The Rajasthan High Court held that the authorities could not, for no plausible reason, drop the one Lecturer, Music (Vocal) post reserved for blind or low-vision candidates while keeping similar reservations for other posts (para 8). A vocal-music teacher needs his vocal cords, not his sight, the Court said (paras 6-7). It allowed a visually impaired teacher's writ petition and directed that his sealed result be opened and acted on, if he is found meritorious (paras 9-11).
The Rajasthan High Court set aside an appellate judgment that had acquitted a cheque drawer only because the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed before the fifteen-day payment period expired. Following Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey and Gajanand Burange v. Laxmi Chand Goyal, it held that such a complaint cannot be taken cognizance of, but the payee may file a fresh complaint, with the delay treated as condoned (paras 13-14, 21).
The Rajasthan High Court upheld a man's conviction for the rape and murder of a child under the POCSO Act and Section 302 IPC, holding that the last-seen evidence, the recovery of her clothes at his instance and a DNA report formed a complete chain (paras 28-30). It declined to confirm his death sentence: aged 24, poor and without criminal antecedents, he was not a rarest-of-rare case, so the sentence was commuted to 30 years' imprisonment without parole or premature release (paras 34-36).
The Rajasthan High Court held that a married daughter of a deceased government employee cannot be denied compassionate appointment on the ground of her marriage, as long as she is otherwise entitled to it (para 8). Her claim had been rejected because the deceased's son was available, under a notification of 28.10.2021 (paras 1, 3). As her brother never joined the post and gave a no-objection (paras 5, 9), the Court set aside the rejections and directed a fresh decision (para 10).
Answering a reference prompted by conflicting Single Bench rulings, a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court held that in a suit for specific performance a prayer to declare the subsequent sale deed null and void is only an ancillary relief. Under the proviso to Section 6(1) of the Rajasthan Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, court fee is payable only on the main relief; Section 38, governing cancellation suits, does not apply (paras 1, 17-19).
The Rajasthan High Court refused bail to a man accused of running 294 fake firms to pass about Rs.1,032 crores of inadmissible input tax credit (paras 4, 14). That an offence under Section 132 of the CGST Act carries five years and is triable by a Magistrate is no automatic ground for bail; each application turns on its own facts and evidence (para 12). Economic offences call for a different approach, and a similarly placed co-accused had been refused bail (paras 7-9, 13).
The Rajasthan High Court allowed two NDPS accused to have the call data records and tower locations of the police officers named in the seizure memo summoned and preserved before the defence stage. Saving such data from deletion is not taking defence evidence prematurely, it held. The trial court must have the records procured and kept on file with a Section 65-B certificate, and the accused may confront the officers with them (paras 12-13, 15, 21-22).
A Rajasthan High Court Division Bench dismissed twelve writ petitions by Stenographer Grade-III candidates who lost their places when the High Court revised the 2021 shorthand-test results. A software error had awarded marks on the words typed instead of applying the prescribed formula, and correcting it was justified (paras 10-11, 13, 17). The first result created no right (para 15), and the formula, part of the method of evaluation, did not change the rules of the game (para 19).
The Rajasthan High Court dismissed the State's special appeals and upheld the quashing of a condition in its policy of 07.06.2022 that a nursing college must have its own 100-bed hospital to obtain a no-objection certificate for opening or adding seats. The Indian Nursing Council's Regulations of 2020 already require a 100-bed parent hospital, and the State's stricter administrative condition contravened them (paras 8, 12-14.1, 20).
The Rajasthan High Court held that a State employee facing a threat to life may seek emergency treatment at a private hospital without awaiting prior sanction or a turn at a government or authorised hospital (para 10). Following the Supreme Court's ruling in Surjit Singh, it said the right to health and self-preservation by medical treatment in an emergency is akin to the right to life under Article 21 (para 10). It ordered a ward boy's cardiac treatment bills verified and reimbursed with interest (para 11).
The Rajasthan High Court refused bail under Section 439 CrPC to a petitioner accused of supplying opium in an NCB case in which 33 kg was recovered (paras 8, 12-13). It found him involved in at least three more narcotics cases, held that he had grossly misused the liberty of earlier bail, and noted that he did not surrender on time after his bail was cancelled (paras 8, 10). A person repeatedly involved in drug trafficking can be called a habitual offender (para 11).
The Rajasthan High Court held that public hearings for the environmental clearance of two nearby limestone mine projects may be held at one common venue, at different times, when the venue is in close proximity to both sites (paras 11-13). The Notification of 14.09.2006 requires a hearing at the site or in its close proximity so that local concerns are heard, and residents cannot insist on a particular place (paras 11, 13). The writ petition was dismissed (para 15).