CRLA / 274 / 1993 (STATE VS CHANDRA AVTAR) Date of Order/Judgment: 08/12/2025 The State and the complainant sought enhancement of the sentence awarded to the respondents for offences of cheating and forgery. HELD- that enhancement can be ordered only when the sentence is manifestly inadequate, perverse or illegal. Finding that the Trial Court exercised discretion within statutory limits and no perversity or illegality was shown, interference was declined. The conviction and sentence were affirmed, and the criminal appeal and revision petition were dismissed.
2
CRLA / 494 / 1994 (BRIJ MOHAN @ RAJA VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 05/12/2025 The appellant sought reversal of the conviction under Section 3(1) (x) of the SC/ST Act, and Section 323 IPC. HELD- that the incident occurred inside a closed showroom and not in public view, an essential ingredient of Section 3(1)(x). The dispute was commercial, the demand draft was not proved, and no medical evidence supported the assault. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction was set aside, the appellant acquitted, and appeal allowed.
3
CRLA / 680 / 1998 (HIMMAT SINGH VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 05/12/2025 The appellant sought setting aside of conviction under Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. HELD- that gas regulators are not declared essential commodities and no control order was produced. The seized articles were not proved to be regulators nor examined, and recovery suffered from defects without independent support. On parity with the acquitted co-accused, the prosecution failed. The conviction was set aside, the appellant acquitted, bail bonds discharged, fine refunded.
4
CW / 981 / 2019 (SHANKAR RAM VS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 04/12/2025 The petitioner challenged disciplinary proceedings culminating in dismissal. HELD- that after a regular departmental enquiry, findings must rest on evidence adduced therein and not on a preliminary enquiry. Ignoring hostile witnesses and the criminal Final Report showed non-application of mind. The Suo motu review was arbitrary. The dismissal and appellate orders were quashed, reinstatement with continuity of service directed, the matter remanded, and the petition disposed.
5
CW / 12663 / 2016 (SMT ANAND KANWAR VS STATE AND ANR) Date of Order/Judgment: 04/12/2025 The petitioner sought release of family pension on the basis of nomination and PPO, claiming to be the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee. HELD- that nomination does not confer succession or marital rights and that entitlement to family pension depends upon establishing a valid marriage. Disputed questions regarding marital status and succession cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction. The parties were relegated to civil court for declaration of rights. Petition dismissed.
1
CRLMP / 7763 / 2025 (AXIS BANK LTD., VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN,) Date of Order/Judgment: 09/12/2025 The petitioner sought quashing of the order directing refund of the amount appropriated from the Fixed Deposit pursuant to court orders. HELD- that the amount deposited under judicial directions was court property and could not be appropriated without prior permission of the criminal court. The DRT order permitting appropriation was passed in ignorance of binding criminal court orders and could not override them. Finding no illegality in the Trial Court’s directions, petition disposed off.
2
CRLW / 1134 / 2025 (KAPTAN SINGH S/O SHRI AMAR SINGH VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 04/12/2025 The petitioner sought quashing of the order opening a history sheet under Rule 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965. HELD- that a history sheet can be opened only against a habitual offender on reasoned satisfaction. With only one conviction and other cases ending in acquittal or quashing, the petitioner could not be treated as a habitual offender. The action was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21. The order was quashed, the petition allowed, and applications disposed of.
3
CRLMP / 6829 / 2025 (STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS BHAWANI SINGH RAJAWAT S/O KISHORE SINGH) Date of Order/Judgment: 04/12/2025 The State sought leave to withdraw prosecutions pending against sitting and former MLAs under Section 321 CrPC, arising from FIRs relating to peaceful public protests. HELD- that withdrawal requires High Court leave and must subserve public interest. Finding that the agitations were peaceful, offences were petty, and no disturbance of public order was alleged, the Court granted leave to the State to move applications for withdrawal before the Trial Court. The petitions were allowed.
4
CW / 7084 / 2024 (ESHITA GUPTA D/O DR. NAVNEET GUPTA VS JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY) Date of Order/Judgment: 03/12/2025 The Peti. sought release of her original Transfer & Migration Certificate deposited with the respondent University on admission to the MBBS course. HELD- original documents are taken only for verification & cannot be retained as security to compel payment of fees. No clause in the information booklet or affidavits authorized such retention. The Uni. may recover dues through lawful means. Directions were issued for immediate release of documents. Present application stands disposed off.
5
SAW / 151 / 2025 (SUNIL SAMDARIA S/O LATE SHRI B. L. SAMDARIA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 02/12/2025 The appellant sought a writ of quo warranto to challenge the appointment of respondent No.2 as Additional Advocate General. HELD- that quo warranto lies only against appointments to statutory public offices. The post of Additional Advocate General is a professional engagement and not a public office, and the State Litigation Policy, 2018 is only an executive guideline without statutory force. As no statutory violation was shown, the writ was not maintainable. The appeal was dismissed.
