PC Act | Magistrate Can’t Make Declaration On Drawing Of Adverse Inference Against Accused For Refusing To Provide Voice Sample: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court recently set aside observations of a magistrate regarding drawing of adverse inference against an accused, who refused to provide his voice sample at investigation stage, in a corruption case. "As far as the observation made by the learned Magistrate regarding unfavourable reckoning is concerned, wherein he has stated that the accused shall be responsible if any...

Govt Employee Has School Going Children, Old Parents Not Ground To Challenge Transfer Order: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court refused to interfere in the transfer order of a government servant by opining that no malafide has been alleged in the transfer order and the contention of the petitioner that he has school going children and old parents cannot be a ground for the Court to interfere in the transfer order.The single judge bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur observed:“No malafide has...

12 Years After Arrest, Rajasthan High Court Says Jaipur Bomb Blast Convict Was Juvenile On Date Of Occurrence

The Rajasthan High Court has set aside District & Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan's order by which it had quashed Juvenile Justice Board's decision to declare Mohd Salman, who was a convict in Jaipur Bomb Blasts case of 2008, to be a juvenile on the date of occurrence. Salman and other convicts were acquitted by the court on Wednesday in a common decision on merits in their appeals ....

‘Unfair Probe, Manipulations Apparent’: Rajasthan High Court Acquits Four Convicts In 2008 Jaipur Blasts Case

The Rajasthan High Court on Wednesday acquitted all the four convicts in the 2008 serial Jaipur blast case and upheld the acquittal of fifth accused on the ground that prosecution has not been able to establish the chain of the circumstances to establish their guilt.On May 13 in 2008, a number of explosions took place in Jaipur, resulting into death of 71 persons and injuries to 185 persons....

Rajasthan High Court Upholds Benefit Of Probation To Two Convicts, Says Complainant Has No Right To Seek Enhancement Of Sentence

The Rajasthan High Court on Tuesday upheld the judgement of a trial court which extended the benefit of probation to two convicts who were convicted under Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), Section 325 (Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt) and Section 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of IPC, in alternative to their imprisonment....

Jail Punishment Imposed Subsequent To Recommendation To Shift Prisoner To Open Air Camp Not Relevant: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court on Tuesday directed the State to transfer a prisoner to Open Air Camp, pursuant to the decision of Recommendation Committee for such transfer, which was allegedly not implemented on the ground that the prisoner was punished with jail punishment for 2 years preceding his recommendation by the Committee.It is to be noted that Rule 3(g) of the Rajasthan Prisoners Open...

Rajasthan High Court Criticises Abuse Of PIL Jurisdiction To Serve Vested Interest, Imposes 50K Cost On Villagers

The Rajasthan High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000. on two villagers from Jodhpur for abusing PIL jurisdiction in pursuance of their vested interests with respect to quarry licenses for mining activities distributed via e-auction.The bench of Acting Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Srivastava and Justice Kuldeep Mathur said the petitioners’ allegations as contained in the writ...

Lok Adalats Have No Adjudicatory Power, Can Only Pass Award Based On Compromise Between Parties: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court has held that Lok Adalats have no adjudicatory power and can only make awards on the basis of a compromise between the parties.The Court, while allowing a writ Ppetition, quashed the Lok Adalat’s decision permitting Public Prosecutor to withdraw prosecution, and ordered for restoration of the criminal matter, granting the parties the liberty to proceed according to...

Murder Of Lawyer: Rajasthan HC To Consider Issuance Of Guidelines For Protection Of Lawyers, Asks Bar Council Of India To Submit Suggestions

The Rajasthan High Court on Thursday sought response from Union of India, Rajasthan government, Bar Council of India and Bar Council Of Rajasthan on issuance of guidelines by the court for protection of advocates till appropriate legislation is framed in this regard. The division bench of the Acting Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Anil Kumar Upman also took notice of a...

Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Lawyers' Strike Over Peer's Murder, Condemns Bar For Obstructing AG's Entry

The Rajasthan High Court on Tuesday took suo moto cognizance of strike called by various Bar Associations on account of a lawyer's murder in Jodhpur.The division bench of the Acting Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Vijay Bishnoi said call of strike and abstention from work by anyone including the office bearers of any of the Bar Association is not in accordance with the...

Successful Candidate's Juvenile Record Not Ground To Deny Service As Police Constable: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court recently held that the employer is prohibited by law from referring to or taking in consideration the judgment of conviction so as to deprive a successful candidate, who was a child in conflict with law at some point of time, from being employed in Government service.The division bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Yogendra Kumar Purohit was hearing an intra...

Rajasthan High Court Upholds Maintenance Order, Says Husband Levelled Adultery Allegation But At Same Time Sought Restitution Of Conjugal Rights

The Rajasthan High Court recently upheld a maintenance order passed under section 125 CrPC which was challenged on the ground that the wife was allegedly living in adultery.The Single Judge bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Jain observed:“the evidence adduced by the present petitioner is not sufficient enough to draw a conclusion that respondent No.1 (wife) was living in adultery. The fact...