Daryao and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh: A Case Analysis

ABSTRACT In the leading case of Daryao & Others v. State of UP & Others, the Supreme Court has placed the doctrine of Res Judicata on a high pedestal, considering the binding character of judgments pronounced by competent courts as an essential part of the rule of law. Gajendragadhkar, J. rightly observed: “ it is in the interest of the public at large that a finality should attach to the binding decisions pronounced by courts of competent jurisdiction.” If this principle form the foundation of the general rule of Res Judicata it cannot be treated as irrelevant or inadmissible even in dealing with fundamental rights in petitions filed under article 32.The court, in these circumstances, held that if a petition filed by a party under article 226 is considered on merits and is dismissed, the decision thus pronounced would constitute Res Judicata and bind the parties unless it is otherwise modified or reversed in appeal to other appropriate proceedings permissible under the constitution. It would not be open to a party to ignore the said judgment and move to the Supreme Court under article 32 by an original petition made on the same facts and for obtaining the same or similar orders.