Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 1 - June 7, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 215-2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 223NOMINAL INDEXPramod Jain v the Regional Officer, Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 215Yasmeen Bee & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Ors., and other connected matters; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 216Feliram v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 217Dhananjay Kumar v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 218Mamta Kumari v the State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 219Principle Secretary & Ors. v Dalbir Singh; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 220M/s Shalimar Electrical v M/s Kanchan India Limited; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 221Gangasahay & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Anr, and other connected petition; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 222Ranjeet Raigar v State of Rajasthan & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 223Order/Judgments of the WeekCourt Can't Take Cognizance Of Offence Under Water Act Without Valid Authorization By Pollution Control Board: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Pramod Jain v the Regional Officer, Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board & Anr.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 215Rajasthan High Court has said that in absence of a valid authorization by the Pollution Control Board or a competent officer authorized by the Board, in favour of the complainant under Section 49 of Water Act, a criminal court cannot take cognizance of an offence under the Act.The court said that as per the "prima facie material" placed before it, showed absence of any authorization by the Pollution Control Board or any officer authorized by the board in this behalf. The court thus said that the Magistrate shall consider whether any authorization letter was issued by the pollution control board or any other person in this behalf for the purpose of filing of the complaint before him prior to filing of the criminal complaint.Rajasthan High Court Directs Formation Of Panel To Examine Issue Of Faulty Answer Keys, Wrong Questions In Public Recruitment ExamsTitle: Yasmeen Bee & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Ors., and other connected mattersCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 216Expressing concern at recurring instances of faulty answer keys and incorrect questions in public recruitment exams, the Rajasthan High Court directed the State to constitute a "High Level Committee of Senior IAS Officers" to examine the issue and formulate an SOP ensuring transparency and accuracy in future recruitment exams.The court passed the direction, while upholding the right of meritorious candidates who were denied appointment to posts of Teacher Grade III Level II in 2022, based on original answer key which was subsequently revised after a long-drawn litigation. Based on revised answer-key, petitioners secured higher marks than some of the already appointed candidates.In several cases, candidates who were initially denied appointment are thereafter found to have secured higher marks than some of the candidates already appointed on the basis of the original answer key. Denial of appointment to such more meritorious candidates, despite there being no fault attributable to them would be wholly arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Rights of more meritorious candidates cannot be permitted to be defeated on account of a faulty evaluation process attributable solely to the recruiting agency," the court said.Rajasthan HC Expresses Surprise On Refusal For Complainant's Narco-Test Citing Language Barrier Despite Consent, Orders Fresh Murder ProbeTitle: Feliram v State of RajasthanCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 217Rajasthan High Court expressed shock at the refusal of the concerned authority from conducting narco-test of the complainant in a murder case–who had consented to the same, on the ground that he was not fluent in Hindi.Rather the authorities were required to depute someone who was acquainted with the mother tongue of such witness/suspect or victim, in whose presence the test could be done, it said. The court further said that Investigation Officer cannot close the investigation only on the ground that unknown accused persons were untraceable."It is quite shocking and surprising to entertain the aforesaid submission and reasoning behind refusing to conduct narcoanalysis test of the petitioner. If any witness is not acquainted with a particular language or is not fluent in Hindi language, this alone cannot be a ground for refusal of conducting narcoanalysis test of such person/suspect/witness. Under such eventuality, the Authorities concerned were expected to depute a person, who is acquainted with the mother tongue of such suspect/witness/victim, in whose presence, the concerned narcoanalysis test can be conducted".O.31 R.5 General Rules 2018 | Mandatory To Serve Summons To Armed Forces Personnel Through Commanding Officer: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Dhananjay Kumar v State of RajasthanCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 218Rajasthan High Court has said that an armed forces personnel–posted as a Soldier, Sailor or Airman, must be served summons for service of a case through their...

Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 1 - June 7, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 1 - June 7, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers