High Court of Bombay
5,061 judgments
Mahesh Baburao Dhavale v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court set aside the trial court's direction to prosecute the victim's father for false evidence under Section 193 IPC in a POCSO case, holding that no preliminary inquiry was conducted and prosecution would be oppressive given the victim's trauma.
Mahesh Bhimraj Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra
The High Court acquitted the appellant in a POCSO and rape case due to failure of the prosecution to prove the prosecutrix's minority and procedural lapses in DNA evidence collection, granting benefit of doubt.
Vijay Choudhary v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 354-A and 509 IPC on grounds of mala fide intention, delay, and prior exoneration by the Internal Complaints Committee under the POSH Act, holding that continuation of investigation would be an abuse of process.
Asha Shivaji More v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court referred to a Larger Bench the issue of whether victims can maintain appeals against acquittals by Appellate Courts under proviso to Section 372 CrPC when accused has no appeal remedy against conviction by the Appellate Court.
Shrikant Studios Pvt. Ltd. v. Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the review petition seeking unilateral modification of a consent order regarding land subdivision, holding that such modification requires consent of both parties and no error justifying review was shown.
Union of India v. Smt. Umraobi
The Bombay High Court dismissed the Union of India's appeal, upholding the trial court's finding of railway negligence and joint liability to pay compensation for a fatal level crossing accident.
Namdev Mahadu Jambhulkar and Others v. State of Maharashtra and Others
The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition restoring mutation entry in favor of the petitioners, holding that writ jurisdiction can be exercised despite alternative remedies to uphold final Civil Court adjudications on land title.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax – 14 v. Music Broadcast Private Limited
The Bombay High Court upheld that compensation paid for premature termination of a contract is revenue expenditure, while non-compete fees constitute capital expenditure on an intangible asset eligible for depreciation.
The Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable and Dhakleshwar Temple Trust v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that failure to acquire land within six months of a purchase notice under Section 127 of the MRTP Act causes reservation to lapse, barring fresh reservation, and allowed the petitioner’s writ to declare the land de-reserved.
M/s. Daund Sugar Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that the State Government cannot levy transport fees under Rule 19 of the Bombay Molasses Rules, 1955, as such fees lack a quid pro quo and are ultra vires, quashing the impugned notifications imposing these fees.
Sarvajanik Education Society v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the deemed confirmation of a probationary teacher under the MEPS Act despite conversion of her post to part-time and non-approval by the Education Department, dismissing the Management's writ petition challenging reinstatement and back wages.
Rukmini Dattatraya Tirawade & Vikram Hari Palkar v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition seeking allotment of deficit land on grounds of non-applicability of resettlement Acts to pre-1977 acquisition, exclusion of petitioners from statutory family definition, and delay barring the claim.
Gulabrao Mahadeo Ghorpade v. Chandrakant Pandharinath Nehate
The Bombay High Court held that prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable against an unlicensed money lender advancing loan by negotiable instruments, setting aside the trial court's acquittal.
Wintry Engineering & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the jurisdiction of Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal Corporation to levy LBT on the petitioner’s factory in Village Chole and dismissed writ petitions challenging assessment orders, directing the petitioner to pursue statutory appeals.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Shirdi Industries Limited
The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award allowing 70% of the claimed loss for Hydraulic Oil and Thermic Fluid, affirming the Tribunal's power to appoint Experts and depart from Surveyor reports under the Arbitration and Insurance Acts.
Astec LifeSciences Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening of income tax assessment after four years due to absence of failure to disclose material facts and held that change of opinion does not justify reassessment.
Bhupinder Singh Balwant Singh v. Rajiv Kutty & Anr.
The Bombay High Court held that a unilateral right to appoint an arbitrator is void but severable, and exercised its power under Section 11(6) to appoint a sole arbitrator, upholding the validity of the arbitration agreement.
Praveen Otarmal Parmar v. M/s. Abhiroop Associates
The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act case, holding that the trial court must consider limitation from the second notice date and afford opportunity to condone delay even without a formal prayer.
Capacite Infraprojects Ltd v. T. Bhimjyani Realty Pvt Ltd
The Bombay High Court held that failure to complete the contractually mandated Dispute Adjudication Board procedure precludes invoking arbitration under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, dismissing the petition as premature.
Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the limitation period under Section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act applies to assessments under Section 144C, and since no final assessment order was passed within the prescribed time, the assessment is time-barred and the return must be accepted.