Evidentiary weight of uncontroverted pleadings in writ jurisdiction

In extraordinary writ proceedings under Article 32 or Article 226 of the Constitution, factual assertions made on affidavit by a petitioner that remain un-traversed or un-rebutted by the respondents are generally accepted as correct. When state authorities fail to file a counter-affidavit despite explicit judicial directions and opportunities granted by the court, the allegations of bias, malice, and personal vendetta stand legally uncontroverted. The state cannot expect the court to assume the existence of justifying circumstances in the absence of formal pleadings and counter-evidence placed on record. Rank procrastination and deliberate failure to instruct counsel or submit a written response indicate a strategy to frustrate the judicial process and delay relief. Consequently, courts will proceed to decide the cause based on the unchallenged facts established by the petitioner. (Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj v. Union of India and Anr. | 2026 INSC 101)