Bombay High Court Monthly Digest - May 2025

2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 170 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 201

Nominal Index:

Harshad Bhoite vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 170

Maheshwari Shanmugam Pillay vs Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 171

Sumitra Khane vs Deputy Collector, Special Land Acquisition, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 172

Kapil Satish Phalke & Anr. V/s. The Sub Divisional Officer, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 173

Kedar Bhusari vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 174

Sanjay Girish Kumar Singh vs Karan Johar alias Rahul Johar, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 175

Amol Nikam vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 176

Satyaswarup Meshram vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 177

Maksud Sheikh vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 178

Vasantrao Shamrao Deshmukh vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 179

M/s. Aakansha Construction Company v. The State Of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 180

Jupicos Entertainment Private Limited Versus Probability Sports (India) Pvt. Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 181

Rizvi Education Society vs The Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 182

Rameshwar Cooperative Housing Society Limited vs Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 183

Girish Dattatray Mahajan vs Anil Thatte, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 184

Reshu Singh vs Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 185

Pandit Vithal Landage vs Vishnu Govind Pawar, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 186

Vitthal Thaku Jagdale vs Nitin Suresh Kadam, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 187

Arjan Motiram Khiani vs Metharam Rijhumal Khiani, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 188

AAS vs SAS, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 189

Ameykumar s/o Nitinchandra Patil vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 190

IP vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 191

Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. vs Maha Active Engineers India Pvt. Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 192

Ram Shankar Sinha vs Ritesh V. Patel, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 193

Balasaheb Gurushantappa Arawat vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 194

Kisanlal Bairudas Jain vs Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 195

Arjun Amarjeet Rampal vs Income Tax Department, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 196

The Board of Mumbai Port Authority vs Official Liquidator of GOL Offshore Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 197

SSK vs ASK, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 198

Celebi Nas Airport Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs Mumbai International Airport, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 199

KSS vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 200

SGT vs NST, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 201

Judgments and Final Orders:

Need For Organ Transplant Is A Facet Of Right To Life: Bombay HC Orders Separate Registration List For Patients Potentially Needing Transplant

Case Title: Harshad Bhoite vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 170

The Bombay High Court while observing that the human need for organ transplant is a facet of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, ordered the Zonal Transplant Coordination Centre at Pune and the Maharashtra government to consider whether a separate registration facility could be provided to the category of patients, who may not be on dialysis or any other procedure but in future may imminently need a an organ transplant. A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Advait Sethna ordered the authorities to file their responses to the petition filed by one Harshad Bhoite, a Pune resident, who petitioned the bench against the decision of the Zonal Transplant Coordination Centre at Pune, which refused to register him for organ transplant.

If An Employee Is Exonerated In Disciplinary Proceedings, Interest Ought To Be Provided On Delayed Payment Of Retirement Benefits: Bombay HC

Case Title: Maheshwari Shanmugam Pillay vs Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 171

A Bombay High Court division bench consisting of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Ashwin Bhobe allowed a writ petition that was filed by a widow asking for interest on the delayed payment of retirement benefits to her late husband. The court ruled that when an employee is acquitted or exonerated in disciplinary proceedings, the retirement benefits ought to be paid along with interest from the date of retirement. Further, the court rejected the argument that there was no liability to pay interest. The court held that even if the proceedings are abated, interest ought to be paid.

State Can't Trample Upon Rights Of Citizens In Rural Areas Merely Because They Lack Literacy Or Means To Approach Court: Bombay HC

Case Title: Sumitra Khane vs Deputy Collector, Special Land Acquisition

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 172

The Bombay High Court has said that in a civilised society there is no place for discrimination in the application of law and a citizen cannot be deprived of his or her rights just because s/he did not approach the courts or the authorities in time. A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Somasekhar Sundaresan directed the Maharashtra government to pay the appropriate amount to some families in Kolhapur district, whose lands were acquired way back in September 1990 for the Dudhganga Irrigation Project.

Power Of Remand Can't Be Exercised In Routine Manner, Only When Authority Has Not Considered Material Evidence: Bombay HC Reaffirms

Case Title: Kapil Satish Phalke & Anr. V/s. The Sub Divisional Officer

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 173

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that power of remand cannot be exercised in a routine manner, and a matter may be remanded only if the original authority has failed to consider a material evidence, where either re-evaluation of evidence is required or wherein parties are to be permitted to lead fresh evidence The court further underscored that power of remand in absence of compelling legal necessity leads to delay in resolving disputes and thus remand should not be ordered when the record is sufficient.

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Lawyer For Using Word 'Bhangi'

Case Title: Kedar Bhusari vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 174

The Bombay High Court while quashing an FIR lodged against an advocate for using the term 'Bhangi', recently said that though the Maharashtra government has by way of a circular replaced the said term with 'Rukhi' or 'Walmiki' but the said word is still used in the Constitution of India for providing benefits to Sweepers. A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh said the Maharashtra government's circular issued on November 9, 2000, by which the State precluded the use of the word 'Bhangi' in daily transactions and communications and replaced it with the words 'Rukhi' or 'Walmiki' does not apply on the words used in the Constitution.

Bombay High Court Refuses To Lift Stay On Release Of Film 'Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar'

Case Title: Sanjay Girish Kumar Singh vs Karan Johar alias Rahul Johar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 175

The Bombay High Court has upheld a March 7, 2025 judgment of a single-judge, who refused to lift the stay on the release of the film 'Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar' which was imposed in June 2024 after noting that the same infringes the personality rights of Bollywood film director and producer Karan Johar. A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Makarand Karnik heard the appeal filed by the makers of the film in question, who challenged Justice Riyaz Chagla's March 7 2025 judgment, by which the single-judge had made absolute an interim order passed on June 13, 2024, staying the release of the film.

Bombay High Court Flags "Dangerous Culture" Of Police "Copy Pasting" Statements Of Witnesses In Criminal Cases

Case Title: Amol Nikam vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 176

The Bombay High Court recently took suo motu cognisance of the 'dangerous culture' of police officers 'copy-pasting' statements of witnesses in criminal cases while investigating even serious offences. A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh slammed the Maharashtra Police for resorting to 'copy-pasting' statements of witnesses and remarked that the same is dangerous and can affect even genuine cases.

Bombay HC Relief To Banker Who Asked Employee To Convince Clients Like She Convinces Her Husband, Says No Intent To Outrage Modesty

Case Title: Satyaswarup Meshram vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 177

The Bombay High Court recently quashed an 'outraging modesty' FIR lodged against an Assistant General Manager of the State Bank of India (SBI) who was booked for telling a senior woman clerk that "she should convince the clients as she convince her husband."A division bench of Justices Anil Kilor and Pravin Patil while quashing the FIR observed that there was no intention on part of the petitioner - Satyaswarup Meshram, as whatever he uttered was only for enhancing the complainant woman's performance.

Woman's Character & Morals Not Related To Number Of Sexual Partners, Her 'No' Means 'No': Bombay HC Upholds Gang Rape Conviction

Case Title: Maksud Sheikh vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 178

"A woman's character or morals are not related to the number of sexual partners she has had", said the Bombay High Court while emphasising that a 'No' by a woman means a 'No' and there is no 'presumption of consent' based on a woman's so called 'immoral activities.' In a strongly-worded order, a division bench of Justices Nitin Suryawanshi and Mahendra Chandwani upheld the conviction of three men - Wasim Khan, Kadir Sheikh and a juvenile in conflict with law, of gang-raping a woman, who had intimacy with one of the accused earlier but had later started living in a live-in relationship with another man. The accused had challenged a sessions court order which had convicted them for various offences including Section 376D IPC (gang rape).

Bombay High Court Asks State To Retrospectively Apply GO Allowing Dependent Parents To Avail Family Pension Upon Unmarried Child's Death

Case Title: Vasantrao Shamrao Deshmukh vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 179

In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court held that the Maharashtra Government Resolution (GR) issued on January 22, 2015, which allows the parents of a 'single' or 'unmarried' son or daughter to receive family pension post the child's death, should be made applicable retrospectively to the extent that 'dependent' parents surviving on the date when the GR was issued, are granted the benefit. A division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Ashwin Bhobe granted a major relief to a septuagenarian couple, which had been fighting for their right to seek their only son's pension for survival since last 15 years.

Tribunal's Attempt To Correct Error By Entertaining Fresh Application For Deemed Conveyance Of Land Constitutes Jurisdictional Error: Bombay HC

Case Title: M/s. Aakansha Construction Company v. The State Of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 180

The Bombay High Court has allowed a plea challenging an order passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City, whereby it issued certificate of Deemed Conveyance of land measuring 2120.25 sq.mtrs. in favour of Torana Co-operative Housing Society, which the petitioners termed as a violation of principles of res-judicata.

Acquiescence To Termination Notice Of Agreement Bars Interim Relief U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Jupicos Entertainment Private Limited Versus Probability Sports (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 181

The Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Makarand Karnik has held that when a party is aware of a termination notice issued by the other party and conducts itself on the assumption that the termination has taken effect, it cannot later seek interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) on the ground that the other party is proceeding to assign the subject matter of the contract to a third party and should therefore be restrained.

Amalgamation Of Two Trusts Not Germane For Inquiry Conducted U/S 50A Of Trusts Act: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Rizvi Education Society vs The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 182

The Bombay High Court stated that amalgamation of two trusts are not germane for inquiry to be conducted under Section 50A Of Trusts Act. Further, the bench of Justice Sharmila Deshmukh disagreed that the publication of notice in official Gazette is sought to be elevated to the status of a jurisdictional condition for exercise of power under Section 50A(2).

No Clause In Private Agreement Can Nullify Statutory Rights Under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act: High Court

Case Title: Rameshwar Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 183

The Bombay High Court stated that no clause in a private agreement can nullify a statutory right under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act), nor can it be the sole foundation for an administrative action of such severity as deregistration. In this case, the issue before the bench was whether an apex cooperative housing association validly registered under Section 154B of the MCS Act, consisting of duly registered societies of flat purchasers, can be deregistered on the objection of a developer who failed to fulfill his statutory duties under Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA).

Bombay High Court Orders Taking Down Of Six Videos Allegedly Defaming Maharashtra Minister Girish Mahajan

Case Title: Girish Dattatray Mahajan vs Anil Thatte

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 184

The Bombay High Court recently ordered taking down of six videos videos allegedly defaming BJP leader and Maharashtra Cabinet Minister Girish Mahajan, which were uploaded by two YouTubers, both of whom are journalists. Single-judge Justice Arif Doctor also restrained journalists Anil Thatte and Shyam Giri, who own YouTube channels - Anil Gaganbhedi Thatte and Mudda Bharat Ka, respectively.

Institute Founded On Mahatma Gandhi's Teachings Must Treat Employees Fairly: Bombay HC Confirms Appointment Of Teacher On Probation For 7 Yrs

Case Title: Reshu Singh vs Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 185

If an educational institution is founded on the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, it must be treat all its employees 'fairly' without any 'exploitation', observed the Bombay High Court recently while confirming the appointment of a teacher, who was compelled to work on probation for nearly seven years. A division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Ashwin Bhobe noted that the petitioner Reshu Singh was appointed as an Assistant Professor at Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan's Mumbadevi Adarsh Sanskrit Mahavidyalay, on June 20, 2018 on a two year probation period. Despite her completing the two years probation, she was not confirmed which compelled her to petition the High Court.

Court Commissioner Can Be Appointed At Pre-Mature Stage Under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC In Encroachment & Boundary Dispute Cases: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Pandit Vithal Landage v. Vishnu Govind Pawar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 186

The Bombay High Court stated that court commissioner can be appointed at pre-mature stage under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC in encroachment and boundary dispute.

Tenant's Mere Non-Cultivation Of Land Personally Does Not Amount To Breach Of S.32R Of Tenancy Act: Bombay HC

Case Title: Vitthal Thaku Jagdale v. Nitin Suresh Kadam

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 187

The Bombay High Court stated that mere tenant's non-cultivation of land personally does not amounts to breach of Section 32R of the Tenancy Act. The bench of Justice Amit Borkar was addressing the issue of whether mere failure of the tenant to cultivate the land personally, in absence of proof of abandonment or unlawful transfer of possession, would justify resumption of land under Section 32R of the Tenancy Act.

When Does Lis Pendens Cease To Operate? Bombay High Court Re-Examines S.52 Of Transfer Of Property Act Post-Alienation

Case Title: Arjan Motiram Khiani v. Metharam Rijhumal Khiani

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 188

The Bombay High Court while re-visiting Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act has clarified the circumstances under which the Lis Pendens ceases to operate.

Bombay HC Orders Woman To Give Voice Sample To Verify Husband's Claim About Extra-Marital Affair, Says Magistrate Has Power Under DV Act

Case Title: AAS vs SAS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 189

If there is adequate material on record, a person can be compelled to give voice samples, even in Domestic Violence cases, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court recently held while allowing a husband's appeal seeking a direction to his wife to provide her voice sample so as to prove her 'extra-marital' affair. Single-judge Justice Shailesh Brahme order a woman to provide her voice specimens within a period of three weeks so that the same could be verified.

In-Laws Asking Wife To Divorce Husband So That He Can Marry Girl From Higher Caste Is Not Cruelty: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Ameykumar s/o Nitinchandra Patil vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 190

In-laws telling a woman to divorce her husband so that he can be married to some other girl of a higher caste is not cruelty under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court held recently. A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh noted that the allegation against the applicant, the sister-in-law of the complainant woman, was only that she asked the woman to give divorce to her husband (applicant's brother) so that he could be married to a girl of a higher caste since the complainant was of a lower caste.

Bombay High Court Refuses To Interfere With Suspension Of Law Student For Posts Against 'Operation Sindoor'

Case Title: IP vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 191

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court recently refused to grant any relief to a female law student from the Symbiosis Law School, who was suspended from all 'academic and non-academic' activities of the institution till further orders for posting various 'political' posts on Instagram including one against the recent 'Operation Sindoor' carried out by the Indian Army. Vacation court judge Justice Rohit Joshi noted that the petitioner is a final year law student, who was allegedly found with one Rejaz, an independent journalist and member of Democratic Student Association (DSA), Kerala in a hotel in Nagpur.

Interim Relief U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act Must Be Sought With 'Reasonable Expedition': Bombay High Court

Case Title: Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. vs. Maha Active Engineers India Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 192

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Atul Chandurkar and Justice Rajesh Patil have held that an applicant under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) must approach the court with reasonable expedition. Delay of several years without adequate explanation is a material factor that militates against the grant of such relief.

[Rent Control Act] In Eviction Suits, Licensee Can't Lead Evidence Contrary To Leave & License Agreement Even If It Is Unwritten: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Ram Shankar Sinha vs Ritesh V Patel

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 193

The Bombay High Court recently explained the scope of Section 24 (b) read with Section 43(4) Of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Single-judge Justice Madhav Jamdar held that the presumption under clause (b) of explanation to Section 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Act is applicable only when an Application for eviction is filed relating to the premises given on licence for residence. In other proceedings, the said presumption may not apply. Therefore, notwithstanding the non-registration of an Agreement in writing of leave and licence in respect of the premises given for residential use, when an Application under Section 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Act is made, the said clause (b) will apply to such an Agreement and it will not be open for the licencee to lead any evidence contrary to the terms and conditions provided in the said Agreement.

Police Cannot Compel Citizens Or Public Servants To Help Them: Bombay High Court Quashes FIR U/S 188 IPC

Case Title: Balasaheb Gurushantappa Arawat vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 194

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court recently flagged the 'unfortunate mentality' of the Police Department in the State that everybody must give preference to the work directed by the police or must help the police. A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh in its order said the police officers cannot make it compulsory for any citizen or public servant to help them and any refusal to help the police will not be considered as an offence in all situations.

[Arbitration Act] S.37 Not An Efficacious Alternate Remedy After Rejection Of Plea U/S 34 Seeking Enhanced Compensation: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Kisanlal Bairudas Jain vs Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 195

The Division Bench of Bombay High Court comprising Justices Mahesh Sonak and Jitendra Jain allowed writ petitions seeking enhanced solatium under National Highways Act, 1956 in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v Tarsem Singh and Ors. While doing so the Court rejected the argument of the Respondent that the petitions ought to be dismissed as the Petitioners have an alternate remedy under Section 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (ACA).

Bombay High Court Quashes NBW Issued Against Actor Arjun Rampal Over 2019 Tax Evasion Case

Case Title: Arjun Amarjeet Rampal vs Income Tax Department

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 196

The Bombay High Court recently quashed and set aside a 'non-bailable warrant' issued by the Ballard Pier Magistrate Court in the city against Bollywood actor Arjun Rampal in a 2019 Income Tax evasion case. Vacation Court judge Justice Advait Sethna noted that the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court in Ballard Pier was 'cryptic' and passed 'without application of mind' as the non-bailable warrant was issued in a case pertaining to a 'bailable offence.'

Statutory Port's Dues Deserve Priority In Distribution Over Other Claims, Including Those Of Secured Creditors: Bombay High Court

Case Title: The Board of Mumbai Port Authority vs Official Liquidator of GOL Offshore Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 197

The Bombay High Court stated that the statutory port dues take precedence over all other claims, including those of secured creditors, by virtue of the paramount lien created under Section 64 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 and such are to be treated as secured claims being entitled to be paid in priority, even before the secured creditors.

Mother Hiring Maid To Look After Child Not Ground To Deny Custody: Bombay High Court

Case Title: SSK vs ASK

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 198

A mother appointing a maid servant to take care of the child is not a ground to deny her the custody of the said child, the Bombay High Court held recently. Single-judge Justice RM Joshi pointed out that appointing maid servants to take care of children is not an 'uncommon' practice.

High Court Restrains Mumbai International Airport From Taking Final Decision On Replacement Of Turkish Firm Celebi's Subsidiary

Case Title: Celebi Nas Airport Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs Mumbai International Airport

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 199

The Bombay High Court on Monday restrained the Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) from taking a final decision in the bids invited on May 17 to replace Turkey-based Celebi for ground and bridge handling services at city's International airport, till the its (Celebi) challenge to cancellation of security clearance is heard by a regular bench after the summer vacations.

'Absolutely Shocking': Bombay High Court Orders Release Of 19-Yr-Old Female Student Arrested For Resharing Post On Operation Sindoor

Case Title: KSS vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 200

The Bombay High Court on May 27 orally expressed its "shock" at the Maharashtra Police for arresting a 19-year-old engineering student who reshared a critical social media post on Indian Army's Operation Sindoor.A division bench of Justices Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan had in the morning session criticised the State and the college authorities for treating her like a "criminal", instead of making an endaevour to reform her.

Bombay High Court Slams Family Court Judge Who Denied Urgent Hearing For Medical Custody Of Child To Undergo Open Heart Surgery

Case Title: SGT vs NST

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 201

"It is unbecoming of a Judge," remarked the Bombay High Court on May 27 while noting that a Family Court Judge did not grant any urgent hearing to a plea filed by a man seeking interim medical custody of his minor son, who is supposed to undergo an 'open heart' surgery. Single-judge Justice Rohit Joshi also expressed shock over the conduct of the man's wife (child's mother), who opposed the plea for interim custody and also the request for urgent hearing.

Orders:

Abu Salem Committed Many Offences In India, Yet To Complete 25 Years Of Jail Term: Maharashtra Govt Tells Bombay High Court

The Maharashtra Government on Wednesday (May 7) told the Bombay High Court that terrorist Abu Salem has not yet completed 25 years of imprisonment and thus he cannot be granted a 'premature' release. A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Advait Sethna is seized with a plea filed by Salem seeking premature release arguing that he has already completed 25 years of imprisonment after counting the remissions and thus as per the treaty signed between the Indian and the Portugal governments, he must now be released.

Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Bangladeshi National Booked For Illegally Entering India

The Bombay High Court recently granted bail to an alleged Bangladeshi national, accused of entering India through illegal means, after noting that she was produced before the Magistrate for remand after more than 24 hours of her arrest. Single-judge Justice Milind Jadhav noted that the prosecution arrested the applicant Sabnam Suleman Ansari (34), a resident of Vashi, Navi Mumbai, on January 28 at 12:30 PM and was produced before the Magistrate (for remand) on the next day (January 29) at 4:30 PM.

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹62 Lakh Compensation For Shah Rukh Khan's Employee Who Died After Being Injured In Road Accident

The Bombay High Court on May 09 upheld the Rs 62 lakh compensation awarded by a Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT) to the family of an employee of Red Chillies Entertainment, owned by actor Shahrukh Khan, who was severely injured in a road accident on March 25, 2012 and died later. A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Advait Sethna upheld the award granted to the family of Charu Khandal, a character animator working with the Red Chillies Entertainment production house.

New Full Bench Of Bombay High Court Led By Justice Ravindra Ghuge To Hear Maratha Reservation Matter

The Bombay High Court has constituted a new full bench (three-judge bench) for hearing the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2024 which provides for 10 per cent reservation to the Maratha Community in education and public service in the State. The new full-bench will now be headed by Justice Ravindra Ghuge along with Justices Nizamoodin Jamadar and Sandeep Marne being the other members of the bench.

Turkey-Based Celebi Subsidiary Moves Bombay High Court Against Termination Of Contract By Mumbai Airport

In a development to the ongoing legal spat between Turkey-based airport ground handling services major Celebi and Indian authorities, the former has moved the Bombay High Court challenging the termination of its contract with the Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) and also the revocation of its security clearance. Celebi Nas Airport Services India (a subsidiary of Celebi), which operates at the Mumbai airport has filed three petitions - two arbitration petitions and a writ petition, challenging the Centre's decision to revoke the security clearance and contract termination by the MIAL.

"She Is No Criminal": Bombay High Court Slams State, Engineering Institute Over Arrest Of Student For Post On 'Operation Sindoor'

While hearing a petition filed by a 19-year-old engineering student, who was arrested for making an allegedly objectionable post on 'Operation Sindoor' on social media, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday (May 27) remarked that the student has to be released adding that she had already faced the consequences after being rusticated by college.