NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 335 - 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 348]

Aman Khan v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 335

A v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 336

Ramrakh Chhipa & Ors. v Municipal Council; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 337

Smt. Mamta Jangid v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 338

R v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 339

Mukul Vairagi v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 340

M/s K.K. Gupta Constructions Private Limited v Union of India & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 341

Ajay Sharma v State of Rajasthan & Ors, and other connected petitions; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 342

Rani Gupta v Management Committee, Maheshwari Public School and Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 343

Smt. Kiran v Municipal Corporation & Anr., and other connected petitions; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 344

Smt. Megha Tak v State of Rajasthan & Ors, and other connected petitions; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 345

Ram Prasad v State of Rajasthan & Ors, and other connected petitions; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 346

Riddham Deora v Union of India; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 347

Shree Balaji Enterprises v/s Reserve Bank Of India & Batch; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 348

Anoop Kumar Meena v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Order/Judgments of the Week

Right To Livelihood Doesn't Extend To Street Vending In Areas Outside Notified Zones: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Aman Khan v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 335

Rajasthan High Court dismissed a petition filed by a street vendor, having a vehicle repair kiosk, opining that where vending zones were declared by the State by issuing notifications, no one could be allowed to put kiosks or to make temporary encroachments on any place which was not declared as a vending zone.

The bench of Justice Anand Sharma observed that the while right to livelihood under Article 19(1)(g) could not be denied arbitrarily, it was equally true that such right was not unqualified or unfettered.

Matrimonial Offences Cannot Be Quashed Merely Due To Subsequent Divorce Or Spouses Living Separately: Rajasthan High Court

Title: A v State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 336

Rajasthan High Court dismissed a quashing petition filed by a husband, observing that a criminal case could not be quashed only because one of the spouses had obtained a decree of divorce and they were living separately.

The bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Jain observed that it might happen that the spouses were having differences and were living separately, but a matrimonial offence required a solution under law and that included registration of a criminal case.

"A criminal case cannot be quashed only on the ground that one of the spouse has obtained a decree of divorce and now they are living separately," it held.

Payment Of Property Tax Doesn't Establish Ownership To Sue On Behalf Of Temple Without Written Authority: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Ramrakh Chhipa & Ors. v Municipal Council

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 337

Rajasthan High Court held that a suit instituted by someone in their personal capacity, asserting rights on behalf of a community or any deity, could not be sustained in the absence of any resolution, power of attorney or other written authority from the trust of the concerned temple or the community.

The bench of Justice Maneesh Sharma further opined that payment of municipal taxes or issuance of receipt for such payment, only constituted proof of possession, without itself conferring any right, title, or interest of the payee over the concerned property.

“…mere issuance of a payment receipt bearing the name of a particular depositor neither creates nor extinguishes title to immovable property, nor does it constitute evidence of ownership or lawful management.”

The Court opined that the appellants had no locus to file the suit in the first place.

“…suit was instituted by the plaintiffs in their personal capacity, purportedly asserting rights on behalf of the Chhipa community and the deity Shri Ram-Laxman Ji Maharaj. However, the plaintiffs placed no resolution, power of attorney, or other written authority from the Temple Trust or the Chhipa community on record to establish their authority to institute the proceedings. In the absence of any document demonstrating that the plaintiffs were vested with administrative control or authorized by a competent body, the plaintiffs remain unauthorized individuals with no legal character or personal entitlement to maintain the suit.”

Woman's Midnight Arrest Without Magistrate Permission Illegal, But Not Ground To Quash Case: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Smt. Mamta Jangid v State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 338

The Rajasthan High Court has held the midnight arrest of a woman without prior permission of the Magistrate to be violative of Section 43(5) BNSS, but ruled that the illegality in arrest alone was not a ground to quash the proceedings against her under the NDPS Act.

At the same time, noting the lapse on the part of the Sub-Inspector who effected the arrest, the Court directed the Director General of Police, Rajasthan, to take action for training police personnel about the procedure of arrest.

“…Sub-Inspector, who conducted search after receipt of information has not bothered to read Section 43 of BNSS before effecting arrest of the present petitioner, who is a female. This clearly indicates that the police requires either extensive training or a handbook type of material so that the police personnel can comply with the provisions of law.”

Rape | Section 376 IPC Not Prima Facie Attracted Where Prosecution Material Shows Subsisting Marital Relationship: Rajasthan High Court

Title: R v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 339

The Rajasthan High Court has partly allowed a criminal revision petition and quashed the charge of rape framed against a man, holding that Section 376 IPC was not prima facie attracted as the prosecution material itself showed that the parties were in a subsisting marital relationship at the relevant time. [2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 339]

The bench of Justice Kuldeep Mathur reached this conclusion despite the prosecutrix's allegation that the marriage had not been solemnised or registered in accordance with the requisite formalities.

The Court noted that the prosecution case itself proceeded on the assertion that the petitioner had entered into a marriage with her.

Medical Board Can't Declare Disabled Candidate Ineligible For MBBS Without Explaining Specific Functional Limitations: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Mukul Vairagi v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 340

The Rajasthan High Court has granted relief to an MBBS student who had been declared ineligible to pursue the course due to a congenital deformity of his left upper limb, holding that the Medical Board could not reach such a conclusion without identifying the specific functional limitations that prevented him from pursuing the course.

The bench of Justice Nupur Bhati found that the Board's assessment failed to identify any specific functional competency which the petitioner was unable to perform or explain how his impairment prevented him from pursuing the MBBS course.

“The impugned reports…given by the Medical Board are deficient, inasmuch as it does not contain a reasoned finding as to the specific functional competency which the petitioner is unable to perform and further does not explain as to how the disability prevents him from pursuing the MBBS Course. The reports also lack assessment regarding assistive devices or reasonable accommodation and the assessment of his dominant right hand.

'Can't Be Left Remediless': Rajasthan High Court Allows Offline Appeal Amid Dispute Over E-Tender Appeal Submission

Title: M/s K.K. Gupta Constructions Private Limited v Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 341

Rajasthan High Court granted relief to an unsuccessful bidder, whose filing of an appeal via the CPWD (Central Public Works Department) e-tender portal was disputed, by opining that a person could not be allowed to remain remediless.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand allowed the petitioner to submit an offline copy of the memo of appeal before the concerned department within 24 hours and directed the department to decide the same expeditiously. The Court stayed the tender process till final disposal of the appeal.

Missed Physical Test Due To Illness, Pregnancy, Heavy Rains: Rajasthan High Court Grants One-Time Retest On ₹10,000 Cost

Title: Ajay Sharma v State of Rajasthan & Ors, and other connected petitions

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 342

The Rajasthan High Court has granted a one-time opportunity to candidates who missed the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) for recruitment to the posts of Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander due to circumstances such as illness, physical injuries, pregnancy and heavy rains.

The bench of Justice Sameer Jain has directed the authorities to conduct a rescheduled test in September 2026. Candidates availing the relief, except those with valid Below Poverty Line (BPL) status, will have to deposit ₹10,000 towards the organisational expenses.

The Court observed that the petitioners had nothing to gain by deliberately missing the PET and that their absence was due to genuine and unavoidable circumstances.

“The paramount consideration is the interest of justice and a balanced approach. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners stood to gain nothing by deliberately missing the PET; and their absence was compelled by genuine, unavoidable circumstances as discussed above.”

₹1 Lakh Compensation For Illegal Termination Of Teacher 'Shockingly Disproportionate': Rajasthan High Court Enhances It To ₹20 Lakh

Title: Rani Gupta v Management Committee, Maheshwari Public School and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 343

The Rajasthan High Court enhanced the compensation payable to a teacher terminated illegally, from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 20 lakh, observing that the amount awarded by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal was “shockingly disproportionate”.

The Court was dealing with a plea by a Hindi teacher who had served the respondent-school for around 20 years before her services were terminated in 2015 on the ground that there were no students for the subject of Hindi. The Tribunal had held the termination to be bad in law but, as the teacher had subsequently attained the age of superannuation, awarded her lump-sum compensation of Rs. 1 lakh in lieu of reinstatement.

The bench of Justice Anuroop Singhi took note of the fact that the teacher was a permanent employee, had rendered unblemished service for around 20 years, was not terminated for any misconduct and was not gainfully employed between the date of her termination and superannuation. The finding that her termination was bad in law had also attained finality, as the school had not challenged it.

Rajasthan High Court Raps Jodhpur Municipal Corporation For Failure To Hand Over Auctioned Plots Due To Encroachments

Title: Smt. Kiran v Municipal Corporation & Anr., and other connected petitions

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 344

Rajasthan High Court took serious note of Municipal Corporation's inaction against encroachers that led to its inability to hand over possession of auctioned plots to the successful bidders, and opined that the body being part of the government was not supposed to function in a manner that led to litigations.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a bunch of petitions that alleged non-handing over of possession of auctioned plots by the government, as well as impleadment applications by other people alleging right over the said plots on account of having possession, who were being treated as encroachers by the Municipal Corporation.

“By its conduct and performance, the State must create a sense of security in the mind of the citizens and citizens while dealing with the State must be in a position to rely upon the representations made by it. A special sanctity attaches to its acts; a presumption of correctness is available in respect of them and a sense of security is assumed in relation thereto.”

Rajasthan High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of Former CJI Sanjiv Khanna As One-Man Commission In Adarsh Credit Society Dispute

Title: Smt. Megha Tak v State of Rajasthan & Ors, and other connected petitions

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 345

The Rajasthan High Court has set aside an order appointing former Chief Justice of India Justice Sanjiv Khanna as a one-man commission to adjudicate the claims and counterclaims of parties in disputes concerning properties attached in connection with the Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society.

A Division Bench of Justice Munnuri Laxman and Justice Sangeeta Sharma observed that the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 provides its own statutory mechanism for the realisation of assets of a defunct society and related matters.

"We are of the view that until the adjudication is done in order to safeguard the properties in question, we are not inclined to interfere in the order of attachment or the order granting status quo by the learned Single Judge. However, we are inclined to set aside the order of appointing the retired Hon'ble Chief Justice of India as a one man commission to adjudicate the claims and counter claims of the parties to the writ petitions," it said.

Can't Demolish Properties For Road Widening Without Examining Title Claims, Fair Hearing: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Ram Prasad v State of Rajasthan & Ors, and other connected petitions

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 346

The Rajasthan High Court directed the constitution of a committee to examine the title claims and grievances of persons facing eviction and demolition for road construction and widening under Sriganganagar's Master Plan, holding that they must be given a fair hearing before any such action is taken.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed that while development and road expansion in accordance with the Master Plan should not be obstructed, authorities could not deprive persons of their properties without following due process of law.

The Court further directed that if a person's valid title is established but the property is nevertheless required for road construction or widening in public interest, a decision must be taken to compensate them.

“In the considered opinion of this Court, the city's development and beautification efforts, as outlined in the Master Plan, should proceed without obstruction. However, it is equally essential to ensure that property owners whose assets are subject to demolition are given a fair hearing. Accordingly, a Committee is required to be constituted to examine each case and redress the grievances of the petitioners.”

Minor Can't Be Denied Passport Merely Because Estranged Father Withholds Consent: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Riddham Deora v Union of India

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 347

The Rajasthan High Court has directed the passport authority to issue a passport to a minor child, observing that merely because the father's consent was absent from the application, his constitutional right to go abroad cannot be violated.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed;

"The future and career of the petitioner cannot be allowed to remain dependent upon the wish, will and desire of one of his parents. The valuable constitutional right of the petitioner cannot be prejudiced and must not be allowed be taken away, merely because the consent of his father is not there on the application for getting passport. The petitioner cannot be compelled to approach his father to get his consent on the said application".

The bench further noted that unless the present of the children is fine and taken care of, how would their future become bright? The bench also emphasized that a child's right to go abroad for the betterment of his future career cannot be allowed to be ruined merely in the absence of the father's consent.

Rajasthan High Court Issues Guidelines To Combat Blanket Freezing Of Bank Accounts In Cyber Crime Cases

Title: Shree Balaji Enterprises v/s Reserve Bank Of India & Batch

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 348

The Rajasthan High Court has recently issued comprehensive guidelines for investigative agencies, banks and other authorities to combat "indiscriminate" freezing of bank accounts in cyber crime cases with the object of not only ensuring effective investigation but also protect "innocent citizens".

Justice Anand Sharma was dealing with a batch of 105 petitions wherein petitioners had challenged the freezing/debit-freezing/lien marking over their bank accounts pursuant to communications issued by the Investigating Agencies in connection with alleged cyber financial frauds.

In view of large number of similar matters coming before the Court and the recurring nature of the grievance, the High Court thought it appropriate to also lay down certain general directions and safeguards so that the legitimate interests of investigation and recovery of cyber-fraud proceeds are protected without subjecting innocent citizens, firms, companies and other account holders to arbitrary or disproportionate financial restrictions.

"The object is not to create an additional hurdle for cyber-crime investigation, but to ensure that effective investigation and protection of innocent citizens operate simultaneously. The fight against cybercrime will be strengthened, rather than weakened, when investigating agencies distinguish between a genuine mule account and an innocent account into which an isolated transaction has incidentally travelled" the court said.

Rajasthan High Court Stays Termination Of Govt Employee For Concealing Stayed Conviction

Title: Anoop Kumar Meena v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

The Rajasthan High Court has stayed the termination of a government employee whose services were terminated over allegations that he had suppressed and concealed information relating to his criminal conviction, which had already been stayed by a coordinate bench of the Court.

The bench of Justice Anuroop Singhi took note of the earlier order staying the petitioner's conviction in a criminal case. The coordinate bench had observed that allowing the conviction to operate could cause irreparable loss to the petitioner, a government servant, by adversely affecting his career in service.