High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Reshu Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

25 Jun 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe

The Bombay High Court quashed the petitioner's punitive transfer orders, directed her accommodation at the relocated campus, granted partial back wages, and ordered reopening of her POSH complaint.

administrative petition_allowed Significant temporary transfer permanent employee POSH Act Internal Complaints Committee

Satyam Shivam Arunkumar Jha v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

25 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 354 IPC against the applicant, holding that a strong prima facie case exists despite delay in FIR and minor discrepancies.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 CrPC Section 354 IPC sexual assault quashing of FIR

Anandrao Bapu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

25 Jun 2025 · S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court acquitted the accused in a corruption case due to insufficient prosecution evidence proving that the money accepted was illegal gratification rather than lawful dues.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 illegal gratification demand and acceptance burden of proof

Rajkumar Gulati & Ors. v. S.D. Corporation Private Ltd. & Ors.

25 Jun 2025 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that MOFA applies to free-sale buildings in slum rehabilitation projects on MHADA land, restraining the developer from unauthorized construction beyond the last disclosed plan without flat purchasers' consent.

property appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 slum rehabilitation scheme floor space index disclosure and consent

The State of Maharashtra v. Shanta Baban Sutar; The State of Maharashtra v. Dattakumar Tukaram Kamble

24 Jun 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld orders directing reinstatement of two long-serving employees terminated without due process, affirming their right to continuity of service despite initial temporary appointments.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant unfair labour practice continuous employment termination without due process employer-employee relationship

Mangal Bhanudas Thombare v. Union of India

24 Jun 2025 · Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court held that a fatal accident occurring while boarding a train, including attempts to save another passenger, constitutes an "untoward incident" under the Railways Act, entitling the deceased to compensation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant untoward incident Railways Act 1989 boarding accident compensation claim

Star Deep Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging redevelopment by a co-operative housing society, holding that disputes over proportionate rights and redevelopment entitlements between lessor and lessee are civil matters beyond writ jurisdiction.

civil petition_dismissed Significant writ jurisdiction Article 226 co-operative housing society redevelopment

Ajit K. Dharia v. Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors.

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition by a tenant challenging an Occupancy Certificate and seeking possession, holding that such civil disputes must be resolved by civil courts and not under writ jurisdiction.

civil petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 Occupancy Certificate tenant rights

Surendra Shah v. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors.

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation to demolish illegal constructions lacking sanctioned plans, emphasizing strict enforcement of municipal laws and rejecting judicial regularization.

administrative petition_allowed Significant illegal construction demolition municipal corporation writ of mandamus

Hiroo Tuljaram Shahani v. The State of Maharashtra

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held the Petitioners guilty of contempt for willfully disobeying their undertaking to remove unauthorized constructions, imposed sentence and fine, and directed restoration of the premises at their cost.

administrative contempt_found_and_sentence_imposed Significant Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act unauthorized construction contempt of court undertaking to court

Meenanath S/o Shivram Patil v. Vivek S/o Balaram Deshmukh & Ors.

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court directed demolition of unauthorized constructions by Respondents, dismissed a civil suit filed with suppressed facts, and held that illegal constructions without statutory approvals cannot be regularized or protected by courts.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant illegal construction CIDCO Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act Article 226

Kiran Ramesh Shinde v. State of Maharashtra

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld routine administrative transfers of judicial employees before completion of tenure, rejecting claims of illegality and punitive motive, and affirmed the distinct transfer rules applicable to judicial service.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant administrative transfer judicial employees Transfer Act 2005 Government Resolution

Sujal Mangala Birwadkar v. The State of Maharashtra

20 Jun 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that a petitioner born to an upper caste father and Scheduled Caste mother must prove social and educational disadvantages due to the mother's caste to claim Scheduled Caste status, and dismissed the petition for lack of such evidence.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Scheduled Caste status caste certificate inter-caste parentage social disadvantage

Ashish Balaji Sawant v. Jalindar Tukaram Khaire & Ors.

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition challenging invalidation of a caste certificate obtained by forged documents, holding that fraudulent claims undermine constitutional affirmative action and warrant dismissal with exemplary costs.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant caste certificate fraud Article 226 District Caste Scrutiny Committee

Avinash Dominic Ghosal v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

20 Jun 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held that unauthorized constructions without prior permission under the MRTP Act cannot be regularized post facto and directed demolition and prosecution of illegal structures, emphasizing strict enforcement of planning laws.

property petition_allowed Significant illegal construction Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Section 53(2) post facto regularization

NGO Alliance for Governance and Renewal v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

19 Jun 2025 · AMIT BORKAR; SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court struck down Regulation 17(3)(D)(2) of DCPR 2034 permitting slum rehabilitation on reserved public open spaces as unconstitutional, emphasizing the State's duty to preserve open spaces under Articles 14 and 21 and the public trust doctrine.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant public open spaces slum rehabilitation Development Control and Promotion Regulations 2034 Article 21

Ramchandra @ Ram Mewalal Yadav v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Jun 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of three accused for murder based on credible eyewitness and dying declaration evidence corroborated by medical and forensic findings despite minor contradictions and procedural delays.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration eyewitness testimony Section 302 IPC life imprisonment

Mangal Credit And Fincorp Limited v. GBL Chemical Limited & Ors

18 Jun 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court held that allegations of fraud do not preclude arbitration at the Section 11 stage and appointed an arbitrator, leaving the question of arbitrability of fraud to the arbitral tribunal.

commercial_arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act arbitrability of fraud jurisdiction of Section 11 Court fraud allegations

Samruddhi Industries Ltd. v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

18 Jun 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court held that an arbitration clause limited to disputes below the DRT's pecuniary jurisdiction does not cover a borrower's claim challenging penal interest charges exceeding that limit, and thus refused to appoint an arbitrator.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement pecuniary jurisdiction Debt Recovery Tribunal Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993

Nishit Patel v. State of Maharashtra

18 Jun 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed the FIR and charge-sheet against the petitioner for abetment of suicide, holding that mere financial transactions without proximate instigation do not constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant abetment of suicide Section 306 IPC quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC