Rajasthan High Court
S.451 CrPC | Seized Property Can't Be Allowed To Become Junk, Court Should Expeditiously Issue Custody Orders: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has reiterated that power under Section 451 CrPC for custody and disposal of seized property produced before any criminal court during pendency of a trial, needs to be exercised expeditiously.A bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman was hearing a petition challenging an order that had declined petitioner's prayer of releasing his car that was seized in relation to an...
Delaying Decision In Service Appeal For 7 Yrs Without Any Reason Amounts To Denial Of Justice: Rajasthan High Court
Rajasthan High Court has frowned upon the 7 years delay in deciding a service appeal by the appellate authority under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958.“I am of the view that withholding a service appeal, without any reason, for as long as seven years, amounts to denial of justice on the ground of sheer delay,” said the bench of Justice...
Notice Of Pre-Election Disqualification Issued To Councillor Prior To Introduction Of S.39(e) Rajasthan Municipalities Act Not Valid: Rajasthan HC
Rajasthan High Court has ruled that Section 39(e) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act 2009 which was inserted by way of an amendment dated April 13, 2024 to empower the State government to remove a member of a Municipality on grounds of pre-election disqualification, does not have a retrospective application.“The amendment was done on 13.04.2023 and there is nothing on record which shows...
Unreasoned Orders By Judicial/ Quasi-Judicial Authorities Violate Natural Justice: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Commercial Tax Assessment Order
The Rajasthan High Court has set aside an assessment order passed by the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Jaipur (“CCT”) under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The Court observed that the assessment order was unreasoned and was passed without any application of mind, violating the principles of natural justice.The assessee had filed his returns for the assessment...
Justice Not Saleable, Failure To Extend Benefits Of Judgment In Rem To Similarly Situated Persons Violates Constitutional Rights: Rajasthan HC
"Justice is not a saleable commodity. All aggrieved persons should not be compelled by the State Authorities to approach the Court of law and get similar orders which have been passed in favour of the similarly situated persons who approached the Court earlier," the Rajasthan High Court observed recently.The remarks were made while disposing off a bunch of writ petitions...
Arbitration Requires Dispute Arising From Agreement, Unrelated Disputes Ineligible for Arbitration: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Rekha Borana held that arbitration hinges on the presence of a dispute arising from the agreement between the involved parties. The bench held that any dispute unrelated to the terms of the agreement between the parties cannot be subject to the arbitration clause and therefore cannot be referred to arbitration under the...
Limited Jurisdiction In Appeals U/S 30 Workmen Compensation Act, Can't Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Venture Fact Finding: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has reiterated that an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act confines jurisdiction of the High Court to only substantial questions of law wherein the court cannot re-appreciate the evidence for fact finding or answering factual questions. A bench of Justice Narendra Singh Dhaddha opined that Workmen Compensation Commissioner was the last authority...
S.427 CrPC | Sentence In Default Of Payment Of Fine Cannot Be Allowed To Run Concurrently With Substantive Sentences: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has clarified that default sentences do not attract the benefit of running concurrently with other substantive sentences that an individual is subjected for any offence.While hearing a petition in relation to Section 427 CrPC, a bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman stated that concurrent running of substantive sentences along with the sentences awarded for default of...
[Arbitration Act] Court Should Not Issue Broad Injunctions Under Section 9 If Dispute Involves Monetary Claim: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni has held that while passing interim order or taking interim measure under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court is required to have a prima-facie grasp of the dispute and claim of the parties. The bench held that the court should look at the nature of the controversy...
CrPC Doesn't Permit Keeping Rape Complaint Pending For Pre-Investigation: High Court Slams Rajasthan Police, Asks DGP To Intervene
The Rajasthan High Court has frowned upon the conduct of the Investigation Officer in a rape case for keeping the complaint pending for about a week, under the pretext of conducting a "pre-investigation", before filing the FIR. A bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand said there is no such provision in the CrPC or principal in criminal jurisprudence to keep any report of offence of rape or...
Non-Compliance Of S.52A NDPS Act Prima Facie Vitiates Search & Seizure: Rajasthan HC Grants Bail To Man Allegedly Found With Half Kg Heroin
The Rajasthan High Court has reiterated that Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is mandatory in nature and failure to comply with the provision undermines the prosecution case and vitiates the entire search and seizure proceedings.A bench of Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni thus granted bail to a man allegedly found in possession of 510 gms heroin.Court said the...
S.138 NI Act | Relevant Date For Determining 'Legally Enforceable Debt' Is Date Of Presentation/ Maturity Of Cheque: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has held that the relevant date for ascertaining existence of a "legally enforceable debt or liability" under the Negotiable Instruments Act is the date of presentation/maturity of the cheque.A bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman said the drawer of a cheque cannot shirk their liability to pay the cheque amount by taking plea that there was no legally enforceable debt...