High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Jyoti Abhijeet Kandage v. Abhijeet Narayan Kandage

15 Sep 2025 · Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that Domestic Violence proceedings can be transferred from Magistrate's Court to Family Court and allowed the wife's application to transfer such proceedings to the Family Court at Kolhapur considering convenience and statutory provisions.

family appeal_allowed Significant Domestic Violence Act, 2005 transfer of proceedings Family Court jurisdiction Magistrate Court

Riyaz @ Bablu Sattar Mujawar v. The State of Maharashtra

15 Sep 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; Shyam C. Chandak

The High Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to unreliable eyewitness testimony, doubtful dying declaration, and flawed weapon recovery, holding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC eyewitness reliability oral dying declaration recovery of weapon

The Commissioner of Sales Tax, Mumbai v. Parle Products Ltd.

12 Sep 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that freight charges reimbursed by purchasers under ex-factory contracts do not form part of the sale price and are not subject to sales tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant sales price freight charges ex-factory delivery Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959

Vaibhav Maruti Dombale v. The Assistant Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai

12 Sep 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that the ITAT cannot recall its final order under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act based on a subsequent Supreme Court ruling, limiting rectification powers to mistakes apparent from the record existing at the time of the original order.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 254(2) Income Tax Act mistake apparent from record subsequent ruling rectification powers

Heena Mohammeddin Kashmiri v. State of Maharashtra

12 Sep 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court directed expeditious execution of a 2012 recovery certificate under the Consumer Protection Act, holding that unreasonable delay and pendency of delayed appeals cannot justify postponement of execution proceedings.

consumer_protection petition_allowed Significant Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Execution of recovery certificate Unreasonable delay in execution Collector's duty

Feroz Khaja Mohammad Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra

12 Sep 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld a preventive detention order under the MPDA Act, holding that procedural safeguards were complied with and the detention was justified to maintain public order.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant preventive detention MPDA Act Article 22 Advisory Board

Asian Paints Limited v. Competition Commission of India & Ors.

11 Sep 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Neela Gokhale
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the CCI's administrative order directing investigation against Asian Paints, holding that Section 26(2-A) does not bar entertaining new complaints on different facts and no prior hearing is required at the prima facie stage.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Competition Commission of India Section 26(1) Competition Act Section 26(2-A) Competition Act Abuse of dominance

Sagar Dattatray Chorghe v. The State of Maharashtra

11 Sep 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that in-service teachers who acquired TET qualification before the Supreme Court judgment are entitled to continue service and promotion, quashing transfer refusals and salary withholding based on prior non-possession of TET.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Teacher Eligibility Test Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act TET qualification In-service teachers

Shabana Rashid Pinjari v. Maharashtra Public Service Commission

11 Sep 2025 · M. S. Karnik; N. R. Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that the Disabilities Act mandates proactive reasonable accommodation and reservation for visually impaired candidates, allowing writ jurisdiction to enforce these rights when alternative remedies fail justice.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 reasonable accommodation reservation for persons with disabilities Article 226 Constitution of India

City and Industrial Development Corporation (Maharashtra) Limited v. Deepak D. Patil & Ors.

11 Sep 2025 · Amit Borkar, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld the Industrial Court’s finding that CIDCO committed unfair labour practices by denying permanency to long-serving firemen and drivers engaged on repeated fixed-term contracts, emphasizing substance over form in employment classification.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant unfair labour practice permanency temporary appointment Model Standing Orders

GEA Westfalia Separator India Private Limited v. SVS Aqua Technologies LLP

10 Sep 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court held that challenges to arbitral awards under the MSMED Act must be filed in courts having jurisdiction over the place where the statutory arbitration was conducted, dismissing petitions filed in Mumbai for lack of jurisdiction.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 MSMED Act Section 18 MSMED Act Section 34 Arbitration Act

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Mumbai Mahanagarpalika Karyalayeen Karmachari Sanghatana

10 Sep 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Court held that qualification conditions for Clerk posts are recruitment norms not altering service conditions under Section 9A ID Act, but unfair labour practices arose from arbitrary reversions and failure to provide training, directing continuation only for compliant employees with a one-year extension for others.

labor appeal_partly_allowed Significant unfair labour practice Section 9A Industrial Disputes Act reversion of employees recruitment rules

Navi Mumbai Mahanagar Palika v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Union

10 Sep 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the Industrial Court's order directing the regularization of perennial contract workers as permanent employees, emphasizing the State's duty to create sanctioned posts and prohibiting unfair labour practices without statutory notice.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant unfair labour practices regularization of workmen perennial work Section 9A Industrial Disputes Act

Bhanudas Sitaram Khunte v. Grievance Redressal Committee

10 Sep 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court held that a transferee is eligible for alternate accommodation under the Government Resolution if credible proof of prior occupation exists, overruling rejection based solely on electricity connection transfer date.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Government Resolution 16.05.2015 alternate accommodation eligibility electricity connection transfer proof of occupation

Santosh Balaram Kharkar v. The State of Maharashtra

10 Sep 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale

The Bombay High Court reduced the appellant's conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, holding that the fatal assault occurred in a sudden fight without premeditation.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part II IPC Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC culpable homicide

Rajan Baburao Vichare v. Naresh Ganpat Mhaske

09 Sep 2025 · R.I. Chagla
Cites 8 · Cited by 0

The court held that a candidate released on probation without imprisonment is not required to disclose such conviction in Form 26, and an Election Petition lacking material facts showing material effect on election result is liable to be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Election Petition Form 26 Representation of People Act, 1951 Section 33A

Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority v. Union of India

09 Sep 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court permitted cutting of 26 mangroves for Mumbai Metro Line 5 subject to strict environmental safeguards, mandating transparent and effective compensatory afforestation in line with the public trust doctrine and constitutional duties.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant mangroves public trust doctrine compensatory afforestation Coastal Regulation Zone

Canon India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Union of India

09 Sep 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that Customs Authorities must pass speaking orders on exemption claims filed under protest in Bills of Entry, directing compliance via writ of mandamus.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 speaking order writ of mandamus Bills of Entry

Farooq Shaukat Bagwan v. The State of Maharashtra

09 Sep 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Rajesh S. Patil
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court allowed bail to an accused in a MCOCA bomb blast case due to prolonged pre-trial detention, trial delay, and parity with co-accused, affirming the right to a speedy trial under Article 21.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail pre-trial incarceration MCOCA parity

Krishna Shantaram Chamankar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

09 Sep 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that prosecution under PMLA cannot continue against petitioners discharged from the predicate offence, quashing the charge-sheet filed against them.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act predicate offence discharge charge-sheet quashing