Rajasthan High Court judgments

Rajasthan High Court rules that permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act must reflect the husband's stable government income and the wife's lack of residential security. The Court enhanced the alimony from ₹25 lakhs to ₹40 lakhs, setting a precedent for equitable spousal maintenance calculations in similar cases.

Rajasthan High Court rules that non-disclosure of a pre-existing illness does not automatically void a life insurance policy unless the illness is the proximate cause of death. The court upheld a partial claim of Rs. 2.5 lakh, emphasizing that insurers must prove a direct causal link between the non-disclosure and the death to deny benefits.

Rajasthan High Court rules that merely subsuming transgender persons under OBC reservation violates the NALSA judgment, directing the state to implement a 3% horizontal quota and form a committee to design inclusive policies. The ruling sets a precedent for affirmative action beyond vertical reservations, impacting constitutional rights and state obligations under Articles 14, 15, and 16.

Rajasthan High Court grants bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 CrPC) in an NDPS case, holding that a three-month delay in dispatching forensic samples violates Standing Order No.1/1988, undermining evidentiary reliability. The ruling reinforces that procedural lapses, even in serious offences, can tilt the balance in favour of personal liberty where substantive evidence is lacking.

Rajasthan High Court upholds that a valid LMV licence suffices for driving transport vehicles under 7500 kg, eliminating the need for a separate endorsement. The ruling reinforces the Supreme Court's Mukund Devangan precedent, directly impacting insurance liability and motor accident claims where licence validity is contested.

Rajasthan High Court directs constitution of a medical board to assess safety of pregnancy termination for a minor rape victim and mandates DNA preservation of the fetus for seven years to aid criminal proceedings. The ruling reinforces procedural safeguards under the MTP Act while balancing victim rights and forensic evidence requirements.

Rajasthan High Court mandates authorities to conduct an institutional stray vacancy round to fill 248 vacant PG medical seats for the 2025-26 session, emphasizing compliance with NEET PG counselling guidelines. The ruling sets a precedent for addressing seat vacancies in medical education, ensuring fair admission processes under judicial oversight.

Rajasthan High Court rules that life convicts imprisoned for over 10 years are entitled to bail under Section 389 CrPC (430 BNSS), relying on Supreme Court directives in Sonadhar and Saudan Singh. The judgment underscores the right to speedy justice, mandating bail where appeals face prolonged delays, setting a precedent for undertrials in similar circumstances.

Rajasthan High Court rules that imposing a bank guarantee requirement post-admission for NEET-SS courses breaches the doctrine of legitimate expectation. Candidates are entitled to rely on pre-existing policies, and original documents must be released without delay to avoid administrative arbitrariness.

Rajasthan High Court rules that secured creditors are not obligated to deposit police assistance expenses under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for enforcing possession of secured assets. The decision quashes a lower court order demanding Rs. 6.34 lakh deposit, reinforcing creditor rights and statutory interpretation.

The Rajasthan High Court ruled that assaulting a superior officer resulting in documented medical harm warrants dismissal under the Navy Act, irrespective of provocation or parity with lesser disciplinary cases. The judgment underscores absolute discipline as non-negotiable in armed forces, setting a precedent for zero-tolerance toward insubordination.

Rajasthan High Court rules that migrant women married into Rajasthan are entitled to OBC caste certificates in their new state of residence, even if ineligible for employment reservations. The judgment mandates verification from the parental state but affirms the right to documentation for social welfare benefits, setting a precedent for inter-state administrative recognition of caste status.

Rajasthan High Court rules that the corporate veil cannot be pierced in execution proceedings without proof of fraud, specific pleadings, or statutory mandate. The court held that environmental principles like 'polluter pays' cannot substitute for substantive adjudication under the CPC, reinforcing natural justice in execution cases.

Rajasthan High Court holds that Consumer Commissions cannot dismiss complaints under Section 38(3)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 without adjudicating merits, as it violates principles of natural justice. The ruling mandates that procedural defaults cannot override substantive rights, ensuring complainants get a fair hearing.

Rajasthan High Court grants interim bail to a juvenile accused under the NDPS Act for appearing in examinations, holding that educational rights may temper statutory bail restrictions even for commercial quantity offences. The ruling underscores the court's discretion to balance juvenile welfare with serious criminal allegations.

Rajasthan High Court rules that transport authorities cannot suspend vehicle registration for alleged overloading without first conducting physical verification and weighing. The judgment reinforces due process, mandating evidence-based administrative action and setting a precedent for fair procedure in transport enforcement.

Rajasthan High Court quashes a GST appellate order for non-compliance with natural justice principles, holding that failure to serve notice or upload proceedings renders the order void. The ruling mandates fresh hearings with proper opportunity for the assessee, reinforcing procedural fairness in tax appeals.

The Rajasthan High Court ruled that writ petitions under Article 226 against private cooperative societies, even those performing public functions, are not maintainable unless a distinct public law element is involved. The decision bars employees from seeking pay parity or service-related reliefs through writ jurisdiction, reinforcing the need for contractual or statutory remedies instead.

Rajasthan High Court disposed a habeas corpus petition by prioritizing the minor's expressed willingness to return to her mother, coupled with the mother's undertaking to ensure her well-being. The ruling establishes that allegations of past maltreatment do not automatically negate custody rights if the minor consents and safeguards are in place, offering a nuanced precedent for family courts handling similar disputes.

The Rajasthan High Court ruled that landowners are entitled to 15% developed land as compensation under state policy if monetary payment remains unpaid, regardless of delay. The judgment reinforces promissory estoppel, holding that mere deposit of funds does not constitute valid payment under the Land Acquisition Act.

Rajasthan High Court affirms that the right to education persists during incarceration, granting emergent parole to a convict to appear for university exams. The ruling sets a precedent for balancing penal objectives with rehabilitation, mandating parole where no adverse circumstances exist.

Rajasthan High Court rules that freezing bank accounts without distinguishing disputed and legitimate funds violates proportionality under Article 21. Banks must allow transactions from non-disputed balances pending police clarification, balancing investigative needs with financial rights.

Rajasthan High Court ruled that 50 B.Sc. Nursing students, admitted under a court order despite procedural lapses, must be granted their degrees upon course completion. The judgment underscores that substantive justice prevails over technical non-compliance, impacting students and institutions relying on interim judicial directions.

Rajasthan High Court disposed of a habeas corpus petition after confirming the illegal detention of a minor girl in Delhi, directing police authorities to immediately hand her over to her parents. The ruling underscores the state’s duty to protect minors’ fundamental rights under Article 21 and ensures accountability for unlawful custody.