Renuka Vs. State of Rajasthan

Renuka vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Sep 15, 1987

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/770920

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/770920
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Suresh Chandra Agrawal and; Panna Chand Jain, JJ.
Decided On: Sep 15, 1987
Case Number: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2278 of 1987
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Constitution of India - Article 226--Public interest litigation-Letter addressed to C.J. regarding Sati in Deorala--Held, 'State Government. is direeted to take adequate steps so that no function is held at place of Sati and incident is not glorified.;Order Accordingly - LABOUR & SERVICESAppointment: [Shiv Kumar Sha...

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Renuka

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 1987WLN(UC)716

Excerpt

constitution of india - article 226--public interest litigation-letter addressed to c.j. regarding sati in deorala--held, 'state government. is direeted to take adequate steps so that no function is held at place of sati and incident is not glorified.;order accordingly - labour & servicesappointment: [shiv kumar sharma, ashok parihar & k.s. rathore, jj] merit list rajasthan secondary education act (42 of 1957), section 28 & rajasthan board of secondary education rules, rule 20 - held, improved marks obtained by candidate after re-appearing in examination can be considered for drawing the merit list of candidate for appointment to post of teacher. circular issued by the director of primary & secondary education ousting such candidate from consideration in merit list is illegal and without jurisdiction. - 3. while we feel satisfied with the stand taken by the learned advocate general and the state in strongly condemning the act of 'sati which took place place on 4-9-1987 and their assurance that no tolerated and every possible action will be taken to see that the majesty of law is upheld, we feel it necessary to give directions that the state government and its officers shall take necessary steps and adequate measures to ensure that no public function and ceremony is held at the place where 'sati' has been committed which may have the effect of glorification of the institution of 'sati' 4. the writ petition is disposed of in terms of this order......this petition, in support of the petition. the learned advocate general was present in the court and he has informed us that a criminal case has been registered in relation to this idcident and certain arrests have been made. he also informed us that a magisterial inquiry has also been initiated by the state government. the learned advocate general also made a statement explaining the policy of the state government in the following terms:the state government, strongly condemns the act of 'sati' on 4-9-1987. the state government will see to it that all those who abetted the said act of 'sati' in any way will be punished. the government will not be a party to the glorification of this act. it further assures the hon'ble court that no unlawful act tolerated and every possible action will be taken to see that majesty of law is upheld.3. while we feel satisfied with the stand taken by the learned advocate general and the state in strongly condemning the act of 'sati which took place place on 4-9-1987 and their assurance that no tolerated and every possible action will be taken to see that the majesty of law is upheld, we feel it necessary to give directions that the state government and its officers shall take necessary steps and adequate measures to ensure that no public function and ceremony is held at the place where 'sati' has been committed which may have the effect of glorification of the institution of 'sati'4. the writ petition is disposed of in terms of this order.

Full Judgment

1. It is a publice interest litigation arising out of a letter addressed to the Hon 'ble Chief Justice by, certain, applicants, representing certain women, organisations It relates, to an incident which, took place on 4th Septernper, 1987 in village, Deorala in Distract Sikar, in which one Smt. Roop Kanwar committed Sati with the dead body of her husband. In this writ petitioq, it has been stated that that said incident of Sati was in clear contravention of the law and further that on 16th September, 1987, certain public ceremonies in relation to the deceased lady are being performed and that the State Government is completely inactive in that regard.

2. We have heard Miss Sunita Satyarthi, Advocate, and who is also one of the signatories to this petition, in support of the petition. The learned Advocate General was present in the Court and he has informed us that a criminal case Has been registered in relation to this idcident and certain arrests have been made. He also informed us that a Magisterial inquiry has also been initiated by the State Government. The learned Advocate General also made a statement explaining the policy of the State Government in the following terms:

The State Government, strongly condemns the act of 'Sati' on 4-9-1987. The State Government will see to it that all those who abetted the said act of 'Sati' in any way will be punished. The Government will not be a party to the glorification of this act. It further assures the Hon'ble court that no unlawful act tolerated and every possible action will be taken to see that majesty of law is upheld.

3. While we feel satisfied with the stand taken by the learned Advocate General and the State in strongly condemning the act of 'Sati which took place place on 4-9-1987 and their assurance that no tolerated and every possible action will be taken to see that the majesty of Law is upheld, we feel it necessary to give directions that the State Government and its officers shall take necessary Steps and adequate measures to ensure that no public function and Ceremony is held at the place where 'Sati' has been committed which may have the effect of glorification of the institution of 'Sati'

4. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of this order.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1987 Same Parties Renuka vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Civil Same Judge Suresh Chandra Agrawal and; Panna Chand Jain, JJ.

Civil