Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 89NOMINAL INDEXAhmedabad Municipal Corporation v/s Sadgunbhai Semulbhai Solanki 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 2Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited vs Gupta Power Infrastructure Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 3Thakor Vipulji Gamaji & Ors. vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 4Mahesh Langa...
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 89
NOMINAL INDEX
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v/s Sadgunbhai Semulbhai Solanki 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1
Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 2
Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited vs Gupta Power Infrastructure Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 3
Thakor Vipulji Gamaji & Ors. vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 4
Mahesh Langa v State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 5
Infodesk India Pvt. Limited Versus The Union Of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 6
Ramabhai Jivabhai Keshwala vs State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 7
Dharini Shah & Ors. vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 8
Radhikkumar Jayantibhai Dhameliya vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 9
Mount Carmel High School & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. and Batch 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 10
Program Officer, ICDS & Anr. vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 11
Ileshkumar Valabhai Kher v/s State of Gujarat & Batch 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 12
Jayanti Ishwarbhai Parmar v. Sabbir Mohammed Zubair 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 13
Mount Carmel School v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 14
Bet Bhadela Muslim Jamat Through President Kadarbhai Abhubhai Malek & Anr. vs State of Gujarat and Batch 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 15
Sharifbhai Sakaryani v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 16
Gujarat Operational Creditors Association v/s Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 17
Gujarat Operational Creditors Association v/s Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. & Ors.2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 18
Pragnesh Thummar v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 19
Maheshdan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 20
Gemarbhai Dalabhai Desai & Ors. v/s SK Patel & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 21
Ramsingbhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati vs Dahayabhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 22
X vs Y 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 23
Mukeshbhai Angalji Makwana & Anr. vs State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 24
Chaitan Vyas vs Pandit Deendayal Energy University 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 25
Ganpatsinh Chimanbhai Rathwa vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 26
Rakhidevi Umashankar Agarwal W/o Umashankar Shyamlal Agarwal vs Religare Finvest Ltd. & Anr Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 27
Kandhal Sarmanbhai Jadeja vs State of Gujarat & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 28
Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 29
National Highways Authority of India v/s Kishorbhai Valjibhai Jethani & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 30
Anishaben Sharifbhai Solanki & Ors. vs Sachinbhai Bharatbhai Suvagiya & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 31
X vs Balvandsingh Hanubha Rana & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 32
Mohammad Sadik @ Sajju Mohammad Rafik Gulam NabiPathan vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 33
Tofan Sudarshan Shahu vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 34
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Limited v/s XYZ and Others 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 35
Bhavini Nagendrasinh Chauhan vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 36
M/s Total Infratech Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 37
Ramliben Jambu v/s LIC India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 38
Dineshbhai Dhulabhai Parmar & Anr v/s Damyantiben Narayanbhai Chuahan & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 39
Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 40
Imran Kumelahmed Khan Legal Heir of Late Kumelahmed Abdulhamid Khan v/s State Bank of India & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 41
Sandip Hasmukhbhai Chudasama & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 42
Sadhviji Jayshrigiri Guru Jagdishgiri v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 43
Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 44
Gujarat State Co Operative Marketing Federation Ltd. v/s President Officer & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 45
AMW Auto Component Limited Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajkot 1 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 46
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Institute of Technology & Anr. vs Kirti H Niralgikar & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 47
Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 48
Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 49
Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 50
Rohan Dyes and Intermediaries Ltd & Anr. v/s Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 51
X v/s Versus High Court of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 52
Irshadunnisha & Anr. Makbulhusen Abbasali Saiyed Heirs Of Deceased Abbasali Haji Muradali Sayed & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 53
XYZ vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 54
Imran Dawood S/o Mohammad Salim Dawood British National v/s Patel Mithabhai Pashabhai & Others 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 55
Nileshbhai Jayantilal Joshi vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 56
X v/s Y 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 57
District Development Officer & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 58
Bharvad Meghankaben Nareshbhai vs National Texting Agency (NTA) Through Its Director General & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 59
Himanshu Dineshchandra Parekh v/s Institute for Plasma Research & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 60
X v/s State of Gujarat and Another 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 61
Mohammed Sajjad Mohammed Imtiyaz v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 62
Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 63
Gulabsinh Devusinh Jhala & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 64
State of Gujarat v. Kalubhai Amarshi Aghara 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 65
Umeshkumar Pratapsinh Parmar & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 66
Samsuddin Jainulabiddin Shaikh & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 67
Devrajbhai Tulsibhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 68
Prashant S/o Prakash Harishchandra Vazirani vs. State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 69
Ajay Rameshbhai Trivedi vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 70
Technovaa Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Gandhinagar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 71
ABC v/s State of Gujarat and Others 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 72
Harsh Mahesh Tanna vs State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 73
M/s Sopariwala Export Pvt. Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 74
X v/s Y 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 75
Minaxi Chandulal Shah & Ors. vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 76
X v/s State of Gujarat and Others 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 77
Tahera Ahmed Patel w/o Late Ahmed Yusuf Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 78
Tathya Pragneshbhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 79
Dipakkumar Kirtilal Shah v/s Navinkumar Bansidhar Maheshwari 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 80
Jabir Bin Yamin Behra v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 81
Sunil Surendrakumar Kakkad v/s Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 82
M/s Addwrap Packaging Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 83
Yash Textiles v/s Vinayak Fashions 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 84
M/s NRM Metals (India) Private Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 85
Narayan Sai vs State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 86
Onali Ezazuddin Dholakawala & Anr. vs Police Commissioner & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 87
Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 88
Balwantsinh Setansinh Vaghela Versus Ministry Of Home Affairs 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 89
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v/s Sadgunbhai Semulbhai Solanki
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1
Dismissing Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's plea against a labour court order directing it to pay arrears of leave encashment to a retired employee, the Gujarat High Court underscored that depriving a person of leave encashment–which is akin to salary and is thus a property, violates his statutory rights in the Constitution of India.
Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati vs Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 2
Observing that an identical PIL is pending before the Bombay High Court raising the same issue, the Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 3) dismissed a plea seeking a restrain on the operation on certain mobile game platforms on the ground that the games in question constitute games of chance and not games of skill.
In doing so the court granted the petitioner–Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati, liberty to approach the Bombay High Court in an intervention plea in the pending matter and raise the issue there.
Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited vs Gupta Power Infrastructure Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 3
The Gujarat High Court bench of Mrs. Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Mr.Justice Pranav Trivedi of has held that the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act' 1996 as to challenge the award passed under Section 18(4) of the MSMED Act' 2006, would be governed by the agreement between the parties which has conferred exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court.
Thakor Vipulji Gamaji & Ors. vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 4
The Gujarat High Court recently lamented the failure on part of the Police, the prosecution and the trial court in an assault case, which came to be transferred to a POCSO Court, eight years after commencement of trial.
In his December 24 order, Justice Sandeep Bhatt observed that the victim had "categorically" deposed in her testimony in 2018 that at the time of incident, she was 15 years old. But despite this no action
Mahesh Langa v State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 5
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (January 9) granted regular bail to journalist Mahesh Langa in a cheating and forgery case registered by the Detection of Crime Branch (DCB) Ahmedabad over allegations of his involvement in a firm which allegedly defrauded government exchequer by availing "bogus" Input Tax Credit.
Justice MR Megdey while pronouncing the order said, "Application is Allowed".
Infodesk India Pvt. Limited Versus The Union Of India & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 6
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that where a subsidiary company provides goods or services to its parent company in its independent capacity, it cannot be said that such services fall under 'intermediary service' under Section 2(13) of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
The provision defines “intermediary” as a broker, an agent or any other person who arranges or facilitates the supply of goods or services or both, between two or more persons.
Ramabhai Jivabhai Keshwala vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 7
Referring to a Supreme Court order on illegal mining of sand/minerals, the Gujarat High Court reiterated that even if an offence under Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act is made out on which magistrate cannot take cognizance without complaint by authorized officer, it however does not debar police from lodging a case for theft of sand/minerals.
Case Title: Dharini Shah & Ors. vs State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 8
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 17) dismissed a PIL moved by residents of Ahmedabad pertaining to the construction of a bridge at Panjrapole cross roads over the Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Marg (IIM road), claiming that it will lead to reduction of green cover in the city.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi while pronouncing the order said, "The instant Public Interest Litigation is dismissed". The PIL was moved by 20 residents of the city with respect to the bridge construction covering an area length of 652 metres.
Radhikkumar Jayantibhai Dhameliya vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 9
The Gujarat High Court has recently directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) to look into the allegations raised by a man–booked in a case alleging VISA fraud and cheating, who had claimed differential treatment by the Police Officials with respect to him and special treatment to the co-accused in the matter.
The petition sought for a direction to Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad to initiate legal/departmental proceedings against the Police Inspector, Anand Nagar Police Station for giving 'special treatment' to the co-accused in a FIR registered under the Sections 406 (Criminal Breach of Trust), 420 (Cheating) and 114 (Presence of abettor at the crime scene) of IPC.
MOUNT CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL & ANR. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS and Batch
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 10
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (January 23) dismissed a batch of writ petitions moved by various linguistic and religious minority schools challenging the 2021 amendments to the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Act which applied a centralised process of recruiting teachers and principals in such schools.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi while pronouncing its order said, "All the writ petitions in this bunch are dismissed".
Program Officer, ICDS & Anr. vs State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 11
After examining the duties and responsibilities of the Anganwadi worker provided in a government resolution, the Gujarat High Court recently set aside a single judge's order which had directed the state to appoint a woman with 70% permanent disability as an anganwadi worker.
The court said this after noting that the role necessitates the physical capability to perform tasks which involves taking care of infants, children and mother.
ILESHKUMAR VALABHAI KHER v/s STATE OF GUJARAT AND BATCH
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 12
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (January 30) granted regular bail to three persons accused in the TRP Game Zone Fire incident wherein twenty-seven individuals, including four children, perished in the massive fire that engulfed the game zone in Rajkot's Nana-Mava locality on May 25, 2024.
Justice MR Mengdey further rejected the regular bail plea of four accused who have been booked in the case.
Jayanti Ishwarbhai Parmar v. Sabbir Mohammed Zubair
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 13
A Single Judge Bench of Justice M.K. Thakker upheld the Labour Court's rejection of a recovery application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court held that without a pre-existing right, claims for additional wages, bonus, and rent were not maintainable under this provision. It explained that Labour Courts cannot adjudicate new claims under Section 33(C)(2), as their jurisdiction is similar to that of an executing court.
MOUNT CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL & ANR. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS and Batch
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 14
Upholding the 2021 amendments to Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Act which allowed the State to make rules regarding recruitment of teachers and principals in linguistic and religious minority schools, the Gujarat High Court said that the language of the provisions did not denote that the State had any "unfettered, uncannalized or unlimited power" to make regulations.
It further emphasized that though power of the state to regulate is not unfettered however mere conferment of power by enabling provisions alone cannot be perceived as infringement of protection granted to minority institutions under Article 30 of the Constitution of India.
Bet Bhadela Muslim Jamat Through President Kadarbhai Abhubhai Malek & Anr. vs State of Gujarat and Batch
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 15
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (February 4) dismissed a batch of petitions seeking protection from demolition of certain alleged religious structures at Beyt Dwarka.
The petitions challenged the notices by Okha Nagarpalika directing removal of "unauthorised construction/encroachment within three days", failing which, demolition of the same had been been indicated.
SHARIFBHAI HASAMBHAI SAKARYANI v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Case Citaiton: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 16
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (February 3) expunged its remarks on the conduct of High Court Advocates' Association President Brijesh Trivedi, after noting his regret over the heated exchange with Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, during the hearing of a 2011 PIL last month.
The court further took note of Trivedi's assurance that such an "occurrence will not be repeated in future".
GUJARAT OPERATIONAL CREDITORS ASSOCIATION Versus ARCELOR MITTAL NIPPON STEEL INDIA LTD. & ORS.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 17
Terming a contempt plea seeking action against Arcellor Mittal Nippon Steel India and others as well as their advocates "disingenuous" and an "epitome of frivolity", Gujarat High Court expressed its displeasure with the applicant Gujarat Operational Creditors Association and its counsel Deepak Khosla for moving the plea and for making "unwarranted remarks" on the judges of the court.
GUJARAT OPERATIONAL CREDITORS ASSOCIATION Versus ARCELOR MITTAL NIPPON STEEL INDIA LTD. & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 18
A division bench of the Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (February 5) opined that videos of the Court proceedings which are live streamed are required to be removed from YouTube after a specific period.
A division bench Justice AS Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi in its order however said that the discretion in this regard is with the Chief Justice.
Pragnesh Thummar v/s State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 19
The Gujarat High Court denied regular bail to a man booked under the NDPS Act for being the "main manufacturer" of the contraband Mephedrone which was found to be of commercial quantity, after considering the role stated to be played by the man noting that his act would have effect on the youth of the nation.
Gujarat High Court Denies Regular Bail To Journalist Mahesh Langa In Alleged Case Of GST Fraud
Maheshdan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 20
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (February 6) dismissed the regular bail plea of journalist Mahesh Langa in an alleged case of GST fraud including the fraudulent availing of Input Tax Credit and forgery of documents registered by Rajkot police.
Justice MR Mengdey while pronouncing the order said, "Dismissed".
The court in its order while dismissing the bail plea said that it is not inclined to exercise its judicial discretion in favour Langa "at this stage".
GEMARBHAI DALABHAI DESAI & ORS. v/s S.K.PATEL, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION MECHANICAL & ORS.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 21
In a contempt plea for non-compliance of an order on extension of increment to retired government employees, the Gujarat High Court expressed its "shock" on noting that the department added as respondent was incorrect and the court was "misled" and not informed of this by the litigant's counsel and even State's counsel "failed" to do so.In a contempt plea for non-compliance of an order on extension of increment to retired government employees, the Gujarat High Court expressed its "shock" on noting that the department added as respondent was incorrect and the court was "misled" and not informed of this by the litigant's counsel and even State's counsel "failed" to do so.
Ramsingbhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati vs Dahayabhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati & Ors.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 22
In a plea challenging the imposition of Rs. 25,000 cost by the trial court in rejecting a litigant's review plea, the Gujarat High Court observed the trial court had not concluded that the review plea was "vexatious or false", underscoring that courts have power to impose costs for frivolous litigation but it should be reasonable.
Taking note of the fact that the district court's registry was insisting on deposit of cost, affecting the petitioner's right to appeal against the trial court order, the high court remarked that the same was "deplorable" as there was no such observation made by the trial court.
X vs Y
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 23
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a wife's revision plea challenging a family court order which rejected her Order VII Rule 11 CPC application for rejection of her husband's 'composite suit' for nullity of marriage and divorce alleging cruelty, after noting that there is no prohibition on filing such a suit or joint petition.
The court further observed that while examining the wife's application for rejection of plaint, the family court was not supposed to elaborately go into the facts but to only check if cause of action was made out.
Mukeshbhai angalji Makwana & Anr. vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 24
While hearing a plea for quashing a cheating FIR where the petitioners alleged that Police was asking them to "settle", the Gujarat High Court on Monday (February 10) orally remarked that these kind of cases were "repeatedly" coming before it where the police seemed to be "more vigilant" in matters concerning property disputes or recovery of money.
In doing so the court, which although was not inclined to entertain the present plea, further orally said that the police cannot insist on parties to settle or threaten the persons concerned which would be abuse of their power, underscoring that police authorities are to simply investigate the case and not conciliate anything.
Chaitan Vyas vs Pandit Deendayal Energy University
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 25
The Gujarat High Court dismissed with Rs. 50,000 cost an examiner's appeal who had alleged that Pandit Deendayal Energy University (PDEU) “manipulated the results to preserve its reputation” by illegally assigning marks to 30 students who had actually failed as per his assessment, underscoring that the plea was “a sheer abuse of the process of the Court.”
Ganpatsinh Chimanbhai Rathwa vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 26
While rejecting a PIL alleging irregularities in implementation of the scheme framed under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), the Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (February 11) said that since a statutory remedy exists for addressing any grievances on the scheme's implementation a PIL cannot be entertained.
Rakhidevi Umashankar Agarwal W/o Umashankar Shyamlal Agarwal vs Religare Finvest Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 27
While quashing criminal proceedings in a cheque bouncing case against a woman stated to be the former director of a textile company, the Gujarat High Court noted that she had resigned in 2013 and shouldn't be held liable for a cheque issued in 20197 reiterating that criminal liability in such cases primarily falls on drawer company.
KANDHAL SARMANBHAI JADEJA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 28
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State to decide the representation of Samajwadi Party MLA Kandhal Jadeja, who alleged non-completion of work for which a grant was given to Kutiyana Nagarpalika claiming that while money was given for development of public utilities on a land it now appeared as garbage land in photographs.
In doing so the court also noted that Nagarpalika in its affidavit "simply" denied Jadeja's allegations and did not give any details to answer the same, adding that it should have given details on the utilization of the grant.
Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 29
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (February 17) dismissed journalist Mahesh Langa's plea to quash an FIR registered by Gandhinagar Police against him for alleged corruption, criminal conspiracy and theft where he is accused of obtaining "highly confidential government documents".
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA Versus KISHORBHAI VALJIBHAI JETHANI & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 30
The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi has held that the plea that limitation period for challenging the award under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) did not start as the signed copy of the award was not received by the party, cannot be raised for the first time in appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act.
Anishaben Sharifbhai Solanki & Ors. vs Sachinbhai Bharatbhai Suvagiya & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 31
While quashing an order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) which had dismissed a claim petition, the Gujarat High Court observed that it was unfortunate that instead of "taking a holistic view" the tribunal had sought to fund minor inconsistencies to throw out the claimant's plea for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
In doing so the court observed that the tribunal had adopted an "insensitive approach" by taking a hyper-technical view, when it should have tried to grant fair compensation to the victim of road accident.
X vs Balvandsingh Hanubha Rana & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 32
Enhancing the compensation to Rs. 13,09, 240 along with interest to a 5-year-old boy who became paralytic after a road accident, the Gujarat High Court said that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal–which had awarded over Rs. 2 Lakh– had “failed to understand” the effect of paralysis on the boy's upper body which left him “deadwood at the nascent age”.
In doing so the court further underscored that the boy's 'normal living' had turned into misery and 50% physical disability which had been assessed was infact "100% functional disability".
Mohammad Sadik @ Sajju Mohammad Rafik Gulam NabiPathan vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 33
The Gujarat High Court recently granted regular bail to an man booked under NDPS Act, in view of long incarnation of three and a half years and after noting that out of 29 witnesses only two had been examined where the trial court had not give any time bound schedule of the examination of such witnesses
Tofan Sudarshan Shahu vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 34
The Gujarat High Court recently granted regular bail to a man booked in a case under the NDPS Act after observing that while the trial had not progressed substantially, the matter had been adjourned almost 78 times leading to “prolonged incarceration” and "blink hope of a speedy trial" in the case.
In doing so the high court further noted that there were many NDPS cases pending before the concerned court which required urgent disposal.
CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED v/s XYZ and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 35
Quashing an order referring to the labour court an alleged dispute between a company and a female foreign national employed as a personal assistant–who had also levelled rape allegations, the Gujarat High Court said that there was no application of mind regarding a "prima facie opinion" on if an industrial dispute existed.
Observing that the assistant labour commissioner's order was defective, the court said that whether an employee is a workman or not is a mix question of law and facts which can be decided after adducing evidence, not permissible at the stage of making reference; however prima facie opinion is a must before a reference order is made.
Bhavini Nagendrasinh Chauhan vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 36
The Gujarat High Court refused to grant further age limit relaxation to a 35-year-old candidate who had applied in the civil judges recruitment process, noting that the same was not provided for in the Gujarat State Judicial Services Rules, 2005.
The court was examining whether the candidate could have been granted the relaxation who claimed to be within the age limit on the first day of filing of application form, but exceeded the age limit on the last date of submission of the form.
M/s Total Infratech Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 37
The Gujarat High Court stated that the assessee is entitled to the interest on refund under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
In this case, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer passed and uploaded the manual order in the ITBA system on 12/05/2022 which was accounted on CPC 26/07/2022 with refund of Rs.2,20,41,042/- and the refund was issued by the CPC and therefore nothing is pending before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
RAMILABEN VITTHALBHAI JAMBU Versus LIC INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 38
Underscoring the "pious intention" of compassionate appointment which is to give relief to the deceased employee's kin, the Gujarat High Court stopped short of imposing costs on a litigant for suppressing material facts after noting that she only intended to secure the appointment of her son at LIC after her husband's death.
In doing so the court observed that the litigant had not disclosed any facts about the financial condition of her family, and the court "prima facie" observed that her only aim was to get "compassionate appointment for her son by one way or the other".
DINESHBHAI DHULABHAI PARMAR & ANR. Versus DAMYANTIBEN NARAYANBHAI CHAUHAN & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 39
The Gujarat High Court has held four senior citizen women guilty of contempt of court, for entering into an agreement to sell a disputed property and creating third party rights despite a 2010 status quo order.
However, noting the age of the contemnors, the court did not send them to civil imprisonment; instead it fined them with Rs 2000 each, quashed the agreement to sell the property and further imposed cost of Rs 1 Lakh on them to be paid to the registry as well as Rs 50,000 to be paid to the petitioners.
NARAYAN @ NARAYAN SAI v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 40
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (March 11) directed the concerned authorities to decided Asaram Bapu's son Narayan Sai's plea for furlough expeditiously, preferably within 30 days.
In 2019 Sai was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by a Sessions Court in Surat in a rape case. His appeal against this decision is pending before the high court.
IMRAN KUMELAHMED KHAN LEGAL HEIR OF LATE KUMELAHMED ABDULHAMID KHAN V/S STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 41
The Gujarat High Court recently rejected a man's plea against dismissal of his application for rejection of suit filed by a bank to recover a loan taken by the man's deceased father, claiming he was not liable to pay his father's bank loan as debt is not heritable property under Muslim Law.
The court however said that the contentions made by the son would require a "detailed inquiry during the course of trial" of the recovery suit.
SANDIP HASMUKHBHAI CHUDASAMA & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 42
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash an FIR against developers/partners of a real estate development firm accused by home buyers of neither finishing the project called Suranva Residency nor handing over possession of the flats in question or returning the booking amount.
In doing so the court underscored that the partners of the firm were obliged to either finish the project, or return the money to the homebuyers and even if there was an dispute inter-se partners the buyers cannot become victims of the same.
SADHVIJI JAYSHRIGIRI GURU JAGDISHGIRI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 43
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash a 2017 FIR for cheating and criminal breach of trust lodged against a Sadhavi (female monk) accused of duping a man of approximately Rs. 1.255 crores taken on the pretext of clearing his land which was acquired by the State Housing Board.
Observing that prima facie allegations were made out, the court referred to the FIR and noted that upon the trust given by the petitioner-Sadhavi, the man (first informant) had also entrusted 16.200 kg of gold to her, which she allegedly took and ran away with.
Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 44
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (March 21) granted anticipatory bail to journalist Mahesh Langa booked in an FIR for alleged corruption, criminal conspiracy and theft where he is accused of obtaining "highly confidential government documents" which are stated to belong to the Gujarat Maritime Board(GMB).
However Langa is presently in judicial custody in a case pertaining to alleged GST fraud; the high court had earlier rejected his regular bail plea.
'Unacceptable': Gujarat High Court Imposes ₹2 Lakh Cost On Man For Joining VC Hearing From Lavatory
GUJARAT STATE CO OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED v/s PRESIDENT OFFICER & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 45
The Gujarat High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 2 Lakh on a man for attending court proceedings through video conferencing from a lavatory and has further asked him to perform community service by cleaning the gardens in the high court premises for two weeks.
In doing so the court rejected the man's contention that he had used the high court's website for the first time and thus committed a mistake noting that the 42-year-old man has a B.Sc. degree, and is working in a company.
AMW Auto Component Limited Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajkot 1
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 46
The Gujarat High Court bench of Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice D.N.Ray has held that after approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code), all liabilities prior to the approval of the plan stand extinguished. Therefore, the Income Tax Authority cannot be permitted to issue a notice under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) seeking to revise the assessment after the approval of the Plan.
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Institute of Technology & Anr. vs Kirti H Niralgikar & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 47
The State has assured the Gujarat High Court that the State Educational Institutions Service Tribunal shall conduct judicial proceedings strictly as per the daily working hours, and CCTV cameras as well as virtual hearing facility shall be made available within two months.
The submission was made by the government pleader in a matter, where the parties had earlier raised concerns about the tribunal's functioning, installation of CCTV cameras and lack of virtual hearing facility leading to prolonged proceedings. The court had in its previous order directed its Registrar General and education department's Chief Secretary to report on the functioning of the tribunal.
Gujarat High Court Delivers Spilt Verdict On Temporary Bail Sought By Asaram Bapu In Rape Case
ASHUMAL @ ASHARAM THAUMAL SINDHI (HARPALANI) versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 48
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (March 28) gave a spilt verdict on the temporary bail plea moved by Asaram Bapu who was convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in 2023 and is serving a life sentence.
Notably, the Supreme Court had in January this year granted interim bail till March 31 to Asaram Bapu on medical grounds.
In a split verdict given by the Gujarat High Court on Friday on Asaram Bapu's temporary bail plea, Justice Sandeep Bhatt in his dissenting opinion said that it seemed that Asaram was only interested in extending the interim bail granted by Supreme Court earlier this year on medical grounds, without "properly utilizing the time period".
Justice Bhatt further said that though the court is aware that the applicant is 86-years-old, he however observed, "but we cannot shut our eyes from the fact that the applicant is a convict of the charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and is undergoing sentence of life imprisonment".
ASHUMAL @ ASHARAM THAUMAL SINDHI (HARPALANI) versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 49
ASHUMAL @ ASHARAM THAUMAL SINDHI (HARPALANI) versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 50
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (March 28) allowed three months temporary bail to Asaram Bapu who was convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in 2023 and is serving a life sentence.
Justice AS Supehia– the third judge who heard Asaram's plea after a division bench earlier today delivered a split verdict, in his order said,
"Thus on an overall appreciation of the respective orders passed by the (division) bench including the view favourable to applicant and the dissenting view and in light of the order of the Supreme Court, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for interim bail...It cannot be said that an 86 years old ailing person...can confine his treatment to particular therapy or particular system of medicines."
ROHAN DYES AND INTERMEDIATES LIMITED & ANR. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 51
The Gujarat High Court quashed two show cause notices issued by customs department to a chemical manufacturing company after noting that the notices had been pending adjudication for 15 and 13 years respectively and deserved to be set aside due to "inordinate lapse of time".
X v/s Versus High Court of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 52
The Gujarat High Court has observed that assessment of judicial officers' decisions for the purpose of promotion is a subjective exercise and it would be impossible to maintain uniformity in such assessments, adding that questioning the same would dent the sanctity of the recruitment process.
It further observed that if the officer's annual confidential reports (ACR) are relied on to question the assessment of the officer's judgments (which is conducted by the high court) and marks in the assessment are allotted based on the ACR, then it would be an "anathema to the recruitment process".
IRSHADUNNISHA & ANR. v/s MAKBULHUSEN ABBASALI SAIYED HEIRS OF DECEASED ABBASALI HAJI MURADALI SAIYED & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 53
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a trial court's eviction order which had held that the tenants had breached the terms of tenancy concerning a property which was originally given on rent to be exclusively used for a cycle repair business but was eventually being used to conduct business of seat covers and accessories.
The high court was hearing a revision plea against judgment of the Appellate court which had quashed and set aside the order passed by the trial court in a civil suit. The trial court had allowed a plea for eviction of defendants; this was challenged by defendants before the appellate court which allowed the defendants' appeal. Against this the plaintiff moved the high court.
XYZ vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 54
The Gujarat High Court granted over Rs. 12 Lakh as compensation to a rape survivor–who was minor at the time of the incident in 2018–observing it is a “serious case of rape” where the survivor had passed though “aggravating circumstances”, physical harassment and mental trauma.
In doing so, the Court noted that the Trial Court passed a "non-speaking order" where it failed to provide adequate reasoning for awarding Rs 3 Lakh as compensation despite the gravity of the case wherein, the girl was raped several times and had to undergo medical termination of pregnancy. The court thus said that trial court should have awarded a higher compensation amount.
IMRAN DAWOOD S/O. MOHAMMAD SALIM DAWOOD BRITISH NATIONAL v/s PATEL MITHABHAI PASHABHAI & others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 55
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a 2015 sessions court order which acquitted six men in a case related to the killing of three British Nationals near Prantij, during the 2002 state-wide riots which followed the Godhra Train Burning incident.
In doing so the court observed that there had been no test identification parade in the matter and the dock identification was conducted for the first time after a gap of six years. The court thus ruled that the manner in which dock identification of the accused was conducted cannot be a relevant fact to convict them.
Nileshbhai Jayantilal Joshi vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 56
The Gujarat High Court granted regular bail to the 64-year-old father accused of murdering his son, chopping his body parts and packing it in polythene bags noting that the father has been in custody since July 2022 and the alleged act prima facie appears to be out of “sheer frustration” rather than a criminal mindset.
The Court observed the record indicated that the father “must have been fed up with the conduct of his son” as the deceased son "fell prey to several vices including drugs and alcohol", was unemployed and would demand money from the father.
X v/s Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 57
Quoting Former US Assistant Secretary for Children and Families Wade Horn who said "Children ought not to be victims of the choices adults make for them", the Gujarat High Court rejected a father's plea for child custody under Guardians and Wards Act noting that the custody was earlier decided by family court with consent of parties to remain with the mother.
In doing so the court however also emphasized that often in custody battles the child becomes the unintended victim of their parents conflict, hence keeping in mind the best interest and the needs of the child, the nature of custody orders must be considered as "temporary orders made in the existing circumstances".
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 58
The Gujarat High Court has deprecated the conduct of the State government for filing an appeal against a writ order with a delay of 276 days, observing that when it is added as a party to the proceedings along with the local authorities, then it cannot watch the proceedings from the fence by neither filing any affidavits nor making any submissions on its stand.
The High Court said that in case the State government chooses not to contest the proceedings, then it cannot refrain the statutory local authorities from implementation of the judgment and orders of the Court by directing them to challenge such orders without involving itself in such proceedings.
Bharvad Meghankaben Nareshbhai vs National Texting Agency (NTA) Through Its Director General & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 59
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a 2025 NEET–UG aspirant seeking to reopen application portal after failing to submit necessary documents due to their unavailability within the prescribed deadline.
In doing so the court observed that the applicant failed to make out an “exceptional case” to re-open the window/portal to submit her application, adding that just because she could not submit the documents the same does not create any right in her favour to direct the authorities to open the portal for her.
Institute For Plasma Research Not 'State', Employees Can't File Writ Petitions: Gujarat High Court
HIMANSHU DINESHCHANDRA PAREKH v/s INSTITUTE FOR PLASMA RESEARCH & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 60
The Gujarat High Court has upheld an order dismissing a man's writ petition against termination of services as an engineer by the Institute for Plasma Research, on the ground that the institute is an independent and autonomous body and merely because it is under the authority of Department of Atomic Energy it cannot be termed as 'State'.
The court was hearing an appeal against a single judge's order which had that the petition is not maintainable against the Institute as it was not a “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
X v/s State of Gujarat and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 61
The Gujarat High Court quashed a cruelty FIR against a woman alleged to be the girlfriend of a married man, reiterating that a woman who is stated to be the girlfriend of the husband cannot be roped in by the complainant wife as a "relative" to make allegations under IPC Section 498A.
The petitioner argued that she is the "paramour" of the husband of the complainant, and except the allegation that the petitioner was in relationship with husband of the complainant, there is no other allegations levelled against her.
MOHAMMED SAJJAD MOHAMMED IMTIYAZ Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 62
The Gujarat High Court rejected a successive bail plea moved by a man who was stated to be in the Border Security Force after observing that the prosecution had alleged his active involvement in a "serious offence against the welfare of nation".
The court further noted that the trial had already begun and there was no fresh ground shown by the petitioner for grant of bail.
Gujarat High Court Declines Narayan Sai's Furlough Plea In 2014 Surat Rape Case
NARAYAN@NARAYAN SAI V/S STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 63
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (April 30) dismissed the furlough plea moved by Asaram Bapu's son Narayan Sai who was convicted for rape and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2019 by a Sessions Court in Surat.
After hearing the arguments by the parties, Justice MR Mengdey said, "I'm not inclined...dismissed".
GULABSINH DEVUSINH JHALA & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 64
Upholding the dismissal of nine railway constables who were "entrusted" to travel on Sabarmati Express, the Gujarat High Court observed that if they had departed in the train instead of taking another train, the 2002 Godhra Train Burning incident could have been prevented.
In doing so the court observed that the petitioners had made bogus entries in the train register and had shown "derelict negligence and carelessness towards their duty". In a 110 page order pronounced on April 24, Justice Vaibhavi D Nanavati held:
"It is not in dispute that the petitioners were assigned the duty to return by Sabarmati Express, however, while making the note to travel by Sabarmati Express, petitioners travelled by Shanti Express...If, the petitioners had departed in Sabarmati express train itself to reach Ahmedabad, the incident that have occurred at Godhra could have been prevented. The petitioners derelict negligence and carelessness towards their duty. The said charges stands proved".
State of Gujarat v. Kalubhai Amarshi Aghara
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 65
The Gujarat High Court upheld a 28-year-old trial court order acquitting a man accused of his wife's murder by setting her ablaze and thereby dismissed the State's appeal, after finding the prosecution's reliance on the victim's dying declarations unreliable.
A division bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Nisha M. Thakore, in its order said, “looking to the medical condition of the deceased, we are of the opinion that the history recorded by the doctors and the dying declarations, as mentioned hereinabove, become doubtful and the evidence emerging from the dying declarations and the oral testimony lacks sterling quality, which is not compelling enough to reverse the acquittal recorded by the trial Court.”
UMESHKUMAR PRATAPSINH PARMAR & ORS. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 66
The Gujarat High Court directed the State to carry out the appointment exercise which regard to five meritorious candidates whose candidature to the post of Section Officer was rejected following "re-evaluation" of answer sheet and publishing of revised final result, stating that the rules prohibit re-evaluation, permitting only re-checking.
It thus said that action of the Gujarat Public Service Commission in accepting applications received by certain candidates seeking re-evaluation was "illegal".
SAMSUDDIN JAINULABIDDIN SHAIKH & ORS. Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 67
In a plea by 58 individuals residing in Ahmedabad's Chandola Lake whose hutments were removed during the demolition drive by the state authorities last month, the Gujarat High Court remarked that the residents act of having "illegal and unauthorised constructions" on Lake Land cannot be "ignored".
While the court "rejected" the petitioners' plea for stay of further demolition till rehabilitation is granted as "devoid of merits", the court however said that it is open for the petitioners to approach the authorities with individual applications for rehabilitation.
DEVRAJBHAI TULSIBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 68
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a PIL petition seeking to stop the alleged illegal operation of a trust from the premises of Gandhi Ashram in Sabarmati, observing that no roving inquiry can be conducted on an apprehension without there being any substance shown to the court.
The PIL moved by an advocate claimed that one Manav Sadhna Trust being operated by one of the Trustee of Original Sabarmati Harijan Ashram Trust, within the Gandhi Ashram precincts has resulted in deprivation of donations fund in the name of Sabarmati Harijan Ashram Trust.
Prashant S/o Prakash Harishchandra Vazirani vs. State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 69
The Gujarat High Court has rejected the bail plea of a cardiologist accused of performing angioplasty upon healthy persons in a bid to get funds from the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PMJAY) scheme for a private hospital.
In doing so the court observed that the material on record indicated a "strong prima facie" case against the petitioner where his involvement in the alleged offence cannot be ruled out.
Gujarat High Court Slaps ₹20 Lakh Cost On PIL Litigant Found Involved In Blackmailing Scandal
Ajay Rameshbhai Trivedi vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 70
Dismissing a PIL seeking demolition of alleged illegal and unauthorised constructions near Lajpore Central Jail in Surat, the Gujarat High Court said that the litigant misused the PIL mechanism for personal gain and that abuse of court process by an unscrupulous person who was caught blackmailing cannot be permitted.
In doing so the court imposed exemplary cost of ₹20 Lakh on the petitioner, Ajay Rameshbhai Trivedi.
Technovaa Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Gandhinagar & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 71
The Gujarat High Court bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N.Ray has held that Penalty orders under Sections 270A, 271(1)(c), and 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Income Tax Act) cannot be issued after the approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code).
Once the Resolution Plan is approved by the Adjudicating Authority, all claims, including statutory dues, stand extinguished, and no further proceedings in respect of such dues can be initiated.
ABC v/s State of Gujarat and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 72
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (May 12) directed the medical termination of a minor rape survivor's 33-week pregnancy, ordering the authorities to carry out the procedure at the earliest after obtaining "express consent" of the parents and explaining the risks to them in the language they understand.
Justice Nirzar S Desai passed the order after examining a report submitted by senior expert doctors at PDU General Hospital in Rajkot who had been earlier directed by a co-ordinate bench to examine the 13-year-old survivor for termination of pregnancy. The court was hearing the minor girl's plea seeking medical termination of pregnancy.
Harsh Mahesh Tanna vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 73
The Gujarat High Court recently observed that passport authorities do not have any authority to decide whether an accused has the right to travel abroad as such an authority is only vested with the Trail Court which may impose conditions, if accused moves a travel plea.
In doing so, the Court directed the Passport Authority to renew the petitioner-accused's passport for a period of 10 years as per the Passport Act, 1967 and Rules.
M/s Sopariwala Export Pvt. Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 74
The Gujarat High Court has referred a matter to the GST Council to decide on whether the compensation cess is leviable on goods supplied to merchant exporter.
The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N. Ray observed that “……..no notification is issued by the Central Government or State Government under the Compensation Cess Act and therefore, the assessee is made liable to pay Compensation Cess at normal rate i.e. 160% on the supply of goods to merchant exporters for export…….”
X v/s Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 75
The Gujarat High Court upheld decisions of the trial court and appellate court which denied restitution of conjugal rights to the wife, after noting that she had attempted to commit suicide which amounts to extreme coercive behaviour with an intention to emotionally manipulate and mentally distress the husband.
The court further noted that the wife had also printed "defamatory posters" claiming that the husband was missing observing that this was "public humiliation" which can leave a lasting scar on mental health and emotional stability of the spouse.
Minaxi Chandulal Shah & Ors. vs Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 76
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the validity of a 2023 amendment to Section 13 of Registration of Births and Death Act that transferred the authority to inquire into the delayed registration of birth and deaths beyond a year from Judicial Magistrate to Executive Magistrate or District Magistrate(DM).
The court was hearing a plea challenging the amendment to Section 13 on the ground that it is against Section 3(2)(a) BNSS wherein any inquiry regarding evaluation of evidence is to be adjudicated by Judicial Magistrate and the Executive Magistrate under Section 3(2)(b) BNSS can only conduct an administrative/executive inquiry.
Man Agrees In Gujarat High Court To 'Re-Marry' Wife As Per Customs In Her Native Place
X v/s State of Gujarat and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 77
In a peculiar case before the Gujarat High Court, a man seeking production of his wife stated to be detained by her parents, agreed to visit her native place and re-marry as her the customs there.
The couple got married in the absence of their families and the woman's family–belonging to Rajasthan, were desirous of performing certain marriage rituals in their native place in the presence of the husband and his family.
TAHERA AHMED PATEL W/O LATE AHMED YUSUF PATEL v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 78
Five years since the death of a "weigh-man"–working in a government recognized fair price shop–due to Covid-19 while performing emergency duty of distributing essential commodities, the Gujarat High Court directed the state government to grant financial assistance of Rs 25 Lakh to the deceased's wife within six weeks.
The court observed that the State government had "erred in rejecting the application" of the petitioner wife of the deceased, in view of administrative direction which was issued to the District Supply Officers in the State for submitting the list of such employees by a particular date.
TATHYA PRAGNESHBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 79
The Gujarat High Court has granted temporary bail of four days to a man booked causing an accident in 2023 at Iskon Bridge in Ahmedabad which claimed nine lives, on account of medical condition of his mother.
The accused Tathya Patel had moved an application seeking temporary bail on account of surgery of his mother. The state opposed the application arguing that date of operation has been fixed as per the convenience of the mother of the applicant. The state said that earlier when the operation was postponed, the applicant had not immediately surrendered; subsequently, on 18.05.2025, he was taken by the police to the Jail authority.
DIPAKKUMAR KIRTILAL SHAH Versus NAVINKUMAR BANSIDHAR MAHESHWARI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 80
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a trial court order which sent a man stated to be suffering from a disability to 30-day civil imprisonment for selling a shop despite a status quo order against such sale.
The high court rejected the contention of the petitioner's counsel that civil imprisonment imposed on the petitioner was wrong and that the court should have have weighed other options available to it–attachment of the property of the person guilty of such disobedience.
JABIR BIN YAMIN BEHRA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 81
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (June 2) granted 10-day parole to Jabir Behra, one of the 11 persons convicted in the case concerning the burning of Sabarmati Express in Godhra in 2002.
Notably, Behra was one of 11 individuals convicted and sentenced to death by the trial court in 2011. Against this order the convicts had moved the high court. The high court had in 2017 commuted the death penalty imposed on Behra and others, to life imprisonment.
SUNIL SURENDRAKUMAR KAKKAD Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 82
The Gujarat High Court has permitted director of IT firm, Sai InfoSystem (India) Ltd Sunil Kakkad who has been booked in alleged multi-crore bank fraud case, to travel to UAE for exploring business opportunities with companies to outsource back-end IT Support & Enterprises Resource Planning software requirements to India.
Kakkad was reportedly arrested in 2014 in Liberia and has been allegedly accused of cheating public sector banks, which is being probed by the CBI. A related money laundering case is being probed by the ED.
M/s Addwrap Packaging Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 83
The Gujarat High Court stated that omission of Rule 96(10) Of CGST Rules, 2017 operates prospectively but applies to all pending proceedings.
The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N. Ray was addressing the issue where a group of petitions have challenged the vires of Rule 96(10) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as substituted by the Central Goods and Services Tax (12th Amendment) Rules, 2018 with effect from 9.10.2018.
YASH TEXTILES Versus VINAYAK FASHIONS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 84
The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray and has held that Once the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Section 34 application—having been filed beyond the limitation prescribed under Section 34(3) and its proviso—any finding on the validity of the arbitral award as void ab initio was without legal authority. Entertaining a time-barred application under Section 34 was a grave error of law on the part of the learned Court.
State Tax Authorities Not Mandated To Issue DIN With Orders Or Summons: Gujarat High Court
M/s NRM Metals (India) Private Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 85
The Gujarat High Court stated that state tax authorities not mandated to issue din with orders or summons.
The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia andP.M. Ravalobserved that “there is no mechanism of issuance of DIN on any of the communication, notice, summons, orders issued by the State Tax Authorities. In such circumstances, the contention raised on behalf of the assessee, that the DIN is not mentioned in any of the summons and the previously attachment order being without any basis, is rejected.”
Narayan Sai vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 86
The Gujarat High Court has granted five days temporary bail to Narayan Sai–convicted and sentenced to life in a rape case– to meet his father Asaram Bapu on 'humanitarian grounds', after considering Asaram's medical condition and the fact that the father and son had not been able to meet personally.
Notably, Asaram Bapu, who has been convicted in a separate rape case in Rajasthan and is serving life imprisonment, is presently also on temporary bail.
Onali Ezazuddin Dholakawala & Anr. vs Police Commissioner & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 87
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State to redress the grievance of two Muslim shop owners who were allegedly prevented by their neighbours from entering their commercial property in Vadodara despite judicial orders, underscoring the State's "duty to maintain the law and order”.
Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar in his order observed that the two petitioners Onali Dholakawala and Iqbal Tinwala are owners of the property in question who wanted to enjoy the same and had approached the state authorities, however till date nothing had been done.
Gujarat High Court Extends Asaram Bapu's Temporary Bail In Rape Case Till July 07
ASHUMAL @ ASHARAM THAUMAL SINDHI (HARPALANI) versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 88
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (June 27) extended the temporary bail of Asaram Bapu, who has been convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in Gandhinagar and is serving a life sentence, till July 07.
Balwantsinh Setansinh Vaghela Versus Ministry Of Home Affairs
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 89
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (June 27) closed proceedings in a PIL concerning the disappearance of nine Indians who left Dominica for USA in December 2022, after it was informed that despite best efforts of Indian Embassies and Central Government the missing persons could not be located.