Multiple choice

That a petition dismissed under Article 226 would operate as res judicata so as to bar a similar petition in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution was held in the case of

  1. Daryao v. State of U.P.

  2. Arjun Singh v. State of M.P.

  3. Sudhir Chandra v. State of W.B.

  4. None of the above
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

In Daryao v. State of U.P., the Supreme Court held that a petition dismissed under Article 226 would operate as res judicata to bar a similar petition under Article 32. This establishes the principle that the High Court's decision under Article 226 has preclusive effect. Options B and C refer to different cases with distinct legal principles.

Keep practicing — related questions