Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 20 to April 26, 2026

NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 141 - 160]Jogendra Pal v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 141Chetan Prakash Sharma v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 149NM v AK; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 152Priyanka & Ors. v Swarn Singh & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 153Mahesh Tiwari v The State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 154PD Gurjar & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 155Bhuriya v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 156Shankar & Anr. v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 157Ashok Kumar Saini v Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 158Sunil Kumar Yadav v Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 159Jagdish v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 160Order/Judgments of the WeekMagistrate May Seek Police Assistance Under Section 225 BNSS To Probe Complaint Without Ordering FIR: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Jogendra Pal v State of Rajasthan & Anr.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 141Rajasthan High Court has held that under Section 225 BNSS before issuing process, a Magistrate can–without ordering an FIR, direct a police officer or any other person who he thinks fit to conduct an investigation on a complaint to decide if there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused.The court observed that this investigation under Section 225 BNSS is "an extension of the Magistrate's inquiry" and not a substitute for police investigation under Section 175 BNSS, wherein the purpose of the former is to assist the Magistrate in concluding his inquiry before issuing process.The bench of Justice Farjand Ali further observed that “investigation” used in Section 225 did not mean a "full-fledged police investigation", neither it authorized exercise of coercive powers like arrest or filing of charge sheet. Rather, it led to a discreet report or factual input to aid the Magistrate in forming his opinion for proceeding further.“A significant and progressive departure introduced under the BNSS is the incorporation of a participatory safeguard, whereby the proposed accused is accorded a limited right of hearing at the pre-process stage. This innovation seeks to infuse procedural fairness and to prevent mechanical issuance of process without due application of mind, thereby strengthening the balance between the rights of the complainant and the proposed accused.”Govt Department Can't Terminate Outsourced Employee; Can Only Recommend Action To Agency: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Chetan Prakash Sharma v State of RajasthanCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 149The Rajasthan High Court has held an employee working with government through an outsourcing agency can't be terminated by the department and the proper recourse is to request or recommend action to the concerned agency.The bench of Justice Munnuri Laxman made the observation while dealing with a case where the Petitioner was working as State Coordinator E-Governance under Rashtriya Gram Swaraja Abhiyan of the Panchayati Raj Department, through an outsourcing agency, and his services were terminated by the concerned department.The Court noted that instead of approaching the agency with the grievance, the government had directly terminated the petitioner treating him as their employee.Husband Obtaining Divorce Decree From Foreign Court Without Informing Wife Constitutes Cruelty: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: NM v AKCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 152The Rajasthan High Court has observed that a husband obtaining an ex-parte divorce decree from a foreign court without informing the wife, amounts to cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act.The division bench of Justice Arun Monga and Justice Sunil Beniwal further affirmed that in the present case, the ex-parte decree of divorce passed by a Court in California, USA, could not be relied upon since no certified copy of the same as proved by the husband, and the wife was not given effective opportunity to contest the same."Our opinion, ibid, is based on the decisive factor informing us about the conceded circumstance that the respondent-husband secured an ex parte decree of divorce from a court in the United States way back in 2015. The appellant-wife asserts that she became aware of this development only in 2018. Regardless of the precise timeline of such knowledge, the factual significance of this event unliterally by husband cannot be understated. The husband's act of one-sidedly dissolving the marriage abroad is a clear and unequivocal manifestation of his intention to sever the marital bond, apart from leaving the wife shocked, which is nothing but an act of cruelty upon her".HRA, Other Allowances Forming Part Of Deceased's Income Must Be Included To Calculate Motor Accident Compensation: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Priyanka & Ors. v Swarn Singh & Anr.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 153Rajasthan High Court has reiterated that the amount paid to the deceased in his income towards Higher Duties allowance, City Compensatory Allowance, House Rent Allowance, Washing allowance...

Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 20 to April 26, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

Tags