Rajasthan High Court judgments

The Rajasthan High Court has declared that requiring a separate typing test for Lower Division Clerks appointed after July 5, 2010, is illegal, holding that RS-CIT certification fully satisfies the computer proficiency requirement under the amended service rules. This ruling directly impacts thousands of state employees entitled to seniority, promotions, and arrears without additional testing, reinforcing parity in recruitment conditions.

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail to a compounder accused of culpable homicide after the FSL report conclusively established sudden cardiac failure as the cause of death, not the alleged injection. This ruling reinforces that prosecutorial allegations unsupported by medical evidence cannot sustain a prima facie case under BNS 2023, protecting healthcare providers from baseless criminal liability.

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail to an accused possessing 9.43 grams of MDMA, ruling that possession below the commercial quantity threshold, combined with prolonged pre-trial detention and absence of flight risk, justifies release under Section 483 BNSS. This reinforces that statutory bail thresholds and procedural delays can override strict NDPS Act presumptions, benefiting first-time offenders in delayed prosecutions.

The Rajasthan High Court has struck down a proclamation and attachment order against an accused who was away for livelihood, ruling that mere non-appearance due to absence from the registered address-without evidence of deliberate evasion-cannot trigger Sections 82 and 83 CrPC. The court emphasized that strict compliance with publication norms and a reasoned finding of intentional avoidance are mandatory safeguards under natural justice, protecting innocent absconders from punitive proceedings.

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that a pre-trial detention exceeding five years, without trial conclusion, constitutes a per se violation of Article 21, entitling the accused to bail even in heinous offences like murder. This sets a new benchmark for judicial intervention in chronic trial delays, affecting all accused facing prolonged incarceration without conviction.

Rajasthan High Court ruled that a Head Constable lacks authority to investigate offences carrying imprisonment exceeding seven years under BNSS, staying trial proceedings. The decision underscores statutory competence requirements for investigating officers, impacting criminal procedure compliance in serious offences.

Rajasthan High Court grants bail under Sections 103(1), 3(5), and 105 of BNS, holding that absence of premeditation in a sudden quarrel and a post-mortem report failing to corroborate the cause of death warrant release. The ruling underscores that prolonged pre-trial detention is unjustified when prosecution evidence is inconclusive.

Rajasthan High Court rules that NMC's FAQ clarification, requiring two years of cumulative government hospital experience post-PG degree, supersedes the one-year senior residency mandate for Assistant Professor eligibility. The judgment directs inclusion of the petitioner in the interview process, setting a precedent for medical education service law.

Rajasthan High Court reaffirms that a habeas corpus petition cannot override the corpus's voluntary choice to live with her husband. The ruling underscores that personal liberty under Article 21 includes the right to reside with a chosen partner, even if the relationship is not legally recognized as a live-in partnership.

Rajasthan High Court ruled that a death due to COVID-19, without prima facie evidence of instigation or intentional aid, cannot sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC. The court suspended the sentence, emphasizing the need for direct nexus between the accused's actions and the deceased's suicide.

Rajasthan High Court rules that trial courts must prioritize and conclusively determine a victim's age under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act before proceeding with POCSO cases, ensuring compliance with statutory safeguards. The directive mandates recording the victim's statement within 30 days, failing which legal measures must be employed to secure attendance.

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that when a person is convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in multiple cases, the substantive prison terms may be ordered to run concurrently to avoid excessive incarceration. However, any default sentences arising from unpaid fines or compensation must still be served consecutively, preserving the deterrent effect of financial penalties. This clarifies sentencing practice for repeat cheque bounce offenders across India.

Rajasthan High Court rules that circumstantial evidence, including pre-trap proceedings and demand corroboration, is sufficient to establish guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act, even if key witnesses turn hostile. The judgment reinforces that direct evidence is not mandatory for conviction in corruption cases, impacting anti-corruption prosecutions nationwide.

Rajasthan High Court holds electricity boards strictly liable for electrocution deaths under the Fatal Accidents Act, enhancing compensation to Rs. 4,31,600 with 6% interest. The ruling underscores negligence in maintaining electrical infrastructure as grounds for heightened liability, impacting future tort claims against public utilities.

Rajasthan High Court upholds the continuation of guest faculties under the Vidya Sambal Yojna at Rs. 800/hour until regular appointments are made, reinforcing job security and honorarium rights. The ruling sets a binding precedent for similar schemes, impacting thousands of guest educators across Rajasthan.

Rajasthan High Court rules that shared premises, common chartered accountant, and notary between bidders create a rebuttable presumption of conflict of interest under Rule 81(3)(D) of the RTPP Rules, justifying disqualification even without evidence of actual bid rigging. The ruling sets a strict standard for bidder independence in public procurement.

The Rajasthan High Court has struck down the imposition of monetary deposits as a condition for suspending sentences under BNSS Section 430 in cheque bounce cases, affirming that such conditions exceed statutory authority and violate the principle of proportionality. This ruling protects accused persons from financial coercion during appellate stays and clarifies the limits of appellate courts’ discretion in bail-related orders.

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail to an accused in BNS offences triable by a magistrate, emphasizing that prolonged trial duration combined with clean antecedents and no recovery undermines the necessity of continued custody. This reinforces that procedural fairness under BNSS Section 483 must outweigh mechanical application of non-bailability, especially in non-violent, evidence-light cases.

Rajasthan High Court holds that withholding an employee's salary without a specific, written order is illegal and arbitrary, even for medically reassigned personnel. The court directed payment of arrears, reinforcing that due process must be followed in salary deductions under service law.

Rajasthan High Court grants bail in a POCSO case where the victim and witnesses turned hostile, and the victim's majority was established through testimony and marital status. The court held that forged school records alone cannot sustain POCSO charges if the victim's age is disproven, impacting bail jurisprudence under BNSS Section 483.

The Rajasthan High Court reduced a minor child’s interim maintenance from ₹10,000 to ₹5,000 per month, emphasizing the child’s age (1.5 years) and the petitioner’s income constraints. The ruling underscores judicial discretion in balancing financial responsibility with the child’s needs under Section 528 BNSS.

Rajasthan High Court rules that a nominee director cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act unless the complaint specifically alleges their active involvement or responsibility in the company’s affairs. The ruling underscores that mere nomination by a lending institution does not attract criminal liability without explicit averments.

Rajasthan High Court directs a ₹25,000 deposit as a precondition for producing the corpus in a habeas corpus petition, refundable only if the live-in partner agrees to accompany the petitioner. The ruling underscores judicial discretion in balancing procedural costs with fundamental rights under Article 226.

Rajasthan High Court upholds a minor girl’s right to choose her custodial parent under habeas corpus, directing police to ensure her safety. The ruling reinforces that a minor’s expressed preference can override parental claims in custody disputes, setting a precedent for juvenile autonomy in family law.