High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Satyanarayana Rani v. National Investigation Agency & Ors.

15 Jul 2022 · Revati Mohite Dere; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court allowed bail to a 72-year-old accused in an IED blast case, holding that the prosecution failed to prima facie establish his involvement and that continued incarceration would violate his fundamental rights.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail National Investigation Agency Act Unlawful Activities Prevention Act prima facie case

Shivaji Ramchandra Tirlotkar v. The State of Maharashtra

15 Jul 2022 · A. S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a neighbor for penetrative sexual assault on a 5-year-old child under the POCSO Act, reduced the sentence from 15 to 10 years, and set aside redundant convictions under lesser POCSO offences.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act penetrative sexual assault child victim testimony medical evidence

Union of India v. Bobsons Corporation

15 Jul 2022 · K.R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The High Court upheld the Settlement Commission’s order refusing to reject the settlement application despite alleged incomplete disclosure, limiting its review to procedural legality under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Settlement Commission Customs Act 1962 Section 127B full and true disclosure

Sterlite Industries (India) Limited v. Special Director of Enforcement

14 Jul 2022 · K. R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The High Court held that once a contravention under FEMA is lawfully compounded and charges paid, no further adjudication proceedings can be continued, quashing the penalty order passed thereafter.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 compounding of contravention section 15(1) and 15(2) adjudication order

S.S. Kilaje v. State of Maharashtra

14 Jul 2022 · K. R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court held that entertainment duty cannot be levied on billiard tables in private clubs used exclusively by members without public access or separate payment, quashing all such demand notices.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Entertainment Duty Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923 Billiard Tables Private Clubs

Kalpana Vijaysinh Savant v. Barkha Amir Haldive

14 Jul 2022 · Rohit B. Deo

The High Court held that a consenting party without any legal right or interest under the suit agreement is neither a necessary nor proper party and set aside the trial court's order allowing its impleadment in a suit for specific performance.

civil petition_allowed Significant specific performance necessary party proper party Order 1 Rule 10 CPC

Kalpana Vijaysinh Savant v. Barkha Amir Haldive

14 Jul 2022 · Rohit B. Deo

The Bombay High Court held that a consenting party without legal right or interest in the suit property is neither a necessary nor proper party in a suit for specific performance and set aside the trial court's order allowing its impleadment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance necessary party proper party Order 1 Rule 10 CPC

Ramchandra Dev v. Joint Charity Commissioner, Kolhapur Division

14 Jul 2022 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court quashed the Charity Commissioner's order rejecting the sale of trust land due to unsubstantiated valuation and directed acceptance of the highest tender exceeding the ready reckoner value.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1958 Section 36(1)(a) Charity Commissioner alienation of trust property

Pundalik Sharanbasappa Patil v. State of Maharashtra

14 Jul 2022 · R.D. Dhanuka; M.G. Sewlikar

The Bombay High Court held that failure to initiate land acquisition proceedings within statutory timelines under Section 127 of the MRTP Act results in automatic lapse of reservation, and the landowner cannot be compelled to accept alternate acquisition modes without consent.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 127 MRTP Act land reservation lapse acquisition proceedings Transferable Development Rights

Amit Dholakia v. The State of Maharashtra

14 Jul 2022 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court directed authorities to promptly finalize and implement rules for installation of electric vehicle charging stations in cooperative housing societies, balancing environmental sustainability with statutory powers under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.

constitutional other Significant electric vehicle charging infrastructure Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 Article 226 Constitution of India Article 21 right to environment

The State of Maharashtra v. Yeshwant Maruti Patil

13 Jul 2022 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J.

The High Court held that promotion is not a fundamental right and a tribunal cannot direct the State to create promotional avenues absent recruitment rules providing for them, upholding the 2015 recruitment rules aligned with UGC Regulations mandating direct recruitment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Promotion Recruitment Rules University Grants Commission Regulations 2010 Fundamental Right

Popat Navasu Bendkoli v. The State of Maharashtra

12 Jul 2022 · A. S. Gadkari

The High Court upheld the conviction under IPC and POCSO Act based on reliable victim testimony despite medical evidence showing no recent sexual assault.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act penetrative sexual assault Section 366 IPC medical evidence

Arun Popatrao Pingale v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

12 Jul 2022 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for sexual assault on a minor, relying on medical and DNA evidence despite the victim's death before cross-examination.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act sexual assault minor victim DNA evidence

Pinnacle Life Science Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

11 Jul 2022 · K.R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court held that the three-month time limit prescribed by a Customs circular for amendment of shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act is illegal, directing the Customs Commissioner to consider amendment applications on merits without time bar.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Section 149 Customs Act 1962 amendment of shipping bills time limit Circular No.36/2010-Customs

Union of India v. Customs & Central Excise Settlement Commission

08 Jul 2022 · K. R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the Settlement Commission's classification of an imported vehicle under Customs Tariff Heading 87.02 based on seating capacity, dismissing the Union of India's challenge regarding jurisdiction and procedural defects.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Settlement Commission Customs Tariff Act, 1975 classification of goods

Meena Anand Suryadutt Bhatt v. Union of India

08 Jul 2022 · K. R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The High Court quashed penalty orders against a resigned director for lack of personal notice and violation of natural justice under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.

administrative petition_allowed Significant natural justice vicarious liability director liability Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992

Dilip Virumal Ahuja v. Rekha Vithal Patil & The State of Maharashtra

08 Jul 2022 · A.S. Gadkari

The High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a Section 138 N.I. Act case, holding that the presumption of debt was successfully rebutted by evidence of loss of cheque and non-existence of loan.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 139 presumption Cheque dishonour Rebuttal of presumption

Expotec International Ltd. v. The Union of India

07 Jul 2022 · K.R. Shriram; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court held that an importer who avails concessional customs duty under Notification 27/02-Cus for leased goods is not entitled to drawback under Section 74 of the Customs Act, and directed recovery of erroneously paid drawback.

tax petition_dismissed Significant drawback customs duty Notification 27/02-Cus Section 74 Customs Act

Ariz Kohli v. Tehzeeb Kohli

07 Jul 2022 · Bharati Dangre

The Bombay High Court set aside the Family Court's order allowing amendment substituting restitution of conjugal rights with divorce, holding such amendment impermissible under CPC and Family Courts Act principles.

family appeal_allowed Significant Family Courts Act, 1984 Order 6 Rule 17 CPC Amendment of pleadings Restitution of conjugal rights

IDFC First Bank Ltd. v. The Union of India

07 Jul 2022 · G. S. Kulkarni; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court quashed a 12-year delayed show cause notice issued to a non-existent entity, holding that statutory timelines under Section 73(4B) of the Finance Act, 1994 are mandatory and delayed adjudication causing prejudice is impermissible.

administrative petition_allowed Significant delayed adjudication show cause notice Section 73(4B) Finance Act 1994 service tax recovery