CMA / 893 / 2020 (UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS SABO) Date of Order/Judgment: 18/01/2021 Submission that driver of offending vehicle was not holding a “perfect driving license”, since special conditions applicable for driving vehicles carrying hazardous substances were not met, thus, insurance company is not liable to pay damages. Held-Table-III under Rule 137 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules,1989, does not prescribe “Diesel” as hazardous goods. “Perfect driving license” means a valid driving license issued by competent authority for driving a heavy motor vehicle.Appeal dismissed.
CRLW / 382 / 2020 (SUBHASH KHICHAD VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 14/01/2021 Petitioner seeking a direction for release on first parole of 20 days. Previously, when the petitioner was released on emergent parole, he went absconding-Held-For being released on parole, the primary requirement is that the convict must have shown good conduct. Abscondance from parole, by no stretch of imagination can be considered to be good conduct. Grant of parole cannot be claimed by prisoners as a matter of right. Petitioner not entitled for regular parole. Petition dismissed.
CW / 8467 / 2019 (SHILPA BEN GARASIYA (ROJAD) VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 13/01/2021 Whether a female candidate, after marrying a person of TSP-ST, migrates to the State of Rajasthan, can claim caste based reservation also, while taking TSP reservation benefits in terms of the notification dated 21.10.2019 issued by the Governor of Rajasthan? Held-Governor has power to legislate in the field of Scheduled area only. For declaring a caste to be SC/ST in relation to that State or Union territory, Presidential Order issued under Article 341,342 is the final word. Petition dismissed.
CRLMB / 14379 / 2020 (PANKAJ DAMOR VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 15/12/2020 Petitioner granted pardon by competent court under Section 306 CrPC and made an Approver-Whether inherent power under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to grant bail to an approver-Relying on Noor Taki @ Mammu v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1987 Raj. 52-Held-According to Section 306(4)(b) CrPC, approver should be detained in custody till termination of trial, at the same time, in exceptional and reasonable cases, High Court has power under Section 482 CrPC, to enlarge him on bail-Bail granted.
CRLMB / 14546 / 2020 (ABID VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 14/12/2020 Petitioner arrested in connection with offences punishable under IPC, POCSO Act and SC/ST Act. Notice to victim/complainant not served-Held-Section 15-A(3) of SC/ST Act is a mandatory provision of law requiring the victim or his/her representative to be given timely notice in all court proceedings including a bail proceeding. Not adding the respondent would tantamount to attracting dismissal of bail application on account of non-joinder of necessary party-Time granted to array victim as party.
CW / 134 / 2018 (DR RAJVEER SHARMA VS STATE OF RAJ AND ORS) Date of Order/Judgment: 13/01/2021 Whether a third child born to the petitioner on account of failure of a ligation operation can be said to come within the ambit of a memorandum dated 01.06.2017 to deny ACP to the petitioner for three years? Held- If a third child is born, without there being any deliberate intent; the circular would not come in way to deprive the concerned individual of the benefits which are available under the service rules. Writ petition allowed and respondents directed to grant ACP to the petitioner.
CW / 14143 / 2020 (SAMTA ANDOLAN SAMITI (REGD.) VS UNION OF INDIA) Date of Order/Judgment: 04/12/2020 Prayer to set-aside the order whereby respondent No. 5 has been appointed/posted as Chief Secretary of State of Rajasthan-Held-Appointment/posting of a person is a service matter, and does not come within purview of public interest litigation. Challenge to an appointment to a public office can be made, when appointment has been made contrary to some statutory provisions or rules. Petitioners have no locus to file present petition. Thus, Writ Petition is not maintainable. Petition dismissed.
CRLMP / 3545 / 2020 (RAMSWAROOP S/O SHRI BHERULAL VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 06/11/2020 Petitioner-victim whose statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded against his will, can he move an application before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C for getting his statement recorded in support of the complaint made by him?-Held- Magistrate does not have the power to record the statement of a person unsponsored by the Investigating Agency. Only the Investigating Agency can move an appropriate application for recording the statement of any witnesses. Petition dismissed.
CRLW / 643 / 2020 (GOVINDA VERMA S/O SHRI MANGALCHAND VERMA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 02/11/2020 Petition seeking emergent parole under Rule 10A of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 moved before the delivery date of the wife of petitioner-However, matter could not be taken up by court-Meanwhile, wife delivered the child-Petitioner seeking parole to attend the new born child-Held-Essential aspect for emergent parole is to see if there is an involvement of humanitarian consideration-There are certain inherent basic human rights even for an imprisoned person. Petition allowed.
CRLMP / 397 / 2020 (JULFI SINGH S/O SHRI JAWAHAR SINGH B/C GURJAR VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 23/10/2020 Petitions relating to prayer for release of tractors and trolleys, which have been seized by Police Authorities/Mining Authorities/Forest Officials for various reasons-The Hon’ble High Court relied on Asharam and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan (2020) 2 RLW(Raj) 1624, wherein it was held that a vehicle should not be allowed to get rusted in Police Station and ought to be released and laid down the conditions before release of the seized vehicles-Thus, Petitions allowed-Vehicles ordered to be released