'Shocking': Rajasthan High Court Slams Rejection Of Minor Rape Survivor's Compensation Claim On Technical Grounds

While expressing shock and surprise, Rajasthan High Court set aside an order of the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) that rejected a minor rape victim's application for interim compensation, and asking her to get requisite certificate from the SHO/Magistrate. The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand held that the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme 2011 (“Scheme”) was not followed...

Rajasthan High Court Monthly Digest: March 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 80 To 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 118NOMINAL INDEXCharan Singh Khangarot v Raghunath Singh & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 80Dr. Vimla Kumawat v the State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 81Vinod Kumar v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 82Rameshwar v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 83Ramprakash Kahrlwa v the Director, Elementary...

Wife's Compromise Waiving Future Maintenance Is Against Public Policy; Doesn't Bar Her Claims U/S 125 CrPC: P&H High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently observed that an agreement in which the wife waives her right to claim maintenance from the husband in the future, in exchange for a sum, is opposed to public policy and the same does not estop her from claiming maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, a statutory right."Abandonment of right of maintenance by the wife would not negate her claim...

'Manifest Infirmity': Rajasthan High Court Criticizes Sessions Court For Reversing 'Well-Reasoned' Discharge Of Theft Accused

While discharging accused in a theft case, Rajasthan High Court affirmed that even though a detailed order was not obligatory at the stage of framing of charges the order must reflect conscious application of judicial mind and cannot be cryptic or mechanical.In doing so the court ruled that the Sessions Court order which set aside the discharge of the petitioners was manifestly infirm as it...

Prior Notice By Police Not Necessary For Property Attachment U/S 106 BNSS: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that for attachment of property by the police under Section 106 of the BNSS, no prior notice is required to be served on the person. It distinguished Section 106 from Section 107 where it specifically provides for the magistrate to issue notice to the person whose property is sought to be attached under Section 107 of BNSS. Section 106 BNSS...

Allahabad High Court Slams KDA For 41-Year Delay In Handing Over Allotted Plot, Directs Chief Minister To Probe Officers' Negligence

The Allahabad High Court has called upon Chief Minister Aditya Yoginath to probe the alleged negligence of KDA officers, responsible for 41 years delay in handing over possession of an allotted land to its now 90-years-old lease holder.Justice Sandeep Jain was dealing with the case of a 90-year old plaintiff who was the highest bidder and the obtained a 999 years lease in 1984 but was not...

'Delegation Of Refund Power To Adjudicating Officer Not Contrary To Scheme Of RERA Act': Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that the delegation of the power to direct refund to an Adjudicating Officer is not contrary to the scheme of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The Court observed that while adjudication of compensation is exclusively within the domain of the Adjudicating Officer, other powers of the Authority, including directing a refund, can be...

Telangana High Court Monthly Round-Up : March 2026

Citation 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 17 - 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 36Nominal Index Rudrabatla Santhosh Kumar and Ors v The State of Telangana 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 17Dr. Karam Nikhil Kumar and seventeen others v The State of Telangana 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 18Salguti Vishnuvardhan Reddy & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 19Harshini Kishore v. The Kaloji Narayana Rao University of...

Land Acquisition | HC Can Suo Moto Enhance Compensation Even If No Cross-Appeal Is Filed By Landowners: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that High Court has the suo moto power under Order 41 Rule 33 CPC to enhance the compensation even if the land owners do not filed cross appeal.Relying on a 2010 decision of the Supreme Court in Pralhad and others vs. State of Maharashtra, Justice Sandeep Jain held:“It is apparent that the Apex Court in the case of Pralhad (supra) has considered...

'Despite ACB Exoneration, J&K Govt Issued Show Cause Notice After Seven Years': High Court Stays Blacklisting Of Insurance Broker

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has stayed the debarment/blacklisting of M/s Trinity Reinsurance Brokers Ltd. by the Finance Department of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir, observing that a prima facie case was made out, especially when the impugned order was issued despite the company having been exonerated by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and after an unexplained gap...

'Shockingly Disproportionate': Allahabad HC Quashes ₹2.14 Cr Recovery From Employee; Says No Finding Of Financial Loss Or Personal Gain

Recently, the Allahabad High Court observed that punishment of recovery of Rs. 214.87 lacs from a delinquent employee was “shockingly disproportionate” when there were no findings regarding any financial loss suffered by the department or any monetary gain by the employee due to his misconduct. Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery held “There was no charge that department has suffered...

'Denying Inter-Utility Transfers To Lower-Ranking Officials Without Nexus To Relevant Policy Violates Article 14': P&H High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that denial of inter-utility transfers only to lower-ranking officials without any rational nexus to the object of the policy is violative of Article 14. The Court observed that such classification between employees is arbitrary where it does not serve the stated objective of the policy.Justice Harpreet Singh Brar was hearing a batch of writ...