Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun Mangal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. on 12 August, 2015
R.P. No. 310/2015
Arun Mangal
Vs.
State of M.P. & Ors.
1
12.08.2015
Shri Arun Dudawat, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri R.B.S. Tomar, Govt. Advocate for the
respondents/State.
Heard.
Shri Dudawat submits that W.P. No.7166/2013 was dismissed as withdrawn. He fairly submits that no liberty was prayed for to file a fresh petition, if occasion arises. However, petitioner was expecting that the government will act reasonably and will not proceed on the basis of existing FIR. Later on it is learnt that the government intends to proceed further on the basis of same FIR.
Shri Tomar opposed the relief.
It is seen that petitioner has not prayed for any liberty to file a fresh writ petition. With open eyes petitioner withdrew the earlier writ petition. Thus, merely because the government intends to proceed on Annexure A/2 (FIR), no case of review is made out. There is no ingredient which is analogous to Order 47 Rule 1 CPC and, therefore, review is impermissible. Hence, review petition is not entertained. However, in the interest of justice, it is R.P. No. 310/2015 Arun Mangal Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
2observed that if any fresh cause of action has arisen and law permits, the petitioner may file a writ petition.
Review Petition is disposed of.
A typed copy of this order be kept in the record of writ petition.
(Sujoy Paul)
(alok) Judge