Nominal Index [Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 90 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 119]State of Gujarat vs Unique Identification Authority of India, UIDAI, Govt. Of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 90Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation and transfer Pricing v. M/s Adani Wilmar Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 91Paschim Gujarat Vij. Co. Ltd. vs Mithabhai Nageshi Maheswari & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw...
Nominal Index [Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 90 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 119]
State of Gujarat vs Unique Identification Authority of India, UIDAI, Govt. Of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 90
Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation and transfer Pricing v. M/s Adani Wilmar Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 91
Paschim Gujarat Vij. Co. Ltd. vs Mithabhai Nageshi Maheswari & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 92
Ashumal @ Asharam vs State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 93
Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 94
Dipak Kishorbhai Salunke v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 95
State of Gujarat vs Anilbhai Babubhai Dudhat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 96
State of Gujarat vs Paresh Shantilal & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 97
X vs State of Gujarat and Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 98
Sunilbhai Ratanlal Maittal vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 99
X vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 100
Punjabhai Karsanbhai Barad/Aahir vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 101
State Of Gujarat vs Natubhai Golanbhai Khuman & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 102
Umarbhai Bachubhai Kabariya & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat & ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 103
Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 104
Chetangiri Kailashgiri Aparnathi & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 105
KHS Machinery Private Ltd & Anr. vs Registrar of Companies & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
Reliance Formulation Private Limited vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Ghatak 21, Division 2 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
Amitkumar Surendrabhai Chaudhary vs State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 108
Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 109
Suo Motu vs Bhaskar Tanna 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 110
Sazid Ali Khan v. Office of Principal Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise Commissionerate, Vadodara-I & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 111
Umesh Varjanbhai Panchal & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 112
Mohmmad Sarifvisad Purvala & Ors. vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 113
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation vs. Shaikh Asif Ahmed Mohammed Hanif 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 114
Sachinbhai Mansukhbhai Patel & Anr. vs State of Gujarat and Another Appeal 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 115
Aasiyabanu Mohammed Afzal Shaikh vs State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 116
KM Bhut vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 117
Abdul Vahab Mohammed Shabbir Sopariwala vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 118
ABC vs State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 119
Case title: State of Gujarat vs Unique Identification Authority of India, UIDAI, Govt. Of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 90
The Gujarat High Court has directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to disclose to the State government, Aadhar card details of five persons, who are claimed to be Bangladeshi nationals, accused of cheating and forgery in a case concerning alleged exchange of forged 100 Riyal currency notes in exchange of Rs. 15,000.
Case title: Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation and transfer Pricing v. M/s Adani Wilmar Ltd.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 91
The Gujarat High Court stated that DTAA (Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement) prevails over Section 206AA of Income Tax Act for TDS on payments to non-residents without PAN. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi was addressing the appeals pertains to alleged short deduction of TDS and raising demand by invoking provisions of section 206AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case title: Paschim Gujarat Vij. Co. Ltd. vs Mithabhai Nageshi Maheswari & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 92
The Gujarat High Court upheld a trial court order granting over Rs. 6 Lakh compensation to the mother of an 18-year-old boy who died due to electrocution caused by low-hanging live electric wires which got entangled with trees under which the deceased was standing to cut grass for grazing cattle.
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 93
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (July 3) extended for one month 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.
Noting statement made by Asaram Bapu's counsel that he wont seek further extension of temporary bail, the court clarified that further prayer for extension of temporary bail will not be entertained on medical grounds.
Case title: Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 94
The Gujarat High Court has initiated suo-motu contempt case against a man who was captured seated on a toilet seat during the court's online proceedings last month.
In doing so the court observed that the "infamous video tarnishing the image of this Court" was widely circulated in social media and requires to be "immediately banned and deleted".
The court, which in its order took "serious note" of a June 28 news report on the incident, further directed the high court's Registrar, Information Technology to inform on the mechanism to stop contumacious litigants in participating in live-streaming proceedings observing that such uncontrolled behaviour had become frequent.
Case title: Dipak Kishorbhai Salunke v/s State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 95
The Gujarat High Court recently denied bail to a man accused of spying and sharing confidential details about the Indian Army to an alleged ISI agent stated to be residing in Pakistan who allegedly posed as a woman having a Facebook account in the name of Poonam Sharma.
In doing so the court observed that material suggests a "larger conspiracy involving ISI agents" posing a threat to national security noting that the applicant allegedly shared "sensitive information on border areas". It further observed that following the alleged incident, terrorist attacks had occurred inclduing drone and other hostile activities which were carried out in border areas by Pakistan.
Case title: State of Gujarat vs Anilbhai Babubhai Dudhat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 96
The Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal of a man accused of rape wherein the victim became pregnant, observing that the victim who was 18-years-old at the time had remained "silent" about the alleged offence until "advanced stage of pregnancy" and never informed her family members, which depicted a "clear case of consent".
The court further said that there was no medical evidence to prove the sexual intercourse was forcible or without her consent, and the repeated incidents of their sexual relations over a period of time indicates a consensual relationship.
Case title: State of Gujarat vs Paresh Shantilal & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 97
The Gujarat High Court recently upheld the acquittal of husband and his kin booked in a dowry death and abetment to suicide case, wherein the wife had died by suicide after setting herself ablaze.
The trial court had in 2014 acquitted the husband and his kin who were booked under IPC Sections 498A(Cruelty), 306(abetment of suicide), 304B (Dowry Death) and provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case title: X vs State of Gujarat and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 98
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (July 9) reinstated a judicial officer dismissed from service for alleged misconduct, engaging in corrupt practices and dereliction of duty wherein he purportedly forced a party to handover seized oil-tankers to its owners which were booked for theft of high-speed diesel, terming it unfair and unlawful.
The court further emphasized that unless there are clear-cut allegations of misconduct, disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated "merely on the basis that a wrong order" has been passed by the judicial officer or on the ground that the judicial order is incorrect, or that they have been negligent in ignoring any fact.
Gujarat High Court Fines 'Journalist' ₹1 Lakh For Abusing PIL Jurisdiction
Case title: Sunilbhai Ratanlal Maittal vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 99
The Gujarat High Court imposed cost of Rs. 1 Lakh on a man claiming to be the Chief Editor of Navsari Times Weekly, for filing a PIL based on "false statement and misleading" the court regarding grant of development rights to a company for commercial construction on a land while claiming that it falls in a residential zone.
Case title: X vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 100
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (July 9) directed the police to look into a man's grievance alleging cheating and forgery by a fertility hospital wherein he claimed that a DNA test revealed that he is not the biological father of the child born to him and his wife through IVF procedure.
The plea has alleged "cheating, criminal breach of trust and forgery" levelled against the fertility hospital.
Case title: Punjabhai Karsanbhai Barad/Aahir vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 101
The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR for voluntarily causing hurt and criminal intimidation lodged against a man whose name was mistakenly shown as an accused in one place and as a complainant in another place in the same FIR.
Noting that no steps were taken to correct the error, but an investigation was carried out and a charge-sheet was filed, the court said that continuing the FIR would be nothing but an "abuse of process of law".
Case title: State Of Gujarat vs Natubhai Golanbhai Khuman & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 102
Upholding the acquittal of a woman's in-laws accused of dowry death, the Gujarat High Court said that demanding money from her to meet legal expenses for applying for their bail in another case would not amount to dowry and can't be regarded as harassment related to "Illegal demand for dowry" leading to the woman's suicide.
Case title: Umarbhai Bachubhai Kabariya & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 103
Dismissing a plea seeking a declaration that provisions of the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act 2020 be declared ultra-vires, the High Court on Monday (July 14) noted that the plea filed was a "wholly misconceived petition", noting that the validity of the statute had already been adjudicated by the court in its judgment last year.
Gujarat High Court Directs Man Captured On Toilet Seat During VC To Deposit ₹1 Lakh By July 22
Case title: Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 104
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (July 14) directed a man, who was captured seated on a toilet seat during online proceedings last month, to deposit Rs 1 Lakh with the court's registry by July 22.
Case title: Chetangiri Kailashgiri Aparnathi & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 105
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (July 11) imposed exemplary costs of Rs 20 Lakh each on seven individuals who filed a PIL challenging development permission granted to a builder, for not disclosing their credentials properly— calling it "doubtful".
Gujarat High Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Against Company For Alleged Default Of CSR Obligations
Case title: KHS Machinery Private Ltd & Anr. vs Registrar of Companies & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a criminal complaint registered against a company claiming default of its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) obligations, after noting that the offence alleged–including the penalty–had been decriminalized by Companies (Amendment) Act 2020.
Justice JC Doshi in his order referred to Supreme Court's decision in T. Barai v. Henry Ah Hoe and Anr. (1983) wherein it was held that that in case the punishment prescribed is reduced by an Amendment Act, then the benefit is to be given to the accused.
Gujarat High Court Upholds Validity Of GST Advisory On Interest For Delayed Tax Payment
Case title: Reliance Formulation Private Limited vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Ghatak 21, Division 2
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the validity of the GST advisory on interest for delayed tax payment.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the reference to Section 79 of the GST Act in the advisory is only to put the assessee on guard as to such outstanding liability as per the record of the Authority so that the assessee can either make the payment of such liability if agreed or may oppose the same when the notice in Form GST DRC-01D is received by the assessee for recovery of such amount.
IELTS 'Scam': Gujarat High Court Directs Magistrate Court To Decide Police's Closure Report Afresh
Case title: Amitkumar Surendrabhai Chaudhary vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 108
The Gujarat High Court has ordered a Magistrate Court in Mehsana to decide afresh the closure report filed by Police in a case pertaining to alleged fabrication of ILETS results.
Justice L S Pirzada upheld the sessions court's order on not accepting police's summary report but set aside its direction on appointment of another officer to investigate the case further. The High Court rather directed the Magistrate court to hear the matter "afresh" without being influenced by either sessions court's order of the high court's order.
Case title: Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 109
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (July 22) directed a man, who was captured seated on a toilet seat during online proceedings last month, to do community service for 15 days.
Noting that he had already deposited Rs 1 Lakh with the court's registry, in view of his unconditional apology and willingness to undertake community service, the Court closed the contempt action initiated suo motu.
Case title: Suo Motu vs Bhaskar Tanna
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 110
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (July 22) closed the suo motu contempt proceedings initiated against senior advocate Bhaskar Tanna for appearing on VC while drinking from a beer mug.
Case title: Sazid Ali Khan v. Office of Principal Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise Commissionerate, Vadodara-I & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 111
The Gujarat High Court held that GST officers issuing summons/arrest memo are not required to be cross-examined by assessee.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi observed that the assessee wants to cross-examine the persons who belongs to the department who have either issued the summons or arrest memo. Such persons are not required to be cross-examined by the assessee.
Case title: Umesh Varjanbhai Panchal & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 112
The Bar Council of India informed the Gujarat High Court that it had decided to grant "one time relief strictly" confined to LL.B. pass outs of grant-in-aid colleges named in the writ petitions filed by certain law graduates, and issue enrolment certificates to such petitioners till academic session 2025-2026.
In doing so the court appreciated the positive step taken by the bar body while accepting the suggestions and directions of the court which had earlier asked the BCI to rethink and appropriately decide on granting enrolment certificates wherein institutions have not paid fee for retrospective recognition.
Case title: Mohmmad Sarifvisad Purvala & Ors. vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 113
The Gujarat High Court refused to interfere with demolition action of dwelling units in Ahmedabad's Rangwala Challi, observing the petitioners residing their had carried out construction despite notice asking them stop and had also gone on to break the seal put by authorities to use the property which had no development permission.
Noting the property was located in 300 metre radius of a protected monument, the court underscored the petitioners had taken law in their own hands and such citizens who have no regard to law are not entitled to any relief.
Case title: Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation vs. Shaikh Asif Ahmed Mohammed Hanif
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 114
The Gujarat High Court upheld Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's order terminating services of three persons appointed as Station Fire Officers on the ground that they secured appointment by resorting to dubious documents underscoring that illegal acts would also cover even those actions committed prior to appointment.
The high court was hearing Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's plea challenging single judge's order which had set aside the termination of Station Fire Officers by the Corporation, who were on probation from 2016 to 2019.
Case title: Sachinbhai Mansukhbhai Patel & Anr. vs State of Gujarat and Another Appeal
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 115
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (July 28) acquitted three men who had been convicted in 2006 by a sessions court in Anand for rioting and for being members of unlawful assembly, in connection with the 2002 Post-Godhra riots.
The high court observed that no Test Identification Parade was conducted and in absence of the same the dock identification of accused was doubtful. It further observed that how the prosecution witness identified the accused was not stated nor had the witness mentioned the role of each of accused whom he saw in a crowd of over 100 people.
Case title: Aasiyabanu Mohammed Afzal Shaikh vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 116
The High Court has directed the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Board (GSHSB) to henceforth ensure that the list of instructions preceding questions for Class 10 and 12 examinations, shall specifically state which questions are to be attempted by visually impaired students.
Case title: KM Bhut vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation:2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 117
The Gujarat High Court upheld the compulsory retirement of a 58-year-old judicial officer, noting that while such an action was not a punishment, the court can't interfere with the "wisdom" of the full court and exercise judicial review when the judicial officer had himself not alleged patent illegality or malafides regarding the decision making process.
A division bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice RT Vachchani in its order observed that order of compulsory retirement is not a punishment. It however observed that "a single un-communicated adverse remark in the entire service record or doubtful integrity" is enough to retire a Judicial Officer compulsorily in public interest.
Case title: Abdul Vahab Mohammed Shabbir Sopariwala vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 118
The Gujarat High Court rejected a plea challenging the constitution of a committee formed to consider necessity of Uniform Civil Code for the State, observing that the panel was constituted by an executive order and in absence of any statutory provision, the selection of the members is in the absolute domain of the State.
The court further said that by merely constituting a committee it cannot be said that prejudice is caused to any class of people when it is always open for them to make a representation espousing their views on the UCC to the Committee.
Case title: ABC vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 119
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a 2010 FIR lodged against an accused who was a minor at the time of the alleged incident, noting that the concerned police authorities must not have had knowledge of Section 83 of IPC, which is applicable on children between 7-12 years.