
State Of Sikkim – Respondent
ORDER :
BISWANATH SOMADDER, C.J.
1.This is an application taken out by the writ petitioner (Mani Kumar Subba) on 02nd April, 2025, praying inter alia for adjournment of the writ petition, being WP(PIL) No. 01/2024, for a period of two weeks from this date (03rd April, 2025). The reasons in support of his adjournment application appear in paragraph 5 to paragraph 9 of the application, which are set out hereinbelow:-
“ ……………………………………………………….
5. That however, vide Order dated 12.12.2024, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to dismiss both the Interlocutory Application being I.A. No. 3 of 2024 and I.A. No. 4/2024.
6. That the Petitioner against the Order dated 12.12.2024 has preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India being SLP (Civil) Diary No. 15942/2025, which was listed on 01.04.2025 as item No. 68, before Court No. 9 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
7. That however, on 01.04.2025, the SLP preferred by the Petitioner herein was not taken up by the Hon’ble Court due to paucity of time, and the said petition has been directed to be listed next week and is currently shown to be listed tentatively on 15.04.2025, as per the Case Status available on the websit
Repeated, unjustified adjournment requests intended to forestall proceedings while lacking an appellate stay order constitute an abuse of process. Courts may impose exemplary costs to deter such dila....
The court ruled that a writ petition, once withdrawn, cannot be restored after substantial delay unless justified, viewing such attempts as an abuse of the court's process.
The court should decide matters on their merits rather than technicalities, and the provision of granting only three adjournments should be understood in a reasonable manner.
Courts may grant adjournments in exceptional circumstances, such as medical reasons, but may also set limits on future adjournments.
The right to a fair trial necessitates adequate legal representation; refusal to grant adjournment undermines this right, potentially resulting in miscarriage of justice.
The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons in orders and balanced the interests of the parties by granting another opportunity to the petitioner, subject to payment of costs.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
