High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:

Rajesh Chandrakant Shingade v. The State of Maharashtra

21 Mar 2024 · Milind N. Jadhav
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Bombay High Court held that an Election Petition electronically filed within limitation with curable procedural defects is validly filed, and subsequent physical filing beyond limitation does not negate this, allowing the petitions to proceed.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Election Petition Limitation period Electronic filing E-filing defects

Dattatraya R. Karale v. Shekhar Balasaheb Genbhau

20 Mar 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Arif S. Doctor, J

The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunal’s quashing of a police officer’s transfer for violating the ECI’s election-related transfer exemption and statutory tenure protections under the Maharashtra Police Act.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Police Act 1951 Section 22N Election Commission of India Circular 2023 Police transfer

Jitendra @ Tiger Umaji Pawar v. Commissioner of Police, Thane

20 Mar 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order for failure to supply all materials forming the grounds of detention, violating the petitioner’s right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant preventive detention Article 22(5) Constitution of India grounds of detention communication of grounds

Barkya @ Vishwas Ananda Patil v. The State of Maharashtra

20 Mar 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The High Court acquitted the appellant of kidnapping and murder charges due to failure of the prosecution to prove a complete and conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence murder kidnapping last seen together

Jeevanjyoti Kaur Bansal v. Kulvinder Singh Bansal

20 Mar 2024 · Sharmila U. Deshmukh

The High Court held that the Supreme Court's mandate for filing affidavits of assets and liabilities applies only at the interim maintenance stage and not at the appellate stage challenging final DV Act orders, quashing the Sessions Court's direction for affidavit filing on appeal.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act affidavit of disclosure interim maintenance final adjudication

Executive Engineer National Highway Division v. Sanjay Shankar Surve

20 Mar 2024 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing an arbitration appeal, emphasizing strict adherence to limitation periods and rejecting false explanations by a government agency.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 limitation period Section 37 appeal

K.K.B. Properties v. Official Assignee

19 Mar 2024 · Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of property transfers made within two years prior to insolvency adjudication, holding that bona fide transactions for valuable consideration without notice of insolvency are protected under Sections 55 and 57 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Insolvency Act Section 55 Section 57 bona fide purchaser

Dinesh Babulal Sanghavi & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Mar 2024 · G. S. Patel; Kamal Khata
Cites 0 · Cited by 10

The Bombay High Court quashed Western Railways' arbitrary refusal to lease land for road widening, holding it violated Articles 14 and 21 by perpetuating a public safety hazard.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Article 21 Article 14 Wednesbury unreasonableness Doctrine of proportionality

Nitin Gorakhnath Sartape v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Mar 2024 · Revati Mohite Dere; Gauri Godse
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld convictions of police and civilians for conspiracy, abduction, and murder in a staged fake encounter, affirming the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence including CDRs and witness testimonies.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant fake encounter abduction conspiracy Call Detail Records

Balasaheb Hanmantrao Solaskar & Ors. v. Mumbai Agriculture Produce Market Committee & Ors.

19 Mar 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a communication directing criminal action against APMC directors as premature and without cause of action, affirming that criminal proceedings can be initiated without prior hearing at the investigation stage.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition criminal action Maharashtra APMC Act prematurity

Gautam Hospitality Private Limited v. The Principal Commissioner GST and Central Excise and Anr.

18 Mar 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that tax liability admitted in writing before the cut-off date qualifies as quantification under the SVLDRS scheme, allowing the petitioner to avail its benefits despite initial rejection.

tax petition_allowed Significant SVLDRS scheme tax quantification Finance Act 2019 Article 226

Sahana Dwellers Private Limited v. The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

18 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Bombay High Court held that a reassessment notice under Section 148 cannot be issued during pendency of assessment proceedings under Section 263 on the same income or issue, rendering such notice invalid.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 147 Income Tax Act Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 263 Income Tax Act reassessment notice

Vibrant Securities Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer

18 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening of the petitioner’s income tax assessment for AY 2013-14, holding that mere change of opinion without tangible material or failure to disclose does not justify reassessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act reopening of assessment failure to disclose material facts change of opinion

Assets Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. v. Union of India

18 Mar 2024 · B. P. Colabawalla; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court held that an unsecured licensee cannot be treated as a secured creditor with priority over a mortgagee, quashing the approval of a below-reserve-price sale of mortgaged property and directing a fresh auction recognizing the mortgagee's priority.

civil appeal_allowed Significant mortgage enforcement secured creditor unsecured creditor leave and license agreement

Miss Geeta Kapur v. The State of Maharashtra

13 Mar 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court quashed a criminal case under Sections 279 and 338 IPC based on a genuine settlement where the injured party accepted medical expenses and compensation but later retracted, holding that continuation would be an abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR settlement Section 279 IPC Section 338 IPC

Pruthviraj Bhanudas Dhavale v. Union of India

13 Mar 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court dismissed petitions challenging answer keys of the AISSEE-2024 exam, holding that courts cannot interfere with expert committee decisions on examination answers under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant judicial review answer key objections National Testing Agency Article 226

Surekhaben Chhaniyabhai Varli v. Union of India

12 Mar 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that the authority must pass and communicate a reasoned order on an application for appointment as a notary, and failure to do so violates natural justice and statutory requirements.

administrative other Significant Notaries Act 1952 Notaries Rules 1956 appointment as notary reasoned order

Hi Style India Pvt. Limited v. Rakesh Corporation

12 Mar 2024 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a belated challenge to an arbitral award, holding that limitation under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is strict and the arbitration agreement in an unsigned invoice was valid.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 limitation Arbitration agreement validity Ex parte arbitral award

M/s. Jai Trust v. The Union of India

08 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that transfer of shares by way of gift without consideration is not taxable as capital gains and quashed the reopening notice issued under Section 148 for lack of valid reason to believe income had escaped assessment.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 45 Section 47(iii)

Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax

08 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 7 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that provisions for salary liabilities arising from post-year agreements and exgratia bonus payments beyond statutory limits are allowable deductions under the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act Section 37(1) Section 36(1)(ii) Payment of Bonus Act