High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Vivek Babu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

06 Sep 2021 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Madhav J. Jamdar
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside the denial of reservation and benefits to a physically disabled employee in an aided college, directing his inclusion and accommodation under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant persons with disabilities reservation horizontal reservation aided posts

Harqbahaddur Logbahaddur Bhandari v. The State of Maharashtra

06 Sep 2021 · Anuja Prabhudessai
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside the appellant's conviction due to procedural irregularities in the Test Identification Parade and insufficient evidence linking him to the offence.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant Test Identification Parade Identification evidence Criminal Manual guidelines Delay in TI parade

Shankar Namdeo Gaikwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

06 Sep 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed the SC & ST Act charges in a property dispute case for lack of prima facie caste-based insult or intimidation, allowing prosecution under IPC to continue.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC SC & ST Act Section 3(1)(r) Scheduled Caste

Bharat Kisan Mekale v. The Commissioner of Police, Solapur

03 Sep 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order under the MPDA Act due to discrepancies in grounds of detention and lack of sufficient material showing activities prejudicial to public order.

criminal petition_allowed Significant preventive detention MPDA Act public order subjective satisfaction

Regency Nirman Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

03 Sep 2021 · K.R. Shriram; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment on the same material already considered amounts to impermissible change of opinion and quashed the reopening notice and order.

tax petition_allowed Significant reopening of assessment Section 148 Income Tax Act change of opinion full and true disclosure

Nilesh Bansilal Gaywal v. State of Maharashtra

02 Sep 2021 · S.S. Shinde; N.J. Jamadar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed the preventive detention order against the petitioner, holding that isolated criminal acts without disturbance of public order do not justify detention under the MPDA Act.

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

Mahadev Rambhau Khodave v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

01 Sep 2021 · Anuja Prabhudessai, J.

The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant of kidnapping and rape charges under IPC and POCSO Act due to failure of prosecution to prove the victim was a child and absence of evidence of force or coercion.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act child age proof School Leaving Certificate evidentiary value kidnapping

Mumbai District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner and Registrar, Co-op. Societies (Maharashtra State), Pune

01 Sep 2021 · G. S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court held that an inquiry under Section 83 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act can be ordered independently of the rectification opportunity under Section 82, and the Registrar’s 15-day rectification notice was lawful, dismissing the petitioner’s writ challenge.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 Section 81 audit Section 82 rectification Section 83 inquiry

First Source Solutions Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-12(2)(1)

31 Aug 2021 · K.R. Shriram; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment after four years requires specific undisclosed material facts, and in their absence, the reopening notice and order are invalid and set aside.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 147 Section 10AA deduction

H.I.M.S. Botawala Charities v. State of Maharashtra

31 Aug 2021 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Madhav J. Jamdar

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of partial acquisition under MHADA Act, holding that petitioners who undertook redevelopment and tenant rehabilitation under amended DCR 33(9) are estopped from challenging the acquisition order.

property petition_dismissed Significant MHADA Act land acquisition natural justice redevelopment

Sunita Chandrashekhar Kapre v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Aug 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld a preventive detention order under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, ruling that the detaining authority properly applied mind and the detenue's activities threatened public order despite a two-month delay.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant preventive detention Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 public order subjective satisfaction

Magnum Management and Services Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India & Ors.

30 Aug 2021 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 12

The Bombay High Court held that the 30-day payment period under Section 127(5) of the Finance Act, 2019 starts from the actual receipt of the statement, and electronic payment within that period entitles the petitioner to benefits under the SVLDRS Scheme.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Scheme Finance Act 2019 Section 127(5) payment compliance

Cooperative Rabobank U A v. Commissioner of Income Tax

25 Aug 2021 · Sunil P. Deshmukh; Abhay Ahuja
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that a pending Revenue appeal before the ITAT entitles the petitioner to pay only 50% of disputed tax under the DTVSV Act and that interest granted under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act cannot be recovered as disputed tax under the scheme.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 disputed tax Section 244A interest Income Tax Act, 1961

Sunil Hirasingh Rathod v. The State of Maharashtra

25 Aug 2021 · Bharati Dangre

The High Court acquitted five accused in a corruption case due to failure of prosecution to prove demand and acceptance of bribe and procedural lapses in electronic evidence and investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 demand and acceptance of bribe Section 7 offence Section 12 abetment

Shri Purushottam Harishchandra Shirsekar v. The State of Maharashtra

25 Aug 2021 · R.D. Dhanuka; R.I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court held that employees appointed on part-time fully aided posts prior to 1st November 2005 are entitled to the old pension scheme with part-time service counted, overruling rejection based on full-time appointment date.

administrative petition_allowed Significant old pension scheme part-time service aided educational institution 100% grant-in-aid

Akbar Jamil Khan v. The State of Maharashtra

25 Aug 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed the externment order against the petitioner for failure to serve show cause notice and lack of requisite subjective satisfaction, upholding principles of natural justice and fundamental rights.

criminal petition_allowed Significant externment order Bombay Police Act Section 56 Section 59

Jainam Investments v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

24 Aug 2021 · K.R. Shriram; Abhay Ahuja
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed the reassessment notice under Section 148 for AY 2014-2015, holding that reopening without fresh tangible material and based on mere change of opinion is impermissible.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reassessment

Shri Chotu Mohan Naidu v. Commissioner of Police Nashik City & Ors.

24 Aug 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order under the MPDA Act for lack of fresh material and violation of double jeopardy principles, ordering the petitioner's release.

criminal petition_allowed Significant preventive detention Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act double jeopardy Article 22 Constitution of India

Ajay Vishwanath Kharade v. State of Maharashtra

24 Aug 2021 · R.D. Dhanuka; R.I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court held that administrative circulars restricting transfer of teachers from unaided to aided posts contrary to subordinate legislation are invalid and directed approval and salary release for the petitioner’s transfer.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant transfer of teachers unaided school aided school Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules, 1981

Rajiv Sharma v. Registrar of Companies, Mumbai

24 Aug 2021 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that a director’s resignation takes effect from the date specified in the resignation notice and must be reflected by the Registrar of Companies despite the company’s non-compliance with statutory filings.

corporate petition_allowed Significant resignation of director Section 168 Companies Act 2013 Registrar of Companies director removal