Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SHIV PRATAP SINGHversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The order rejecting the statutory appeal on the ground of latches is quashed, allowing the appeal to be revived.

Summary

The petitioner Shiv Pratap Singh challenged a punishment order dated 15 July 2025 issued by the Superintendent of Police. He filed a statutory appeal on 1 January 2026, contending that the appeal was delayed due to bona‑fide reasons and that a small delay should be condoned. The Deputy Inspector General of Police rejected the appeal on the ground of latches (untimeliness). The High Court held that the delay was minimal, not willful, and that the petitioner’s right to have the appeal heard could not be barred solely on that ground. Accordingly, the Court set aside and quashed the order of the Deputy IG and directed the petitioner to deposit Rs 1,000 to revive the appeal, which must be decided within three months. The order was dated 23 April 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether a statutory appeal filed after a small, bona‑fide delay can be condoned despite the ground of latches.
  • Whether the order of the Deputy Inspector General rejecting the appeal on the basis of latches is liable to be set aside.

Subjects

  • statutory appeal
  • delay condonation
  • latches
  • police disciplinary proceedings
  • High Court writ jurisdiction
  • procedural law

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                         WRIT - A No. - 5823 of 2026

Shiv Pratap Singh
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

The State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                         :    Ujjawal Dixit
Counsel for Respondent(s)                         :    C.S.C.

Court No. - 6
                    HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

1. Against the order of punishment dated 15.07.2025 passed by the
respondent No.5/Superintendent of Police, Fatehgarh, statutory appeal
was filed by the petitioner before the respondent No.4/Deputy Inspector
General of Police, Kanpur Range, Kanpur which was rejected by him vide
order dated 31.01.2026 on the ground of latches.

2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed
by the respondent No.5 was received by the petitioner on 27.07.2025 but
due to bona fide reasons which were not in the control of the petitioner,
appeal could not be preferred within the prescribed period and the same
has been filed on 01.01.2026. It is argued that delay is very small and in
the case of statutory appeal/revision the law is well settled that the small
delay shall be condoned by imposing some cost.

3. On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that the
order impugned has rightly been passed by the respondent No.4 rejecting
the time barred appeal filed by the petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. From perusal of the record, it is clear that against the order of
punishment, statutory appeal has been filed by the petitioner which was
rejected by the respondent No.4 on the ground of latches but the latches is
very small and the same has not been made deliberately or willfully. Law
is well settled that valuable right of the petitioner of filing and hearing of
statutory appeal could not be curtailed only on the ground of latches.
                                                                                         WRIA No. 5823 of 2026
                                                                 2


                                  6. In this view of the matter, order dated 31.01.2026 passed by respondent
                                  No.4/Deputy Inspector General of Police, Kanpur Range, Kanpur is liable
                                  to be set aside and same is hereby quashed.

                                  7. The petitioner is permitted to deposit a sum of Rs.1000/- in the High
                                  Court Bar Association, Allahabad/Prayagraj and place the receipt before
                                  the respondent No.4/Deputy Inspector General of Police, Kanpur Range,
                                  Kanpur within three weeks from today along with certified copy of this
                                  order. In case, the petitioner does so, the respondent No.4 will revive the
                                  aforesaid appeal and decide the same strictly in accordance with law on
                                  merits most expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months
                                  from the date of production of certified copy of this order.



                                                                                         (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                  April 23, 2026
                                  saqlain




Digitally signed by :-
SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.