High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Vishwanath Sahadu Wakhare & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

11 Dec 2020 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that land converted to old tenure under the Watan Abolition Act is transferable without permission, and a belated challenge to mutation entries certifying such sale after 42 years is barred by limitation and res judicata.

property petition_allowed Significant Watan Abolition Act old tenure Maharashtra Land Revenue Code Section 59(b)

Vikrant Angolkar v. The State of Maharashtra

10 Dec 2020 · Sandeep K. Shinde
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that offences under the Essential Commodities Act punishable with imprisonment of three years or more are cognizable and non-bailable, rejecting anticipatory bail applications of accused involved in diversion of PDS rice for export.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Essential Commodities Act, 1955 anticipatory bail bailability economic offences

Ravindra Valmik Konkar v. The Registrar of Trade Unions

09 Dec 2020 · Anuja Prabhudessai

The High Court held that the Registrar of Trade Unions cannot adjudicate election disputes and must grant consent for referral to the Industrial Court after a summary inquiry, quashing the refusal of consent in this case.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Trade Unions Act, 1926 Section 28-1A Registrar of Trade Unions Industrial Court

Michael Gabriel v. Dattaram Kashiram Ambre & Ors.

09 Dec 2020 · C.V. Bhadang

The Bombay High Court held that notice and hearing are required before condoning delay in filing an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C., even though no notice is needed before initiating such proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 340 Cr.P.C. condonation of delay notice requirement preliminary inquiry

Akhil Bharat Krishi Go Seva Sangh v. State of Maharashtra

09 Dec 2020 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking payment of disputed government grants for fodder camps, holding that serious factual disputes require trial and cannot be resolved under summary writ jurisdiction.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 disputed questions of fact mandamus

Shobha Gurunath Mali & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra

08 Dec 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld the life conviction of accused no.2 for the homicidal death of his wife by throttling, acquitted others of murder but convicted them for giving false information under section 201 IPC, rejecting the suicide defence due to lack of corroboration.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant murder circumstantial evidence compression of neck throttling

Faiyaz @ Baba Arif Zariwala v. State of Maharashtra

08 Dec 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of accused for rape under section 376 IPC, rejected delay and non-disclosure defenses, and enhanced the sentence to the statutory minimum, emphasizing the need for stringent punishment in sexual assault cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant rape section 376 IPC delay in FIR victim testimony

The State of Maharashtra v. Rajesh Sadashiv Dhaware & Ors.

08 Dec 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a dowry death case, holding that prosecution failed to prove cruelty or dowry demand beyond reasonable doubt and the dying declaration was unreliable.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 498A IPC dying declaration

Tanaji Maruti Kolekar v. The State of Maharashtra

08 Dec 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for murder and related offences based on a complete and cogent chain of circumstantial evidence including forged documents, incriminating conduct, and discovery of the body and weapon.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder forgery power of attorney

Raju Laxman Pachhapure v. Union of India

08 Dec 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Abhay Ahuja
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging excise duty demand, holding that statutory appeal remedies under the CGST Act must be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 Central Excise Act, 1944 Pan Masala Rules excise duty demand

Hitesh Hemant Malhotra v. State of Maharashtra

07 Dec 2020 · Sandeep K. Shinde

The Bombay High Court granted bail to the accused in an NDPS case holding that the weight of paper carrying dried LSD drops is not to be counted towards commercial quantity, thus Section 37 rigors do not apply.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act LSD quantity commercial quantity mixture definition

The State of Maharashtra v. Eknath Bhila Khairnar

04 Dec 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a murder case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the oral dying declaration and other evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC murder oral evidence

Sanjay Dhondu Manchekar v. The State of Maharashtra

04 Dec 2020 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction for cheating under Section 420 IPC based on proved inducement and dishonor of promise but reduced the sentence from five to three years considering mitigating factors.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 420 IPC Cheating Deed of Guarantee Memo of Acceptance of Liability

Umesh Navnitlal Shah HUF v. Income Tax Officer – Circle 18(3)(5)

04 Dec 2020 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain · (2021) 435 ITR 220 (Bombay)
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that the petitioner’s case was a non-search case requiring computation of disputed tax at 100% under the DTVSV Act and rejected belated additional grounds challenging LTCG additions, directing issuance of revised tax computation accordingly.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 disputed tax non-search case search case

Vinobha Bhave Nagar Godavari Adhyapak Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. v. Central Railway

03 Dec 2020 · S.J. Kathawalla; Madhav J. Jamdar

The Bombay High Court quashed the arbitrary refusal by Central Railway to grant a No-Objection Certificate for redevelopment, directing issuance of the NOC after joint surveys confirmed no encroachment on railway land.

administrative petition_allowed Significant No-Objection Certificate Railway land boundary Joint survey and demarcation Article 226

Yogesh Waman Athavale v. Vikram Abasaheb Jadhav

03 Dec 2020 · S.S. Shinde; V.G. Bisht
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that mere judicial errors or negligence do not amount to contempt unless there is willful disobedience, and dismissed a contempt petition against a subordinate judge for not following binding precedents.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant contempt of court willful disobedience binding precedent judicial officer

The State of Maharashtra v. Amar Dnyaneshwar Dhake & Amit Vilas Pardeshi

02 Dec 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case due to failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the unreliability of eyewitness testimony and lack of corroboration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 302 IPC Homicide Acquittal Reasonable doubt

The State of Maharashtra v. Sadhana Suresh Jadhav & Ors.

02 Dec 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal of accused in a dowry death case due to unreliable dying declarations and insufficient prosecution evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC Section 498A IPC Section 34 IPC

Faiyyaz Mullaji v. The Secretary, Urban Development Department and Ors.

02 Dec 2020 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J

The Bombay High Court held that additional FSI granted for construction of a star graded hotel in the No Development Zone was unauthorized under the applicable Development Control Regulations, allowing the PIL challenging such permissions to proceed.

administrative other Significant No Development Zone Development Control Regulations Floor Space Index Star Graded Hotel

Vinita Umesh Singh v. The Administrator, Dadra & Nagar Haveli

01 Dec 2020 · Dipankar Datta CJ; G. S. Kulkarni J.

The Bombay High Court held that the requirement to have studied Class VIII within the Union Territory for MBBS admission priority is arbitrary and must be read down to include candidates like the petitioner who studied Class VIII outside but Classes IX to XII within the Union Territory, upholding merit and equality under Article 14.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Article 14 Admission policy Medical college admission NEET