CRLR / 1300 / 2023 (KAPIL RAM @ KAPIL RAM SINGHANI VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/04/2025 Pet. challenged order framing charges u/s 306, 500, 501 & 504 IPC in a case alleging harassment of deceased via WhatsApp leading to suicide. HELD The core element of S. 306 is intentional abetment of suicide. No suicide note/direct evidence linked Pet. to abetment. Witnesses denied his involvement; WhatsApp messages were unsubstantiated. Allegations of harassment w/o any evidence don’t constitute abetment. Defamation & intentional insult charges remained unsustainable. Petition allowed
2
CRLR / 95 / 2025 (MITHU SINGH VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 23/04/2025 Petitioner assailing the order passed by ld. Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Chittorgarh, dismissing the application u/s 197(2) Cr.P.C. HELD: Pet. was not acting in the course of his official duties at the time of the alleged incident. The petitioner cannot invoke the protections of Sec. 197 Cr.P.C. solely by virtue of being a government employee, as the allegations made by the complainant are unrelated to the performance of his official duties. Petition dismissed.
3
SAW / 566 / 2024 (ECOSAFE INFRAPROJECTS LLP VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 22/04/2025 The appellant seeks quashing of the e-auction notice, alleging that its terms and conditions, particularly regarding lease commencement and sale price fixation, are vague, ambiguous, uncertain, and non-transparent. HELD- The Court held that the appellant’s doubts were unfounded and imaginary, as the rules governing the mining lease process were clear. The conditions in the e-auction notice were consistent with the Rules, and no ambiguity existed. The appeal, being sans substratum, was dismissed.
4
SAW / 1262 / 2024 (ANKITA MATHUR VS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 21/04/2025 Appellant challenged sanction order for prosecution alleging mechanical approval without application of mind. HELD: Sanction upheld as authority examined demand, acceptance, and recovery evidence, including call transcripts. Sanctioning authority has applied its mind to come to the conclusion that it is a fit case for grant of sanction. Judicial review limited to examining the correctness and validity of the order of sanction, not merits of evidence. Appeal dismissed.
5
CRLAS / 2507 / 2023 (DEEPAK LOHIYA VS NIRMALA DEVI JAIN) Date of Order/Judgment: 16/04/2025 Appellant challenged the acquittal of the respondent u/s 138 NI ACT. HELD: The Mere act of sending a notice does not fulfill the statutory obligation, but the notice must reach the accused. Any legally enforceable debt or liability must also be proved. The complainant failed to prove a valid cause of action. Appeal dismissed.
1
CMA / 5151 / 2019 (RAJASTHAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT VS M/S NATIONAL BUILDERS) Date of Order/Judgment: 01/05/2025 The appellant RUIDP challenged the arbitral award, claiming deductions, penalties, and damages were not proper and should have been reversed. HELD- the Court held that arbitral awards can't be interfered with unless there is a serious illegality going to the root of the matter. It stated that an award should not be disturbed merely because another view is possible. The Court found no such flaw or patent illegality in the award and upheld the arbitrator's findings.
2
CW / 16206 / 2024 (MAMTA CHOUDHARY W/O SHRI RAKESH CHOUDHARY VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 25/04/2025 Petitioner challenged her suspension u/s 39(6) of the Raj. Municipalities Act, 2009, citing malafide intent. HELD: No interference required; She has failed to conduct 6 meetings as per S. 51 of the Act. Several irregularities have been committed by the Petitioner during her tenure as chairperson & various files have been misplaced; Meetings could be held before/after lifting of elections’ code of conduct. Petition dismissed.
3
CW / 16232 / 2024 (INDRA DUDI W/O SHRI SAHI RAM VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/04/2025 Petitioner assailing the order of suspension as well as charge-sheet issued to her by Resp. HELD: The correctness of the charges and the allegations cannot be decided and adjudicated by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Art. 226. Chargesheet cannot be interfered with by the Court lightly the elected representative of the public cannot be equated with that of the Govt. employees since these offices are held by the incumbent for a fixed period of time. Petition rejected.
4
CFA / 705 / 2012 (SMT GAYATRI SHARMA W/O SHRI BHAGWAN SAHAI D/O SHRI DEEN DAYAL TIWARI VS SHRI DEEN DAYAL TIWARI S/O LATE SHRI GOPAL SAHAI) Date of Order/Judgment: 21/04/2025 Appellant assails decree passed by ADJ No.7, Jaipur Metro, partly allowing the suit for partition & permanent injunction. HELD: The Trial Court committed an error while deciding the issue No. 4 & gave liberty to the appellants & resp. to file partition suit before the Revenue Court. Trial Court should have decided the shares of the parties in agricultural land. Appellants & resp. who are legal heirs of Deen Dayal, are entitled to get 1/5th of property. Appeal partly allowed.
5
CR / 70 / 2020 (STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS MAHARAJA SAWAI MANSINGH SECOND MUSEUM TRUST) Date of Order/Judgment: 17/04/2025 Petitioner through revision petition challenged the dismissal of application u/order 7 rule 11 of CPC. HELD- Under Article 363 of constitution dispute arising out of any specific treaty/covenant/agreement or other legal document executed prior to enforcement of Indian constitution can’t be resolved by any court/ tribunal/ and barred by law. Applications u/order 7 rule 11 CPC allowed and suit filed by respondent, rejected
