Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 299 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 306] State of Maharashtra vs Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Vakil Ansari, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 299KSIQ vs IAQ, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 300Seema Sureshchandra Mehata vs Marvel Realtors & Developers Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 301Bindu Narang vs Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 302Maharashtra...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 299 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 306]
State of Maharashtra vs Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Vakil Ansari, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 299
KSIQ vs IAQ, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 300
Seema Sureshchandra Mehata vs Marvel Realtors & Developers Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 301
Bindu Narang vs Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 302
Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. vs Azhar Ahmed Qaisar Ahmed, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 303
Gazi Salauddin Rehmatulla Hoole alias Pardeshi Baba Trust vs New Shree Swami Samartha Borivade, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 304
Sadashiv Parbati Rupnawar vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 305
Celebi NAS Airport Services India Pvt Ltd vs Mumbai International Airport Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 306
Judgments/Final Order
Case Titile: State of Maharashtra vs Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Vakil Ansari
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 299
The Bombay High Court while acquitting all the 12 convicts in the infamous 7/11 Mumbai train blast case, observed that the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) probing the case tortured the accused in the most 'inhuman and barbaric' manner as the officers were 'frustrated' at the relevant time and thus the 'confessional statements' of the accused obtained by the cops, were inadmissible. A special division bench of Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak after going through the evidence on record, noted that the accused were in 'prolonged' police custody till 76 days and that they retracted from their confessions recorded during their remand, just the moment when they were produced before the court for judicial custody.
Case Title: KSIQ vs IAQ
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 300
The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court on Monday (July 21) held that even when a personal law is pitted against the welfare and comfort of a child, the latter would always have an upper hand. Single-judge Justice Shailesh Brahme noted that the Muslim Personal Law allows the custody of a minor above the age of 7-years to the father and the child in the instant case was 9-years-old. However, after personally interacting with the child, the judge noted that he has a greater bonding with his mother and thus granted custody in her favour.
Case Title: Seema Sureshchandra Mehata vs Marvel Realtors & Developers Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 301
The Bombay High Court has held that the certificate contemplated under Rule 4 of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017, is not mandatory in an execution application, and the object of this Rule is to ensure that the directions for handing over possession are executed by the civil court within whose jurisdiction the project is situated.
Case Title: Bindu Narang vs Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 302
The Bombay High Court has held that the Permanent Lok Adalat (PLA) must adhere to the principles of natural justice as enshrined in Section 22-D of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, even though summary procedure is followed. The Court quashed the PLA's order in a dispute involving a telecom bill, on the ground that the petitioner was denied the right to cross-examine the respondent's witness without any reasoning.
Case Title: Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. vs Azhar Ahmed Qaisar Ahmed
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 303
The Bombay High Court has held that merely changing the purpose of electricity usage from one industrial activity to another does not amount to unauthorised use of electricity under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, unless it causes revenue loss to the distribution company. Justice Vrushali Joshi of the Nagpur Bench dismissed a writ petition filed by the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL) challenging the Appellate Authority's order that had set aside a demand bill issued to consumer Azhar Ahmed Qaisar Ahmed.
Case Title: Gazi Salauddin Rehmatulla Hoole alias Pardeshi Baba Trust vs New Shree Swami Samartha Borivade
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 304
Mere "mob fury" or "footfall of people" on a particular piece of land based on an assertion that it is a Dargah cannot prove that it is a legal structure, said the Bombay High Court while dismissing the plea filed by Gazi Salauddin Rehmatulla Hoole alias Pardeshi Baba Trust seeking recall of a May 30 order directing demolition of a structure in Thane. It thus refused to recall the demolition of the Dargah, which has allegedly expanded from 160 sq. ft. to over 17,610 sq. ft. without municipal approvals on private land in Thane district.
Case Title: Sadashiv Parbati Rupnawar vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 305
Taunting a woman about her complexion and inability to prepare food properly are 'domestic quarrels' and the same cannot be a ground to invoke sections 498-A (harassment) and 306 (abetment to suicide) if the woman dies by suicide, the Bombay High Court held recently, while acquitting a man of a 27-year-old case. Single-judge Justice Shriram Modak said the allegations that the appellant husband taunted the deceased wife on her dark complexion and her father-in-law taunted her about the food quality, etc., though harassment but cannot be said to be of a higher degree.
Case Title: Celebi NAS Airport Services India Pvt Ltd vs Mumbai International Airport Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 306
The Bombay High Court this week vacated its earlier order restraining Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) from taking a final decision on the bids to replace Turkey-based Celebi Aviation Holding's subsidiary Celebi NAS for ground and bridge handling services at city's International airport. Single-judge Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan noted that the Delhi High Court recently dismissed the petition filed by Celebi Aviation Holding challenging the 'security clearance' by India's aviation security regulator - Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) under the Ministry of Civil Aviation of India, which had revoked the security clearance of Celebi Airport Services India of Celebi, citing grounds related to 'national security' with immediate effect.
Other Developments
In a continuing expression of concern, the Bombay High Court recently once again flagged the practice of 'copy-pasting' witness statements by investigating officers and directed the State Government to address this growing 'menace'. A division bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Sanjay Deshmukh made these observations while disposing of a Criminal Application, which was withdrawn after the Court indicated its disinclination to grant relief.
The Bombay High Court has directed the GST Council and GST Network to develop a mechanism for cross-state ITC transfer in Mergers/amalgamations. A bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita Mehta permitted the IGST and CGST amount lying in the electronic credit ledger of the Transferor Company to be transferred to the Petitioner Company by physical mode for the time being, subject to the adjustments to be made in future.
The Bombay High Court has granted urgent ex parte ad interim relief to Uber in its plea seeking protection against protests scheduled to be held by Rickshaw drivers unions from 23rd July (today) over threats of violence and disruption to their services. The plea was heard by a single bench of Justice Riyaz Chagla.
In a development in the ongoing litigation with respect to ban on Plaster of Paris (PoP) made Ganesh idols and immersion of the same in natural waterbodies, the Maharashtra Government today furnished a new policy before the Bombay High Court stating that it will permit immersion of only idols above 5 feet in natural water bodies and the same will be removed the next morning itself, to avoid any harm to the environment.
The Bombay High Court was recently disturbed by the conduct of a Cyber Crime Police Officer, who produced an imposter before the court passing him off as a complainant in a First Information Report (FIR) against a TV serial "Tum Se Tum Tak" aired on popular channel Zee TV. A division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad noted that the complainant as per the FIR - Sunil Sharma, has contended that his sentiments are hurt by the telecasting of the serial, which revolves around the story of a 50-year-old man falling in love with a 20-year-old girl.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday (July 24) made it clear that for the forthcoming Ganeshotsav and Durga Puja festivals, idols made of Plaster of Paris (PoP) which are till the height of 6 feet, will have to be mandatorily immersed in artificial ponds/water tanks. A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne noted that last year, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) had created around 204 water tanks for 1.95 lakh Ganesh idols which were below 5 feet. However, only 85,000 such idols were immersed in these 204 tanks whereas the remaining were immersed only in natural water bodies.
The Bombay High Court recently imposed a hefty costs of Rs 30 lakhs on two petitioners and their advocates for restoring their writ petitions filed in the year 2019, which were dismissed for not removing office objections. Single-judge Justice Kamal Khata imposed Rs 15 lakhs costs on Mahatma Phule Cooperative Housing Society (Proposed) and their advocates along with Rs 15 lakhs on Unity Land Consultancy (Developer) and their advocates.
The Bombay High Court on Friday, while dismissing a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) seeking to protest the "Genocide" in Gaza by Israel, asked the petitioner to "show patriotism for the citizens of our own country first." A division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad said India already has several issues to deal with, and the petitioner party should avoid taking up issues which do not affect the citizens of India.
While hearing petitions both in favour and against the decision of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) over demolition of Kabutarkhanas (pigeon feeding enclosures) in Mumbai, the Bombay High Court on July 24 (Thursday) opined that if there is a hazard or potential for such hazard by breeding of pigeons and congregating them in Kabutarkhanas, certainly it is a matter of grave social concern.