High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Taleb @ Chota Rafi ee v. The State of Maharashtra

24 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court quashed the FIR and charge-sheet against the petitioner due to lack of prima facie evidence linking him to the alleged offence, emphasizing the court's power to prevent abuse of process under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Article 226 Constitution prima facie case

Sarfaraz Tajammul Husain Ansari v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

24 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Section 379 IPC registered on mistaken belief of theft, exercising inherent power in light of complainant's consent and absence of criminality.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 379 IPC inherent power of High Court mistaken belief

Delna Khambatta v. State of Maharashtra

24 Mar 2021 · S.S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking custody of two daughters, prioritizing their best interest and expressed wishes to live with their father in India over foreign custody orders, while granting the mother visitation rights.

family petition_dismissed Significant child custody best interest of child comity of courts international child abduction

Pandharinath L. Bhandari v. Shri Bharti Trimbak Bhandari

24 Mar 2021 · Sandeep K. Shinde
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The court held that parties may confront adverse witnesses with relevant documents not produced at the pleading stage during cross-examination, but courts must cautiously prevent abuse where leave to file such documents was refused.

civil appeal_allowed Significant cross-examination confrontation with documents Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Keshu Shankarlal Giri & Ors. v. Union of India

23 Mar 2021 · Prithviraj K. Chavan
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and directed compensation to the dependants of a deceased bona fide railway passenger, holding that strict liability under section 124-A of the Railways Act applies and the incident was an untoward incident.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Section 124-A strict liability untoward incident

Jayashree Suresh Gharat & Ors. v. Union of India

23 Mar 2021 · Prithviraj K. Chavan
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and held that under the strict liability principle of the Railways Act, the railway must compensate dependants of a deceased bona fide passenger who died in an untoward incident, rejecting the claim that the deceased was a trespasser.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act, 1989 Section 124-A strict liability untoward incident

Arvind Arjun Kamble, Arjun Maruti Kamble & Tajjudin Mohammed Mujawar v. The State of Maharashtra

23 Mar 2021 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. R. Borkar

The Bombay High Court acquitted appellants of murder charges due to prosecution's failure to prove intent and reliance on a doubtful dying declaration.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant murder dying declaration self-defense injuries on accused

Rekha Dilip Sapkale v. Union of India

23 Mar 2021 · Prithviraj K. Chavan

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and awarded compensation to the dependant of a deceased bona fide passenger who accidentally fell from a running train, emphasizing a liberal interpretation of the Railways Act's provisions on 'untoward incidents'.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 untoward incident accidental falling from train compensation

Madhuri Sameer Gokhale v. The Addl. Joint/Deputy/Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

23 Mar 2021 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court quashed the faceless best judgment assessment order and demand notice for AY 2014-15 due to jurisdictional defects and breach of natural justice under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 147 Section 144B Faceless Assessment

Noor Kabirdin Meghani & Ors. v. Sanjeev Manuel D’Souza

22 Mar 2021 · Sandeep K. Shinde

The Bombay High Court quashed the trial court's order allowing amendment of the plaint after trial commencement, holding that the amendment was an afterthought and not based on subsequent events, thus protecting the petitioners from an impermissible amendment in an eviction suit.

civil petition_allowed Significant Order 6 Rule 17 CPC amendment of plaint Maharashtra Rent Control Act sub-letting

ABC v. State of Maharashtra

22 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court allowed medical termination of pregnancy beyond twenty weeks for a minor rape victim with mental disability, directing preservation of forensic evidence and compensation under victim schemes.

criminal petition_allowed Significant medical termination of pregnancy rape minor mental disability

Illiyas Gulab Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside a detention order due to inordinate delay in considering the detenue's representation, emphasizing the constitutional mandate for prompt disposal under Article 22.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant preventive detention representation delay Article 22 personal liberty

Pravin Ganpat Kakad v. The Commissioner of Police

19 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court upheld a preventive detention order under the MPDA Act, ruling that verification of in camera statements need not follow a fixed format, translation errors must prejudice representation to be fatal, and the detaining authority properly applied mind.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant preventive detention MPDA Act in camera statements verification

Shri Arif Riyaz Ghodeshwar v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appellant's bail plea in a murder case under MCOCA, holding that prima facie presence in an unlawful assembly causing death suffices to deny bail at the preliminary stage.

criminal appeal_dismissed bail MCOCA unlawful assembly presence at crime scene

Allwyn Liguroy Furtado v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Mar 2021 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. R. Borkar

The Bombay High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for the murder of his mother based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence and rejected the appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence matricide violent strangulation hostile witnesses

Keda Tanaji Aher v. State of Maharashtra

19 Mar 2021 · R. D. Dhanuka; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court held that RBI directives to supersede the Board of a co-operative bank under Section 110A(1)(iii) of the MCS Act are binding on the Registrar, who need not grant hearing before supersession, and upheld the supersession order as constitutionally valid.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act Section 110A(1)(iii) Reserve Bank of India Supersession of Board

Kripal Amrik Singh & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

18 Mar 2021 · S. S. Shinde; Manish Pitale

The Bombay High Court upheld the Child Welfare Committee's lawful custody of a minor child under the Juvenile Justice Act, dismissing the petitioners' claim of valid adoption under the Hindu Adoption Act and rejecting the writ of habeas corpus.

family petition_dismissed Significant juvenile justice act child in need of care and protection habeas corpus adoption

Shri Ramdas M. Handore & Ors. v. Shri Narayan D. Pawar & Anr.

18 Mar 2021 · Sandeep K. Shinde

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appellants' second appeal, upholding the decree for specific performance and possession in favor of the respondents, emphasizing the necessity of readiness and willingness for specific performance and the inadmissibility of suit without seeking rescission of substantially performed agreements.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance possession breach of contract rescission

Dist. Solapur v. Sakhubai Jagu Bodare

18 Mar 2021 · Sandeep K. Shinde

The Bombay High Court dismissed the second appeal in a partition suit, holding that the widow's share under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act is absolute and without evidence of share disposal, no adjustment in partition shares is warranted.

civil appeal_dismissed partition suit Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Section 14 ancestral property

Manoj Brijlal Kapoor v. Khandelwal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

18 Mar 2021 · Anuja Prabhudessai

The Bombay High Court upheld the trial court's dismissal of a conditional settlement offer under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, holding that judgment on admissions requires unequivocal admission and cannot be granted amid serious factual disputes.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC judgment on admissions unequivocal admission discretionary power