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 / 5051 / 2025 (ABHA JAIN W/O SH. ASHOK KUMAR JAIN VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 30/04/2025 Petitioner challenged the penalty orders and closing of mining activity alleging violation of principles natural justice. HELD: Site inspection report dated 16.01.2024 was not supplied with show cause notice; impugned orders lacked reasoning & are silent on the applicability of conversion factor post 2017 Rules which have removed the conversion factor in royalty Schedule. Matter remitted for fresh decision. No coercive action for six weeks. Petition disposed of.
3
CW / 5235 / 2025 (MANJEET DEORA D/O BHAWANI SINGH DEORA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 29/04/2025 Pet. challenged scholarship denial under E1 category despite selection, citing legitimate expectation. HELD: Less income was shown in ITRs i.e. ₹6.96 lakh while the CA assessed ₹11.32 lakh, disqualifying E1 eligibility. Neither promise nor representation was made by the state; admission to foreign university was at petitioner’s risk. Petition dismissed. Respondents restrained from granting E3 scholarships till further orders & directed to submit the list of all E1–E3 beneficiaries.
4
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.
5
CW / 5514 / 2025 (RAMSWAROOP @ PAPPU S/O BOBAD RAM SAINI VS MOOLCHAND SAINI S/O KALLUU RAM SAINI) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/04/2025 Pet. challenged warrant under Order 21 Rule 35 CPC for eviction while appeal before Appellate Rent Tribunal was pending. HELD: Tribunal failed to pronounce judgment despite final hearing. Delay violates Art. 21 and judicial discipline. As per Sec. 19(8) of Act of 2001 Appeal must be disposed of within 180 days from the date of service of notice. In this case more than 2 months have passed. Tribunal directed to deliver judgment within 2 weeks. Petition disposed of with direction.
