[2026:RJ-JP:2155] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9312/2025 Sahabuddin S/o Sitab Khan, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Village Belaka, Tehsil And Distt. Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Hurmat Khan S/o Chawala Khan (Deceased), Represented Through Legal Represntatives 1/1. Asu Khan Alias Aas Mohammad S/o Late Hurmat Khan, R/ o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 1/2. Rasid Khan S/o Late Hurmat Khan, R/o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 1/3. Jaituni D/o Late Hurmat Khan, R/o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 1/4. Fatuni D/o Late Hurmat Khan, R/o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 1/5. Sitabi Widow Of Hurman Khan, R/o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 1/6. Buddan D/o Late Hurmat Khan, R/o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 1/7. Reshami D/o Late Hurmat Khan, R/o Village Bahala Tehsil Ramgarh Distt. Alwar. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar Ramgarh, Distt.- Alwar As A Land Holder ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vipul Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohit Gupta HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 19/01/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 01.05.2025, whereby the application dated 07.04.2025, filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a document which is admitted does not require formal proof and even if such [2026:RJ-JP:2155] (2 of 2) [CW-9312/2025] document is not properly stamped, there is no requirement of impounding the same and the document ought to be permitted in evidence. 3. Heard and perused the material available on record. 4. This Court is of the firm opinion that the learned Court below has rightly rejected the application as it is a settled position of law that insufficiently stamped document cannot be read in evidence for any purpose, unless and until it is sufficiently stamped. 5. Moreover, even if there is an admission between the parties with regard to the document, the said document cannot be taken into evidence, as it would certainly defeat the purpose of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act of 1998”). 6. The Act of 1998 clearly provides that it is the duty of the Court before which the insufficiently stamped document is produced, to impound it and send it for proper stamping to the Concerned Authority. 7. It is not in dispute that in the present case, the learned trial Court had impounded the document and has sent it to the Concerned Authority who has already passed an order. 8. In such facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds no error so as to call for any interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 9. Hence, the present civil writ petition is dismissed. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (BIPIN GUPTA),J PARSHANT /35