Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 04 To May 10, 2026

NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 164 - 178] Order/Judgments of the Week Nishi Mishra & Anr. v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 164 Kamlesh Kumar v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 165 Dr Charan Jeet Singh v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 166 Ishita Bhardwaj v/s State of Rajasthan and connected; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 167 Manish Dotasara v State of Rajasthan & Ors. and other connected petitions; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 168 Surendra Pal Singh Sahni v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 169 Dinesh Kumawat & Ors. v Union of India & Ors., and other connected petitions; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 170 Vikas Wadhwa v Punjab and Sind Bank & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 171 Mohammad Atik & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 172 Rohit Nayak & Anr. v Kailash & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 174 Akshya v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 175 Mohammad Rahil Belim v State of Rajasthan, and other connected petition; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 176 Islam Khan and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 177 Rohitashva v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 178 Rajasthan High Court Grants 'Honourable Acquittal', Says 'Benefit Of Doubt' Or 'No Evidence' Improper Where Charges Not Proved Title: Nishi Mishra & Anr. v State of Rajasthan Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 164 Rajasthan High Court honourably acquitted two sister-in-laws in a cruelty case observing that while granting acquittal the use of terms "benefit of doubt" and "in absence of evidence" by trial court and revisional court was improper especially when prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges. The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand It further observed that even though the concepts of “honourably acquittal”, “acquittal of blame”, “fully acquittal”, were unknown to CrPC, an honourable acquittal may be where the court definitively concluded, based on a full-fledged trial and appreciation of evidence, that the accused had not committed the crime. The Court highlighted that such acquittal was very different from arriving at that finding based on some lacuna in the prosecution case or in the leading of evidence or due to non-availability of credible evidence. In such a case, the accused was not convicted by giving him benefit of doubt. Belated Allegations Not Raised In Earlier FIR Indicate Abuse Of Process: Rajasthan High Court Title: Kamlesh Kumar v State of Rajasthan & Anr. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 165 Rajasthan High Court held that non-disclosure of a serious offence within a reasonable time or at a relevant time when an earlier crime was registered against the same accused by the same complainant, would falsify the allegations and render the subsequent complaint/FIR/allegations an abuse of law. While setting aside an FIR alleging rape against the petitioner, the bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed that the FIR was lodged after a delay of more than two months from the date of alleged incident, and that too in the background of an existing property dispute between the concerned family members. “…impugned FIR No.127/2021 is nothing but a bundle of lies full of fabricated and malicious allegations and under the changed circumstances, where the petitioner was not found guilty in the first FIR No.80/2021 by the Investigating Officer, it would be absurd to allow the prosecution of the petitioner to continue by considering the aforesaid.” Second FIR Permissible If New Facts Or Larger Conspiracy Emerge From Subsequent Investigation: Rajasthan High Court Title: Dr Charan Jeet Singh v State of Rajasthan & Anr. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 166 Rajasthan High Court has held that registration of a second FIR is permissible when it presents rival version's set of facts arising from same circumstances in relation to first FIR but pertaining to a "larger conspiracy" and when probe brings out unknown facts at a later stage. The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand referred to Supreme Court case of State of Rajasthan v Surendra Singh Rathore and said: “…when second FIR is in the form of a counter-complaint or presents a rival version of a set of facts, in reference to which an earlier FIR was registered and when the second FIR is arising from the same set of circumstances, relating to a larger conspiracy and when investigation and/or person related to incident brings to the light hitherto unknown facts or circumstances, at a later stage, then registration of the subsequent FIR is permissible.” Sending Abortion Pills Through Courier Not Offence U/S 312 IPC Unless Forcefully Given To Cause Miscarriage: Rajasthan High Court Title: Ishita Bhardwaj v/s State of Rajasthan and connected Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 167 Rajasthan High Court quashed an FIR against a woman under sections 312 and 313 IPC, observing that merely sending abortion pills to anyone did not fulfil the basic ingredients of the...

Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 04 To May 10, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 04 To May 10, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers