Himmat Singh Gehlot v State of Rajasthan, 2026
It reinforces the principle that public safety under Article 21 includes safe movement on highways.
Judgement Details
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Date of Decision
18 February 2026
Judges
Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati & Justice Sandeep Shah
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
- A civil writ petition was filed following an accident claiming four lives due to a Dharmkanta constructed within the prohibited highway zone.
-
The Court noted widespread encroachments within the Right of Way (ROW) of National Highways across Rajasthan:
-
103 religious structures
-
881 residential structures
-
1232 commercial structures
-
-
Lack of inter-departmental coordination in granting permissions, licenses, and utility connections without considering Highway Control lines, building lines, and road land boundaries was identified as a key cause.
-
The Court emphasized that any occupation within ROW or building line is impermissible, and only regulated construction within control lines with statutory permission is allowed.
-
Even religious structures cannot claim immunity from removal if they fall within the highway ROW.
-
Reference made to Union of India v State of Gujarat (Supreme Court) which held that religious structures on public roads or spaces cannot remain and must be removed.
Issues
-
Whether encroachments within the ROW of National Highways, including religious structures, are permissible?
-
Whether permissions, licenses, or NOCs issued without reference to highway safety norms can operate as a defense against removal?
-
Whether the State has a positive obligation under Article 21 to ensure safe movement on highways?
-
Whether systemic administrative lapses contribute to proliferation of encroachments and can be excused?
-
Whether removal or relocation of encroachments is mandated even for religious structures within ROW?
Judgement
-
The Rajasthan High Court directed removal or suitable relocation of all encroachments within the ROW of National Highways across Rajasthan within 2 months.
-
Permissions or licenses granted in isolation cannot serve as a defense if a structure falls within prohibited highway zones.
-
Demarcation of ROW, road land boundaries, building lines, and control lines to be carried out, with a district-wise encroachments register maintained.
-
District Highway Safety Task Force to be constituted for coordinated removal and demarcation.
-
No renewal of licenses, NOCs, or permissions without clearance from NHAI/PWD.
-
Existing permissions to be reviewed within 15 days and kept in abeyance upon detection of violation.
-
Police protection to be provided during removal to prevent re-encroachments.
-
Periodic highway safety audits to be institutionalized.
Held
-
All encroachments, including religious structures, are illegal if within ROW.
-
Permissions issued without highway control reference are invalid.
-
State has a positive obligation under Article 21 to ensure safety on highways.
-
Encroachments to be removed or suitably relocated within 2 months.
-
Systemic administrative failures cannot excuse violations of highway safety norms.
Analysis
-
Reinforces the principle that public safety under Article 21 includes safe movement on highways.
-
Establishes that ROW, building line, and control line norms must be strictly observed.
-
Permissions or licenses granted without inter-department coordination cannot prevent removal of illegal structures.
-
Clarifies that religious structures do not enjoy immunity from removal under highway safety laws.
-
Lays down practical enforcement measures, including task forces, demarcation, audits, and police protection.
-
Strengthens accountability of State and local authorities in preventing hazardous encroachments.