CRLR / 355 / 2020 (PANKAJ VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 22/05/2020 Juvenile tried for offence u/s. 392/34 of IPC- praying for release on bail- As per JJ Act, Section 12-Held, Board is not required to mechanically release a juvenile or grant him bail as a matter of course-Further, failure in filing chargesheet on time-default bail an indefeasible right of an accused-Held, In Supreme Court’s order regarding extension of period of limitation during lockdown no advantage has been provided to any investigating or prosecuting agency- Revision Petition allowed.
2
CRLW / 15 / 2020 (RAKESH VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 14/05/2020 Rule 9 of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules,1958-Held,the petitioner while availing the first parole indulged in commission of offence and thus, was not entitled to be released on second and third parole or to be considered for release on permanent parole in terms of Rule 9-As per Rule 13, parole cannot be claimed as a matter of right-It cannot be inferred from Rule 9 that a prisoner who has served substantive sentence of 14 years without remission, is entitled for permanent parole.
3
CW / 6082 / 2019 (LYCON MICRONS LLP VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 16/04/2020 Mines, Minerals and Mining leases-Challenge to legality of a notification dated 10.03.19 issued by the Government of Rajasthan-Vires of Rule 82 of Rajasthan Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2017 questioned- Further, challenge to restriction on interstate movement of certain minerals-Impugned notification declared unconstitutional and quashed-Rule 82 of 2017 Rules upheld with declaration that State Government is not empowered to put restrictions on transportation of minerals outside the state.
4
CW / 15944 / 2019 (JAGDISH KUMAR CHOUDHARY VS RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,) Date of Order/Judgment: 19/03/2020 Writ Petition-Challenge to result of an examination conducted by RPSC for recruitment of Headmasters in Secondary Education-Challenge to certain questions and answers finalized by a Committee of Experts-Candidate cannot use writ jurisdiction as an appeal in disguise over experts opinion-Courts need to be satisfied that brief reasons are provided for a particular view and examine if the experts have relied on relevant materials and not mere textbooks-Expectations from expert committee laid down.
5
CW / 1325 / 2020 (REKHA MEENA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 27/02/2020 Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules,1965-Rules 35 and 36 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Rules,2011-Rejection of petitioner candidature, consequent to physical challenge-denial of fair opportunity in public employment-appointment to remain subject to production of certificate of fitness or upon objective satisfaction that the incumbent is capable of performing the functions/duties as required.
1
CRLMP / 1834 / 2020 (SMT. MADHU W/O RAJENDRA KUMAR PANCHOLI VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 07/05/2020 Prayer to direct the police to carry out fair and prompt investigation as no arrests made- Court held that once FIR has been registered presumption is drawn that police shall be conducting proper investigation- No arrest, does not imply investigation not being done properly- filing of Criminal Misc. Petition u/s.482 Cr.P.C., an attempt to browbeat the investigation agency and interfere in fair investigation- Court would not exercise its inherent powers u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for such purposes.
2
CW / 21332 / 2019 (RAJARAM GURJAR SON OF SHRI BHAYRAM GURJAR VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 14/02/2020 Section 39(6) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009- Challenge to order of suspension- The power of suspension can be invoked by State Government if the “proceedings have been commenced” for removal of a member, as provided under subsection (1) of Section 39 of the Act, 2009. Provision under sub-section (6) of Section 39 of the Act, 2009 nowhere contemplates that any show cause notice is required to be given or an explanation is required to be called from the member of municipality.
3
CRLMP / 6765 / 2019 (SOLAR4MAX.COM VS OXIDE POWER PRODUCT PVT.LTD) Date of Order/Judgment: 31/01/2020 Section 143A and 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act- Section 143A & 148 provides for grant of interim compensation. However, it does not entail any consequences and the provisions do not state that non-compliance would have a particular result. In facts of each case, the period of depositing the amount can always be extended as the purpose in making the amendment is essentially to grant relief to the aggrieved party by immediate compensation of payment of 20% of the total value of the cheque.
4
CRLMP / 5944 / 2019 (YOGENDRA DURLABHJI S/O LATE SHRI K.S. DURLABHJI VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 29/01/2020 Cognizance of offences under Section 18(c) and 27 (b) (ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940- The vicarious liability of a person arises only when he is at the relevant time incharge for the conduct of the said business. The overall responsibility of a hospital would not entail the liability of all actions-any other person may be responsible for obtaining license as made out under Section 34(1) of the Act of 1940.
5
CRLR / 273 / 2019 (SHYAM SUNDER SINGHVI S/O SHRI KASTOOR CHAND SINGHVI VS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH UMA NAND VIJAY, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/01/2020 Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002; Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. Under PMLA, 2002, a person accused may not have committed the scheduled offence and such person can be prosecuted for the offence of money laundering even if such person is not guilty of the scheduled offences-High Court should not interfere with the order passed by the courts below while exercising powers under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C unless it finds that the order impugned is perverse on face of it.
