Case: Mangu and Another Vs. State of Rajasthan

The two appellants along with four others were convicted by the Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, under Sections 147, 452/149 and 325/149 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment and fine. The High Court on appeal acquitted four of them and maintained the conviction and sentence of the two appellants who were involved with several others. The appellants moved an application for a certificate praying for leave to appeal to this Court under Article 134 (1)(c) of the Constitution. Later on the leave application was withdrawn and on May 12, 1971, the High Court rejected the application as withdrawn. The appellants later obtained ex parte special leave on May 25, 1971. It was mentioned in para 5 of the special leave petition that their application for leave in the High Court was rejected "on merits, but not as being out of time".

Reasoning:
5. Rule 2 of Order 21 is, by itself, mandatory. The fact that its compliance may be excused by the Court in appropriate cases does not affect the mandatory character of the rule.6. There is no application by the appellants showing sufficient cause for exempting them from compliance with the requirement of theenough we allowed to take us through the judgment of the High Court and we find that it is an appeal only for reappreciating the evidence and does not disclose any manifest grave error of law or miscarriage of justice.We are, therefore, of the opinion that this is a case which does not merit invoking of our inherent powers for dispensing with the requirements of the Rules particularly so when the appellants has made a definitely wrong statement in the special leave application with regard to their earlier application for leave in the High Court.This is, therefore, a fit case in which the preliminary objection should prevail.