High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:

The State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Manohar Ghadigaonkar

01 Oct 2020 · A. S. Gadkari; V. G. Bisht
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a murder case due to failure of the prosecution to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder Section 302 IPC last seen theory

Sachin Subhash Londhe v. State of Maharashtra

01 Oct 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to lack of credible evidence and inconclusive forensic reports, emphasizing that last seen evidence and recovery of blood-stained clothes without conclusive proof are insufficient for conviction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC homicide last seen evidence blood-stained clothes

Sayyad Shabbir Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra

01 Oct 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a father for repeatedly raping his minor daughter, affirming that credible sole testimony of the victim supported by medical evidence suffices for conviction even with delay in FIR and minor omissions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape prosecutrix testimony corroboration delay in FIR

Tukaram Rau Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra

01 Oct 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction for murder based on the reliable testimony of a natural witness corroborated by circumstantial and forensic evidence, dismissing the appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC murder eyewitness testimony interested witness

Siddhi Developers v. The Joint Commissioner

30 Sep 2020 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that delay in filing an appeal beyond the maximum three-month period prescribed under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 is not condonable by the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Tribunal, and dismissed the appellant's appeal accordingly.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay limitation period Section 85 Finance Act 1994 Section 35C Central Excise Act 1944

Pioneer Publicity Corporation Pvt Ltd v. Airport Authority of India

29 Sep 2020 · GS Patel, J

The Bombay High Court held that a valid arbitration agreement existed despite absence of a signed contract and appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement contract formation signature requirement Section 11 Arbitration Act

State of Maharashtra v. Arun Balkrishna Mhatre & Ors.

29 Sep 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case due to unreliable dying declarations and failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC Section 34 IPC murder

The State of Maharashtra v. Tayappa Shankar Jagdale & Ors.

29 Sep 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case due to failure of prosecution to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence and trustworthy dying declaration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence dying declaration murder political rivalry

Asian Satellite Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Circle 6(1)(3)

28 Sep 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for assessment year 2012-13, holding that mere change of opinion without new material and full disclosure of facts by the assessee does not justify reassessment.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 147 Reopening of assessment

State of Maharashtra v. Devendra Jeevan Pawar & Ors.

25 Sep 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court dismissed the State's appeal against acquittal in a violent assault case due to inconsistencies in prosecution evidence and lack of corroborative medical proof.

criminal appeal_dismissed Acquittal Benefit of doubt Injured witnesses Discovery statement

The State of Maharashtra v. Ashok Tukaram Dhamne & Ors.

25 Sep 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V.G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal of accused persons in a sexual assault case due to material contradictions, delay in FIR, and insufficient prosecution evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed rape sexual assault wrongful confinement contradictions in evidence

Ramakant Vasudeo Pai v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

25 Sep 2020 · R. D. Dhanuka; Madhav J. Jamdar
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that failure to commence land acquisition within statutory periods under the MRTP Act results in lapse of reservation, allowing the petitioner’s writ for dereservation of land reserved for school extension.

property petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 Section 127 MRTP Act land reservation lapse land acquisition

The State of Maharashtra v. Mallinath Rajaram Harsure

25 Sep 2020 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of a public servant accused of bribery, emphasizing that demand of bribe is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act bribery demand of bribe acceptance of bribe

BVM Finance Private Limited v. Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd

25 Sep 2020 · Nitin Jamdar; Milind Jadhav

The Bombay High Court held it has jurisdiction to entertain a commercial suit by a debenture trustee despite arbitration clauses in related documents, upholding interim relief against the appellant.

commercial appeal_dismissed Significant jurisdiction debenture trust deed entire agreement clause arbitration clause

Kajal Mukesh Singh; Sneha Anil Singh; Bhumi Anil Singh v. The State of Maharashtra

24 Sep 2020 · Prithviraj K. Chavan

The Bombay High Court quashed the detention orders under the ITPA for adult victims due to procedural lapses and violation of their fundamental rights to freedom of movement and choice of vocation.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 Section 17 inquiry protective home detention fundamental rights

The State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Pandurang Pawar

24 Sep 2020 · A. S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of a police officer charged with bribery, holding that demand of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the prosecution failed to prove this element beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 bribery demand of bribe acceptance of bribe

Tejas Gajendra Kshirsagar v. State of Maharashtra

22 Sep 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant of murder due to failure of the prosecution to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence excluding all other hypotheses.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory Section 302 IPC Section 27 Evidence Act

Bhagwat Putalaya Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Sep 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction for murder based on a reliable extra-judicial confession corroborated by conduct and circumstantial evidence, rejecting the sudden fight exception.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant extra-judicial confession circumstantial evidence section 302 IPC section 201 IPC

Gopal Shankarappa Rathod v. State of Maharashtra

22 Sep 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant in a murder case due to failure of the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence and procedural lapses in FIR handling.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory FIR delay Section 157 CrPC

Anand Roopchand Gajbhiye v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Sep 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar

The High Court acquitted accused no.1 for lack of medical corroboration and non-explanation of injuries, convicted accused no.4 under Section 326 IPC for assault causing grievous injury, and upheld acquittals of others, modifying sentence in light of settlement.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 307 IPC Section 326 IPC common intention ocular evidence