Pradeep Singh vs Union Of India

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:22152
1 WP-15680-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
&
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA
rd
ON THE 23 OF JULY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 15680 of 2024
PRADEEP SINGH
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri D.P.Singh - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Praveen Kumar Newaskar, Dy. SGI for respondent No.1.
Shri Sarwesh Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent No.9
Shri Vinod Kumar Bhardwaj, Senior Advocate with Shri Anand Vinod
Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the respondent No.10.
Shri S.S. Kushwaha, Counsel for the respondents/State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been
filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
allow this writ petition in the form of Probono Publico
in the interest of public at large.
(ii) That, the Respondents may kindly be directed to
take cognizance over the complaint/ representations
Annexure-P/1 made by the petitioner and with a further
issue necessary direction to the respondent authorities
for protecting the life and liberty of the citizens of M.P.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN
Signing time: 7/24/2026
2:57:59 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:22152
2 WP-15680-2024
and U.P. so also others who are using such damaged
bridge at NH-719 connecting two States i.e. M.P. and
U.P., in the interest of justice and the respondents be
further commanded to restrain passing of the vehicles
over the same and till construction of new bridge
protect the life of public at large i.e. the citizens of M.P.
and U.P. so also others who are using such damaged
bridge at NH-719 Bhind-Etawah marg.
(iii) That, the respondents be further commanded with
regard to transportation of the vehicles through the
damaged bridge protecting the life and liberty of the
citizens, in the interest of justice.
(iv) That, other directions deemed fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case be issued to the
respondents.
(v) Cost of the petition be awarded."

2. It is the case of the petitioner that a bridge connecting the State of
Madhya Pradesh and State of UP specifically the cities of Bhind and Etawah
is 55 years old and it has reached to a dangerous condition inviting the
accidents which may take place at any point of time putting the life and
property of the citizens of the country in jeopardy.
3. Accordingly, it has been prayed that respondents be directed to
protect the life and liberty of citizens of MP and UP and also those who are
using the damaged bridge at NH 719 connecting two States and to restrain
the passing of vehicles over the same till construction of new bridge takes
place. A direction has also been sought for respondents to regulate the use of
bridge by the vehicles with an intention to protect the life and liberty of the
citizens.
4. Respondents No.9 and 10 have relied upon the technical report
dated 3rd of February 2024 prepared by Department of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. According to this report, the bridge
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN
Signing time: 7/24/2026
2:57:59 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:22152
3 WP-15680-2024
structure is safe for the designed vehicular load, in addition considering its

1970s vintage and the quality of maintenance provided during its lifetime, it
was recommended that the bridge structure be inspected more frequently
than in the standard practice and any structural distress or anomalous
behavior be reported to the appropriate authorities. However, a word of
caution was also mentioned that frequent braking and stopping of heavily
loaded vehicles impose significant lateral loads on the decks leading to
excessive shaking and displacement of roller and rocker bearings of the
suspended span. Therefore, it is important to ensure smooth movement and
no stopping of heavy vehicles on the bridge.
5. The petitioner has not filed any report to counter the technical report
submitted by the Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur. Although this court had given an option to the
petitioner that if he so desires and if he is so concerned about the life of the
citizens of the country specifically of Madhya Pradesh and UP, then this
court can assign the duty of technical inspection to any team maybe from
abroad but in that situation, he will be required to deposit a substantial
amount in advance to meet out the fees and expenses of inspecting team but
it was submitted by Shri D.P. Singh-Advocate that it will not be financially
possible for the petitioner to bear the expenses.
6. Be that whatever it may be.
7. Since we do not have any other technical report and the technical
report submitted by Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur has also not been controverted by the petitioner by
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN
Signing time: 7/24/2026
2:57:59 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:22152
4 WP-15680-2024
filing the technical report from any other recognized agency, this court is of

considered opinion that the case of the petitioner that the bridge connecting
Bhind and Etawah, situated on NH- 719, is in a dilapidated condition cannot
be accepted.
8. At this stage, another preliminary objection was raised by counsel
for the Union of India. It is submitted by Shri Newaskar that the entire bridge
is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Distt. Etawah which is a part
of State of UP and therefore, the question involved is beyond the territorial
jurisdiction of this court.
9. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the Union of India.
10. Article 226 of Constitution of India reads as under:-
"226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs.
—(1) Notwithstanding anything in Article 32,
every High Court shall have power, throughout the
territories in relation to which it exercises
jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority,
including in appropriate cases, any Government,
within those territories directions, orders or writs,
including [writs in the nature of habeas corpus,
mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and
certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of
any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any
other purpose.]
(2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue
directions, orders or writs to any Government,
authority or person may also be exercised by any
High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to
the territories within which the cause of action,
wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such
power, notwithstanding that the seat of such
Government or authority or the residence of such
person is not within those territories.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN
Signing time: 7/24/2026
2:57:59 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:22152
5 WP-15680-2024
(3) Where any party against whom an interim
order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in
any other manner, is made on, or in any
proceedings relating to, a petition under clause (1),
without—

(a) furnishing to such party copies of such petition
and all documents in support of the plea for such
interim order; and
(b) giving such party an opportunity of being
heard,
makes an application to the High Court for the
vacation of such order and furnishes a copy of
such application to the party in whose favour such
order has been made or the counsel of such party,
the High Court shall dispose of the application
within a period of two weeks from the date on
which it is received or from the date on which the
copy of such application is so furnished,
whichever is later, or where the High Court is
closed on the last day of that period, before the
expiry of the next day afterwards on which the
High Court is open; and if the application is not so
disposed of, the interim order shall, on the expiry
of that period, or, as the case may be, the expiry of
the said next day, stand vacated.
(4) The power conferred on a High Court by this
article shall not be in derogation of the power
conferred on the Supreme Court by clause (2) of
Article 32."
11. Thus, it is clear that if any part of a cause of action has arisen
within the territorial jurisdiction of multiple High Courts, then any of the
High Courts can entertain the said lis. In the present case, the bridge situated
in the district of Etawah is connected with the road coming from State of
Madhya Pradesh. The persons from Madhya Pradesh use the bridge for
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN
Signing time: 7/24/2026
2:57:59 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:22152
6 WP-15680-2024
entering in the district of Etawah. Therefore, in case if any untoward incident

takes place, then the commuters who are using the bridge for going from
Madhya Pradesh to UP or vice versa will be adversely affected.
12. Under these circumstances and looking to the question involved in
the present case, this court is of considered opinion that since a part of
action can be said to have arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this
court, therefore, it would not be appropriate for this petition to relegate the
petitioner to approach the High Court having jurisdiction over district of
Etawah.
13. In absence of any rebuttal on technical issue, no case is made out
for continuing further. However, the authorities are requested to ensure that
the word of advice given by the Department of Civil Engineering, Indian
Institute of Technical Technology, Kanpur should be complied with in its
letter and spirit.
14. With aforesaid, writ petition is disposed of.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA)
(ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
JUDGE
ar

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN
Signing time: 7/24/2026
2:57:59 AM