1. Very often, when writ petitions are filed unreasonably long after the proximate cause for such action had arisen, Courts are placed in a predicament either to deny relief on grounds of laches, the claims having become stale or to assess the relief sought, from the touchstone of the violations complained of and to grant relief ex aequo et bono (from equity and good conscience).

2. Recourse in such situations is usually taken by the respondents to the off quoted maxim vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subueniunt which, as is well known, declares that law comes to the assistance of the vigilant, not of the sleepy. This is to mean that only persons who are watchful and careful of using his / her rights, are entitled to the benefits of law, thus disentitling a petitioner to relief when petitions are filed unusually long after the cause of action arose.

3. However, in the assessment of these issues there is need for great caution because, as is now settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several judgments, when it comes to violations of fundamental rights, especially to life and personal liberty, delay or laches by itself would not disentitle relief to a petitioner, but with a covenant