Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Sentence Cannot Be Reduced to Two Months for Four Life-Threatening Stab Wounds: Supreme Court Restores 3-Year RI in Attempt to Murder Case Suspicion, However Grave, Cannot Substitute Proof: Apex Court Reaffirms Limits of Section 106 IEA Accused at the Time of the Statement Was Not in the Custody of the Police - Discovery Statement Held Inadmissible Under Section 27: Supreme Court Failure to Explain What Happened After ‘Last Seen Together’ Becomes an Additional Link: Supreme Court Strengthens Section 106 Evidence Act Doctrine Suicide in a Pact Is Conditional Upon Mutual Participation — Survivor’s Resolve Reinforces the Act: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Participation in Draw Does Not Cure Illegality: Supreme Court Rejects Estoppel in Arbitrary Flat Allotment Case Nepotism and Self-Aggrandizement Are Anathema to a Democratic System: Supreme Court Quashes Allotment of Super Deluxe Flats by Government Employees’ Welfare Society Liberty Is Not Absolute When It Becomes a Threat to Society: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Alleged ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Mastermind Magistrate’s Power Is Limited — Sessions Court May Yet Try the Case: Supreme Court Corrects High Court’s Misconception in ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Bail Order Dacoity Cannot Be Presumed, It Must Be Proved: Allahabad High Court Acquits Villagers After 43 Years, Citing ‘Glaring Lapses’ in Prosecution Case

Citizens Are Not Cattle, You Cannot Let Them Die in Silence: Rajasthan High Court Blasts Government Inaction Amid 50°C Heatwave

18 April 2025 10:28 AM

By: Deepak Kumar


“Funds for Publicity But None for Saving Lives? This Is Apathy at Its Peak” — High Court Warns Rajasthan Authorities of Contempt in Heatwave Crisis. In a searing judgment delivered on April 17, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur, through Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, condemned the State Government for its “shocking” failure to implement even the most basic preventive measures to protect the public from an ongoing deadly heatwave. Calling the inaction “prima facie contemptuous,” the Court declared that “citizens cannot be treated as cattle,” and warned that the judiciary will not remain mute spectators while people die from extreme temperatures crossing 50°C in several districts.
The Court revived its earlier suo moto proceedings under the title “Save the Planet Earth and the Future Generations of this Universe”, stating with urgency, “This Court feels pain and expresses its concern for the people suffering from extreme heatwaves and heat strokes… There is no mechanism implemented so far.”
“The Orders Have Been Kept in Cold Storage While the State Burns — This Is Bureaucratic Indifference, Not Incompetence”
Justice Dhand found that the orders passed almost a year ago, in May 2024, had been disregarded by all government departments. “No effective action plan has been framed,” the Court noted, “and no precautionary steps have been taken for the safety of the general public, especially daily wage earners, rickshaw pullers, labourers, women, and children.”
“What is the value of judicial orders if they are treated like trash by the administration?” the Court asked pointedly, noting that this kind of obstinacy “erodes the credibility of the rule of law.” He observed that the absence of a heatwave preparedness plan in a desert state like Rajasthan is not only “disturbing but shameful.”
“You Have Crores for Publicity and Award Ceremonies But No Money for ORS and Shade — What Does That Say About Your Priorities?”
Rejecting any anticipated excuse about lack of budgetary provisions, the Court said, “You cannot spend millions on award ceremonies, rallies and publicity and then claim you have no funds to save human lives.” Justice Dhand emphasized that “taxpayers’ money must be used in public interest, not vanity projects.”
The Court observed that even simple, low-cost measures like mango panna, ORS packets, water kiosks, tree plantation, and shaded waiting areas had not been arranged, despite being part of prior orders.
“Your Heat Action Plans Exist Only on Paper — You Ignored Your Own Climate Strategies”
Justice Dhand castigated both the Central and State Governments for failing to act on their own policies. Rajasthan’s Heat Action Plan, and the Centre’s National Program on Climate Change and Health, had been in place since 2013, but none had been operationalized.
“You had the plan. You had the power. You did nothing,” the Court stated, finding that the “lack of execution is not mere laziness, it is a constitutional breach of duty.”
Referring to the 2015 draft Bill on Prevention of Deaths Due to Heat and Cold Waves, which remains pending before Parliament, the judge remarked, “Even legislation that could have saved lives lies forgotten. For reasons best known to the Central Government, the Bill has not seen the light of day.”
“Shade Is Not a Luxury, It’s a Lifesaving Necessity — And Even That You Failed to Provide”
The Court ordered the State to immediately implement cooling shelters, distribute fluids and ORS, and broadcast heatwave alerts across print, electronic, and digital media. “The shade offered by a cloth, cap, turban or umbrella can even save lives,” the Court remarked, directing that such messaging be sent through FM radio, Doordarshan, text alerts, and all communication platforms.
It also directed that all public offices, contractors, and employers provide rest hours to outdoor workers during peak heat hours between noon and 3 PM.
“This Court Will Not Hesitate to Use Coercive Powers — If You Fail Again, Be Ready for Legal Consequences”
Issuing notices to concerned authorities, the High Court warned that continued disregard for its orders would lead to contempt proceedings. “Contempt is not just disobedience — it is an affront to the institution of justice,” the Court said, directing the State to file an affidavit listing all steps taken, and why officials should not be held accountable.
The judgment concluded with a stark reminder: “Preparedness today determines survival tomorrow. This Court expects immediate and sincere compliance — not bureaucratic eyewash.”
Date of Decision: April 17, 2025

 

Latest Legal News