High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

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

State Bank of India v. Vineet Agrawal

21 Sep 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 1990-91, holding that no failure to disclose material facts justified reopening beyond four years.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 notice Reopening of assessment Failure to disclose material facts

Lalita Dhanraj Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

21 Sep 2020 · Anuja Prabhudessai

The Bombay High Court held that limitation for filing an appeal under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act runs from the date of actual or constructive knowledge of the order, and appellate authorities have power to condone delay, quashing dismissal of appeal as barred by limitation.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 Section 16(2) limitation period appeal

Sundaram Home Finance Limited v. Rahul Jayvantrao Kaulavkar

18 Sep 2020 · S.C. GUPTE

The Bombay High Court held that civil courts retain jurisdiction to try suits involving agricultural land exempt from the SARFAESI Act and that such jurisdictional questions cannot be decided at the Order 7 Rule 11 stage.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 34 agricultural land Order 7 Rule 11

Kailas Gangaprasad Yadav v. The State of Maharashtra

16 Sep 2020 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant in a POCSO sexual assault case due to contradictions in evidence, improper recording of the child's statement, and lack of medical corroboration.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act Section 6 POCSO sexual assault child victim

The State of Maharashtra v. Mukesh Bhojraj Puraswami & Ors.

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

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case where medical evidence indicated death by hanging and prosecution failed to prove homicidal strangulation beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant homicidal death suicide asphyxia ligature mark

Altisource Business Solutions India Pvt Ltd v. Union of India

14 Sep 2020 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that interest at 6% per annum on delayed GST refunds is payable from 60 days after the original refund application date, even if the refund is sanctioned only after an appellate order.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST refund interest on refund Section 54 CGST Act Section 56 CGST Act

State of Maharashtra v. Nakul Trimbak Bhangare & Ors.

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

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a rape and robbery case due to inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony, failure to conduct proper identification parade, and lack of corroborative evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape prosecutrix testimony Test Identification Parade FIR delay

Mohammad Arif Asik Ali Raain v. State of Maharashtra

09 Sep 2020 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for sexual assault under the POCSO Act but reduced the sentence from five to three years, affirming the reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the sufficiency of prosecution evidence.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant POCSO Act sexual assault prosecutrix testimony identity proof

Vishal Mahesh Suple; Manish Bharat Parmerkar; Vinayak Chidambar Dhole v. The State of Maharashtra; Vivek Sitaram Kamtekar

08 Sep 2020 · S. S. Shinde; M. S. Karnik

The Bombay High Court quashed a criminal case under IPC Sections 427, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with 34 based on an amicable settlement and the complainant's withdrawal, subject to a monetary condition.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR amicable settlement Section 482 CrPC abuse of process

Dr. Gufran Beig v. C.B.I., A.C.B. Pune

08 Sep 2020 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court discharged two accused officials from criminal prosecution for alleged procurement irregularities, relying on departmental exoneration and lack of prima facie evidence to proceed to trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant discharge application departmental enquiry prima facie case procurement irregularities

Vaijanath Dayanand Kale v. Nerkar Properties LLP

07 Sep 2020 · S.C. GUPTE

The High Court upheld the jurisdiction of the commercial court over a construction contract dispute, dismissing the writ petition challenging the plaint's return under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Commercial Courts Act, 2015 construction contract commercial dispute jurisdiction

Hanmant Nagnath Surwase v. The State of Maharashtra

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

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the accused for murdering his wife based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence and failure to provide any plausible explanation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence Section 302 IPC murder motive

Ramesh Namdeo Naikwade v. The State of Maharashtra

03 Sep 2020 · S.S. Shinde; M.S. Karnik
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to unreliable eyewitness testimony and insufficient proof beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC murder eyewitness testimony reasonable doubt

Vijaykumar Raosaheb Kulkarni v. The Rasta Peth Education Society & Ors.

31 Aug 2020 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that an employee’s ambiguous resignation letter should be treated as voluntary retirement if pension benefits are involved, and that voluntary retirement can be withdrawn before its effective date even after acceptance.

labor appeal_allowed Significant voluntary retirement resignation pensionary benefits withdrawal of retirement notice

Shahenaj Amjed Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra

26 Aug 2020 · Revati Mohite Dere; M. S. Karnik
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court altered the appellant's conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, reducing her sentence to the period already served.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part II IPC culpable homicide murder