Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round Up: June 13 - June 19, 2022

Nominal Index [2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 184 - 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 196] Bhim Saini @ Bhimraj Saini v. State of Rajasthan with other connected matter 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 184 Raju @ Rajkumar Through His Brother Sh. Sharwarmal v. State & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 185 Sarvjeet Kaur v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 186 Richa Dharu v. Hemant Panwar 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 187 X v. Y 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 188 Smt Kamla v. Hindustan Petroleum Corp. Ltd & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 189 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited & Anr. .v. Sharda 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 190 Manisha Vishnoi v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 191 Bhavin Tanwar v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 192 Bheru Lal v. State Of Rajasthan 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 193 Chitrank Sharma v. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 194 Bhan Singh v. State Of Rajasthan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 195 Victim v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 196 Judgments/ Orders of the Week 1. "No Citizen Can Take Law In Own Hands": Rajasthan High Court Refuses Bail To Two In Honour Killing Case, Orders Further Investigation Case Title: Bhim Saini @ Bhimraj Saini v. State of Rajasthan with other connected matter Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 184 The Rajasthan High Court denied bail to two accused, including the girl's brother, in a case 'having a strong trait of honour killing'. Essentially, the deceased-Azad and the accused petitioner-Bhim Saini's sister were in a relationship. As the girl's family was not pleased with the same, therefore, the couple eloped. They were later apprehended by the police and the girl was made to accompany the petitioner-side. The deceased filed a habeas corpus petition following which, the parties attempted to settle the matter through compromise and accordingly, the deceased withdrew the petition. In a close proximity of time, the boy went missing and after four days his dead body was found lying in a pond tied with the heavy iron material. Justice Farjand Ali, while dismissing the bail application of the two accused, observed, "Needless, to observe that every citizen of this country is abided and governed by rule of Law and one has to follow it as no one is above the Law, as in fact no one can. Every citizen is principally embodied to access their fundamental right and legal right peacefully and if it is being hindered by any one, the rule of law and the procedure established by law is there for its recourse, but no citizen is allowed to take the course of law in its own hands, strictly not." 2. Rajasthan High Court Asks Convict Belonging To Below Poverty Line Family To Pay ₹2 Lakh Personal Bond, ₹1 Lakh Surety For 7 Day Parole Case Title: Raju @ Rajkumar Through His Brother Sh. Sharwarmal v. State & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 185 The Rajasthan High Court directed the State to release a convict, belonging to Below Poverty Line (B.P.L.) family, on parole of 7 days on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- and one sound and solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-. However, the court waived the requirement of the petitioner's brother furnishing surety bond. Essentially, the petitioner was granted parole of 7 days under Rule 18 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 on 29.09.2021 with the requirement of furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and two sureties in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each (out of which one was to be of the petitioner's brother Sharwarmal). The petitioner had moved the High Court with an assertion that he may be released on furnishing personal bond only as he is a poor man belonging to the B.P.L. family. 3. Wife Stitching Clothes Domestically Entitled To Maintenance; Welder-Husband Is Like Skilled Workman With Sufficient Income: Rajasthan High Court Case Title: Sarvjeet Kaur v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 186 While hearing a matter pertaining to maintenance, the Rajasthan High Court observed that the husband, who is a welder, is almost like a skilled workman, and thus, it cannot be presumed that he is not earning sufficiently to maintain the petitioner-wife. The court also opined that even if the petitioner-wife is stitching clothes domestically and has some income source, then also the husband is liable to pay maintenance to the wife along with her two children. Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati, while allowing the criminal revision petition, observed, "This Court, after hearing the submissions and analyzing the record of the case, is of the firm opinion that even if the petitioner-wife is stitching clothes domestically then also she is entitled to get the maintenance. The respondent No.2-husband is a welder, which is almost like a skilled workman, and thus, it cannot be presumed ...

Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round Up: June 13 - June 19, 2022

ANIRUDH VIJAY

Tags