High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Sunil @ Satya Shantaram Dalvi v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

23 Dec 2025 · Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the bail application of accused involved in a mob lynching, holding that parity does not apply due to their overt violent acts and the serious nature of offences, despite long incarceration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail parity principle mob lynching overt acts

Rajesh Dhakal Rao v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

23 Dec 2025 · Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed bail for an accused in a mob lynching case, holding that parity with co-accused does not apply due to the accused's distinct and serious role, and long incarceration alone does not justify bail in grave offences.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail parity principle mob lynching serious offence

Union of India v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Pvt. Ltd.

23 Dec 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale

The High Court upheld the Appellate Tribunal's order setting aside attachment orders under PMLA, holding that monies advanced before the Prevention of Corruption Act became a scheduled offence were not proceeds of crime and that Enforcement Directorate was bound by its prior admissions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 proceeds of crime scheduled offence Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

Shrabani Deodhar v. The State of Maharashtra

23 Dec 2025 · Manish Pitale; Manjusha Deshpande

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR against TV channel officials for airing a serial episode allegedly insulting Scheduled Caste members, holding that the essential ingredients of offences under the Atrocities Act, IPC, and PCR Act were not prima facie made out against them.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(1)(x) Section 295A IPC Protection of Civil Rights Act

Siddharth Mohan v. Sandip Sharma

23 Dec 2025 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld the City Civil Court's order allowing amendment and additional evidence in a Charity Application under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950, emphasizing that allegations of fraud justify such relief notwithstanding procedural restrictions.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 Section 72 additional evidence Order 41 Rule 27 CPC

Ambar Auto Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra

23 Dec 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Sandesh D. Patil

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition challenging MIDC's allotment of a disputed industrial plot, holding that the petitioner had no pre-emptory right after omitting the plot from his application and accepting alternate allotments.

property petition_dismissed Significant pre-emption right plot allotment MIDC writ petition

The Manglorian Garden Homes Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. Jan Mohammed S. Sama & Ors.

23 Dec 2025 · M. M. Sathaye

The High Court held that defendants failed to prove subsisting license and payment of compensation as of 1 February 1973, thereby upholding the eviction decree under the Bombay Rent Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant Bombay Rent Act Section 15A subsisting license unlawful sub-letting

Neepa Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

23 Dec 2025 · Sharmila U. Deshmukh

The Bombay High Court held that a single mortgage deed securing multiple distinct loan agreements attracts aggregate stamp duty under Section 5 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, dismissing the petition challenging deficit stamp duty and penalty.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 Section 4 Stamp Act Section 5 Stamp Act Mortgage deed

Zenobia R. Poonawala v. Dr. Rustom Farhad Ginwalla

23 Dec 2025 · Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court upheld the trial court's injunction order, holding that a suit enforcing civil rights is maintainable before the civil court despite pending landlord-tenant proceedings and tenancy disputes.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant civil rights enforcement temporary injunction landlord-tenant dispute Section 10 CPC

Subhash Kantilal Pawar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

22 Dec 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition to quash a corruption FIR against a police hawaldar, holding that prima facie material at the investigation stage warrants continuation of proceedings and alternative remedies must be pursued.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR Prevention of Corruption Act Article 226 Constitution Section 482 CrPC

Hardik Patil v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

22 Dec 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale

The Bombay High Court allowed a petition directing a further thorough investigation into a murder case due to lapses and incompleteness in the original police investigation, emphasizing the court's power under Article 226 to ensure justice through proper inquiry.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Article 226 Constitution of India Further investigation Transfer of investigation Murder investigation

Bhagwati Akshar Empire LLP v. City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd

22 Dec 2025 · SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ; GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld CIDCO's cancellation of a tender despite the petitioner being the highest bidder, holding that no vested right arises without issuance of allotment letter and judicial interference in bona fide commercial decisions is limited.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tender cancellation highest bidder earnest money deposit judicial review

Nanasaheb Vasantrao Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

22 Dec 2025 · Shree Chandrashekhar, CJ; Gautam A. Ankhand, J
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed a PIL seeking CBI investigation into the Lavasa Project, holding that delay, availability of statutory remedies, and prior dismissal of related PILs preclude judicial interference.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Public Interest Litigation CBI investigation Article 226 Code of Criminal Procedure

Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited v. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another

19 Dec 2025 · Sharmila U. Deshmukh
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the Plaintiff's claim for interim injunction against the Defendants' use of the mark "HOM", holding that the Plaintiff failed to prove that the abbreviation "HOM" is recognized by the public as its trademark and that there is no prima facie case of infringement or passing off.

civil petition_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off abbreviation as trademark goodwill

Harsh Anil Singh v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Dec 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Sandesh D. Patil

The Bombay High Court quashed the FIR and all proceedings against a student accused under the NDPS Act due to absence of any material evidence linking him to narcotic consumption.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 8(c) Section 27

Vishal Ashok Kamble v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Dec 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale

The High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, rejecting claims of provocation and private defence due to the brutal and disproportionate nature of the assault.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 302 IPC murder exceptions to murder right of private defence

Hindustan Construction Company v. Mumbai Metro One Private Limited

18 Dec 2025 · Abhay Ahuja
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that a Settlement Agreement superseding the original contract and lacking an arbitration clause extinguishes the original arbitration clause, rendering disputes under the Settlement Agreement non-arbitrable and dismissing the application to refer the suit to arbitration.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 8 Settlement Agreement Supersession of contract

Haffkine Bio-Pharmaceuticals Corporation Employees’ Union v. The State of Maharashtra

18 Dec 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe

The Bombay High Court held that a Conciliation Officer must admit an industrial dispute for conciliation proceedings and cannot refuse on technical grounds, quashing the premature closure of conciliation in this case.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Conciliation Officer Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 conciliation proceedings industrial dispute

Ayyappa Swami v. State of Maharashtra & Rushali Purushottam Gupta

18 Dec 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Sandesh D. Patil

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR alleging wrongful restraint for preventing illegal feeding of stray dogs in a society, holding the obstruction lawful and the FIR an abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant wrongful restraint Section 126 BNS Act feeding stray dogs abuse of process

Omkar alias Tedya Umesh Satpute v. State of Maharashtra

18 Dec 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order under the MPDA Act, holding that individual criminal acts without broader impact on public order do not justify detention.

criminal petition_allowed Significant preventive detention public order law and order Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act