Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 547 (RAJ)

DIMPLE BHURA @ DIMPLE DASOT WIFE OF SHRI SUNIL DASOT, v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMA/3/2026 · 2026-03-07

Anil Kumar Upman

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:9844] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 3/2026 In S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.3483/2025 Dimple Bhura @ Dimple Dasot Wife of Shri Sunil Dasot, Resident of Flat No. 602, Deenbandhu, Anukampa Apartment, Kabir Marg, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through P.P. 2. Rajeev Verma Son of Shri Shiv Prasad Verma, Resident of A-2, Sanjay Colony, Nehru Nagar, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur City (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP with Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/03/2026 1. In “Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal versus Union of India and Anr.” reported in 2003 (2) SCC 45, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that lawyers have no right to go on strike or to give a call for boycott of Courts. Calls given by Bar Association or Bar Council for such purpose cannot require the Court to adjourn the matters. In the case of “Krishnakant Tamrakar versus the State of Madhya Pradesh” reported in (2018) 17 SCC 27, it has been held that strike by advocates is in violation of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the same tantamount to contempt. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has further held that the office bearers are [2026:RJ-JP:9844] (2 of 2) [CRLMA-3/2026] liable to be removed from the office for passing resolution for strike. In view of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal (Supra) and Krishnakant Tamrakar (Supra), since the advocates are abstaining from work today, this Court deems it proper to pass order on merits. 2. The instant criminal misc. application under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been preferred for restoration of S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.3483/2025, which was dismissed vide order dated 20.11.2025 on account of non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 03.11.2025 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 3. Having considered the grounds mentioned in the application and in the interest of justice, the same is allowed and the S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.3483/2025 is ordered to be restored to its original number. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /33