Hearing a matter through its Paperless Module 2.0, Rajasthan High Court finds the main petition had never been uploaded — only the stay petition had — and directs that a comprehensive, accountability-fixing Standing Order covering all case types be placed before the Chief Justice.
Rajasthan High Court holds that confiscation proceedings under mining law and a criminal complaint under the Motor Vehicles Act are legally distinct, so a magistrate cannot order a seized vehicle released without first calling for a report from the Mining Department.
Rajasthan High Court directs the Bar Council of Rajasthan to dispose of all pending advocate-enrolment applications by September 9, 2026, holding that delays traced to the Bar Council's own election process were adversely affecting law graduates' right to livelihood.
Rajasthan High Court disposes of a PIL on leopard-habitat protection in Jawai by declaring a 1-km interim regulatory zone around notified conservation boundaries — a precautionary screening distance, not a permanent no-construction line, pending a full state policy.
Rajasthan High Court dismisses a quashing petition and imposes ₹50,000 costs on a man who presented himself as an advocate before trial courts without bar enrolment, holding that no person may practise as an advocate without enrolment under the Advocates Act.
Rajasthan High Court sets aside a Family Court order and grants divorce in a 22-year marriage, holding that the wife's denial of cohabitation since 2005 combined with a since-failed Section 498-A complaint against the husband amounted to cruelty.
Rajasthan High Court quashes an FIR filed nearly four years into a marriage alleging the husband used drugs and black magic to induce it, holding the marital-rape exception under IPC barred the core allegation and the delay pointed to changed circumstances, not a concealed crime.
Rajasthan High Court upholds the compulsory retirement of a government Ayurvedic dispensary in-charge, rejecting his argument that a subordinate compounder was solely responsible for irregular sickness-certificate entries.
Rajasthan High Court upholds a trial court's decision to condone a nearly five-year delay in filing a written statement, holding that the timeline under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC is directory, not mandatory, in non-commercial suits.
Rajasthan High Court holds that discovery and production of documents under Order XI CPC cannot be invoked merely for convenience when the evidence sought is otherwise reasonably accessible to the litigant through public channels.