Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 07 – April 13, 2025

Nominal Index:

Anna Maruti Shinde vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 135

Bharat Ramji Thakkar vs Union Of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 136

Arun Hastimal Firodia v. The State of Maharashtra and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 137

PV vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 138

Contract for Emergency Medical Services vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 139

Harshvardhan Navnath Khandekar vs State Of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 140

M/s. Mehta & Co. vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 141

Nivritti Pandurang Nale vs. Uttam Ganu Nale & Anr, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 142

Tanaji Shivaji Solankar & Ors vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 143

Central Depositories Services (India) Limited. Vs. Ketan Lalit Shah and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 144

Ballam Trifla Singh vs. Gyan Prakash Shukla & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 145

Judgments/Final Orders:

Bombay HC Orders SIT Probe Into Five Policemen Involved In Badlapur 'Fake' Encounter, Says Can't Ignore State's Reluctance To Register FIR

Case Title: Anna Maruti Shinde vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 135

The Bombay High Court ordered SIT probe into five policemen allegedly involved in the Badlapur 'fake' encounter case.

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale said that a refusal to investigate a crime undermines the Rule of Law, erodes public faith in justice, and allows perpetrators to go unpunished.

FIR Lodged & Investigation Underway: Bombay High Court Disposes PIL Alleging Mid-Day Meal Scam

Case title: Bharat Ramji Thakkar vs Union Of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 136

The Bombay High Court has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning an alleged scam in the distribution of food grains under the Mid-Day Meal Scheme, noting that a First Information Report (FIR) has been lodged and an investigation is underway.

Chairman Of Industrial Establishment Held Liable For Non-Compliance With Labor Court Order: Bombay HC

Case Title: Arun Hastimal Firodia v. The State of Maharashtra and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 137

A single judge bench of Justice Y. G. Khobragade upheld the issuance of criminal process against the Chairman of Kinetic Engineering Ltd., for failing to implement a Labor Court judgment. The court rejected the argument that a Chairman cannot be held responsible for compliance with court orders. The court clarified that persons in positions of control and supervision over an industrial establishment's affairs are obligated to implement court judgments even when appeals are pending without a stay order.

Once Marriage Is Registered, Husband Can't Be Booked For Rape On Ground That He Did Not Fulfill Promise To Marry As Per Customs: Bombay HC

Case Title: PV vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 138

Once a marriage is legally registered and a couple establishes sexual relations, the husband cannot be booked for rape because he did not fulfill his 'promise to marry the wife as per religious customs', the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court, held recently.

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL On Alleged Illegalities In Govt Tender For Supply Of Ambulances

Case title: Contract for Emergency Medical Services vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 139

The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition concerning alleged illegalities in the state government tender process for the supply and operation of emergency medical services and ambulances.

Bombay HC Refuses To Entertain PIL Apprehending Coercive Action By State Against Those Who Shared Kunal Kamra's Controversial Comedy Clip

Case title: Harshvardhan Navnath Khandekar vs State Of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 140

The Bombay High Court has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that raised apprehension that the Maharashtra government would take coercive action against those who shared Kunal Kamra's comedy clip, where he made the "gaddar" comment purportedly against Maharashtra's Deputy CM Eknath Shinde.

Bombay High Court Slaps ₹2 Lakh Cost On BMC For Razing Structure Used As Temporary Shelter For Cancer Patients

Case Title: M/s. Mehta & Co. vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 141

The Bombay High Court recently imposed Rs 2 lakh costs on the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) for high-handedly demolishing a structure which was used to provide temporary shelter and food for the cancer patients taking treatment in the city's Tata Memorial Hospital.

Presumption U/S 16 HAMA Conditional Upon Signing Of Adoption Deed By Persons Giving And Taking Child In Adoption: Bombay HC

Case title: Nivritti Pandurang Nale vs. Uttam Ganu Nale & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 142

The Bombay High Court has observed that mere registration of an adopted deed cannot give rise to a presumption under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. It noted that the presumption under Section 16 is conditional upon the signing of the deed by the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption.

Human Teeth Not 'Dangerous Weapon', Injury Caused By It Falls U/S 323 IPC And Not 324 IPC: Bombay High Court

Case title: Tanaji Shivaji Solankar & Ors vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 143

The Bombay High Court has observed that causing injury by biting with human teeth constitutes 'voluntarily causing hurt' under Section 323 IPC rather than Section 324 IPC as human teeth cannot be considered as a 'weapon'.

No Bar On Arbitrator To Allow Withdrawal Of Claims Provided Legitimate Interests Of Other Party Are Not Prejudiced: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Central Depositories Services (India) Limited. Vs. Ketan Lalit Shah and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 144

The Bombay High Court bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Dr. Neela Gokhale has held that the arbitrator can allow the parties to withdraw their claims to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings by issuing a new notice of arbitration, provided that the legitimate interests of the other party are not prejudiced.

Acted As Client's Agent: Bombay HC Asks State Bar Council To Enquire Into Lawyer's Conduct Who Sought Adjournment To Delay Order Pronouncement

Case title: Ballam Trifla Singh vs. Gyan Prakash Shukla & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 145

The Bombay High Court has directed the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa to hold an enquiry regarding the conduct of an advocate, who sought adjournment despite the case being listed for passing order. Remarking that the counsel acted as a “mouthpiece” of his client, Justice Madhav J. Jamdar observed that advocates' first duty is towards the court and that advocates are not the agents of their clients.

Other Orders/Observations:

Bombay High Court Seeks Response From State Over Steps Taken To Comply With SC Guidelines Against Use Of 'Two-Finger Test'

Case Title: Smita Singalkar vs Maharashtra University of Health Sciences

The Bombay High Court recently asked the Maharashtra government to spell out the steps taken to sensitise medical health providers across the State on the 'insensitive, inhuman and discriminatory' nature of the 'two-fingers test' or the 'virginity test' on survivors of sexual assault or rape.

Bombay High Court Seeks Maharashtra Govt's Response On Kunal Kamra's Plea To Quash FIR Over Alleged Defamatory Video On Eknath Shinde

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (April 8) asked State to get instructions on comedian Kunal Kamra's plea for quashing an FIR lodged against him following his satirical video and "gaddar" comment purportedly made against Maharashtra's Deputy CM Eknath Shinde.

Bombay High Court To Hear Appeal Against Order Restraining Release Of Film 'Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar'

The Bombay High Court has agreed to hear an appeal against a single judge's order that restrained the release of the film “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar”. On 13 June 2024, the Court had restrained the release of the film and any promotional material finding a strong prima facie case that the makers made unauthorised use of filmmaker Karan Johar's name and personality.

Bombay HC Five-Judge Bench Orders Removal Of 'Scandalous' Video Of Adv Nilesh Ojha Making 'Defamatory Allegations' Against Sitting Judges

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday ordered YouTube and Marathi news channel - ABP Majha, to remove a 'scandalous' video of advocate Nilesh Ojha, who made 'defamatory' allegations against sitting judges of the High Court.

Bombay High Court Passes John Doe Order Against Sale Of Counterfeit & Contraband 'Closeup', 'Pepsodent' Goods

The Bombay High Court has granted ex-parte ad-interim in favour of Hindustan Unilever, against infringement of its trademark and copyrights in its 'Closeup' and 'Pepsodent' toothpastes, by unknown persons selling counterfeit products.

High Court Issues Notice To State On Plea Seeking 'Carrying Capacity Survey' In Mumbai For Sustainable Urban Development

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court seeking 'Carrying Capacity Survey' for the city of Mumbai to address the address conflict between urban development and environmental sustainability.