CRLMB / 11651 / 2024 (SATYA NARAYAN VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 26/09/2024 Petitioner seeks restoration of their liberty on bail-bond. HELD: It is the primary duty of the officer u/s 50 NDPS Act, to inform the person that he has the right to get searched in the presence of the magistrate or the Gazetted Officer. No official document is present which reflects that the Seizure Officer (Sub Inspector) was authorized to take charge as SHO. Hence, non-compliance of mandatory provisions of sections 50, 41 & 42 NDPS Act. Bail granted with personal bond to be furnished.
2
CRLMP / 6527 / 2024 (MARU RAHUL NARESHBHAI VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 25/09/2024 Petitioner seeks quashing FIR u/s 406 & 420 IPC and 66C & 66D of IT Act. HELD: Formal Notices regarding joining of investigation were only issued to 22 accused persons, and not to the petitioners. Prosecution to proceed further by following the procedure u/s 193(9) BNSS by taking permission from the Ld. Trial Court. Petitioners not to be summoned without express permission of Ld. Trial Court. Petition disposed accordingly.
3
WMAP / 296 / 2024 (YAGYAJEET SINGH CHAUHAN VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/09/2024 Pet. a renowned National Shooter aggrieved by the order of refusal of Arms license by the Resp. stating that it was danger to public welfare and peace as her family having criminal history. HELD: Observations of Resp. impinges upon Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Art. 14 & 19(1)(g) of Constitution. Rules 36 & 37 of the Arms Rules 2016 provide for grant of arms license to outstanding sports person after fulfilling conditions. The Resp. are directed to grant the license within 10 days
4
CW / 17062 / 2023 (AKSHAY KUMAR VAISHNAV VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/09/2024 Petitioner aggrieved by non-grant of experience certificate in desired format & bonus marks for selection process of Ayurved Compounder/Nurse. HELD: Petitioners entitled to experience certificate as Yoga Instructors only but not entitled to get benefit of bonus marks as nature & kind of work of YI is different to that of Ayurveda Nurse/Compounder. Writ Petition disposed accordingly.
5
CW / 13204 / 2024 (GOVERDHAN KUMAR VS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 23/09/2024 Pet. prays merit to be considered and not the date of appointment for the seniority of LDCs and Rule 285 of the Raj. Panchayati Raj. Rules 1996 to be followed. HELD: Respondents required to adhere to Rule 285 of rules of 1996 and directed to re frame the seniority list taking into consideration petitioner’s position in merit list prepared by Distt. Establishment committee at the time of their appointment & not their date of joining/appointment in accordance with law. Petition disposed of
1
ITA / 98 / 2024 (PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL) Date of Order/Judgment: 26/09/2024 Pet. aggrieved by the order of ITAT Jaipur regarding issue of genuineness of loan transaction. HELD: The loan recvd. by resp. is proved based on the supporting evidences including cheque, paid interest, TDS deductions & affidavits. Merely receiving information from the ‘AO’ u/s 148 of Income Tax Act 1961, that lender company was indulged in accomodating entries was insufficient to disallow loan as legitimate transaction. The effect of tax amount being less than 2 crores, Appeal dismissed.
2
ITA / 329 / 2018 (PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JAIPUR-II VS RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT UTPADAN NIGAM LTD) Date of Order/Judgment: 26/09/2024 Appellant aggrieved by the order passed by the ITAT files appeal u/s 260A of IT Act 1961. HELD: The SQ 1 regarding share of the employee in PF has to be deposited as per due date fixed by EPF Act and ESI Act and not as per Sec. 43B of the Act, thus, cannot be a condition for deduction. For SQ 3, advance against depreciation is not considered as income for the accounting year therefore, cannot be carried forward. SQ. 3 answered against the Appellant-department. Appeal disposed of.
3
CW / 13968 / 2024 (M/S LAXMIPRAKASH GARMENTS PVT. LTD VS BAJRANG SINGH RATHORE S/O BHANWAR SINGH RATHORE) Date of Order/Judgment: 21/09/2024 Petitioner assailing impugned order which allowed the impleadment of parties under Order 1 Rule 10.
HELD: Respondent company after selling estate to Pet. approached NCLT to be declared insolvent. If declared insolvent & dispute decided in favour of workman, issue of compliance of award would arise though to be decided by labour Court. No error in impugned order. Petition dismissed.
4
CW / 1458 / 2022 (RAVI JOSHI S/O LATE SHRI OM PRAKASH JOSHI VS MAHARISHI DAYANAND SARASWATI UNIVERSITY) Date of Order/Judgment: 19/09/2024 Petitioner suspended on the grounds that he was under judicial custody for more than 48 hours & requests to set aside the impugned order of suspension. HELD: The prolonged suspension for 3 years not justified as no chargesheet submitted, and is thus, contradictory to the Rule of Law and violates Article 21. No suspension order is extendable beyond 3 months subject to chargesheet not served. Petition allowed.
5
CW / 12288 / 2022 (ANIL KUMAR PUROHIT S/O LATE SH. RADHA KISHAN PUROHIT VS ASHOK KUMAR PUROHIT S/O LATE SH. RADHA KISHAN PUROHIT) Date of Order/Judgment: 19/09/2024 Petitioner aggrieved by order of ADJ No. 4 Jaipur dismissing application U/O8R1(3) CPC HELD: Object of O8 R1 CPC is to prevent belated production of docs. Court has discretionary powers considering facts & circumstances of each case. Authenticity of Documents can’t be considered at this stage but can be considered after giving opportunity to both parties to adduce evidence. Petition allowed.
