Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 29 - October 05, 2025

Nominal Index [Citation 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 391 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 402]

MABRB vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 391

Malabar Gold & Diamond Limited vs Meta Platforms Inc, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 392

Naresh Jagdishrai Goyal vs Bank of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 393

Akshay Quenim vs Royce Savio Pereira, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 394

State of Maharashtra vs Aakash Sandhi Bindu, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 395

Gautam Dham Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs Funds and Properties of Parsi Panchayat, Bombay, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 396

Anil D Ambani vs State Bank of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 397

Asha Bhosle vs Mayk Inc., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 398

Vasantha Perampally Nayak vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 399

Mangal Credit and Fincorp Limited Versus Ulka Chandrshekhar Nair, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 400

Shree Construction Company vs Bagwe Housing Pvt. Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 401

Dodal Electro Instruments vs The Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 402

Judgments/Final Orders:

POCSO FIR Can't Be Quashed Only Because Victim And Accused Have Married And A Child Is Born: Bombay High Court

Case Title: MABRB vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 391

Just because a minor girl has fallen in love with an adult man and their families have got them married and she has given birth to a child does not mean that the offences under the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act are not made out, the Bombay High Court held on Friday (September 26). A division bench of Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nandesh Deshpande refused to quash an FIR lodged against 29-year-old man and his parents, booked under the charges of the stringent POCSO Act and also the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.

Bombay High Court Orders Pulling Down Of Social Media Posts Labelling Malabar Gold As "Sympathiser Of Pakistan"

Case Title: Malabar Gold & Diamond Limited vs Meta Platforms Inc

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 392

The Bombay High Court on Monday (September 29) in an ad-interim order, directed various social media platforms to pull down the defamatory posts against jewellery brand Malabar Gold and Diamonds, which is being labelled as a 'Sympathiser of Pakistan' by netizens for engaging a Pakistani social media influencer to promote it's brand in London.

Bombay High Court Quashes Bank Of India Order Classifying Naresh Goyal's Loan Account As 'Fraud'

Case Title: Naresh Jagdishrai Goyal vs Bank of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 393

The Bombay High Court recently quashed and set aside a show cause notice issued to Jet Airway's founder Naresh Goyal, by which the Bank of India (BoI) classified his loan account as 'fraud.' A division bench of Justices Riyaz Chagla and Farhan Dubash noted that the Bank did not provide an opportunity to Goyal to represent against the July 1, 2025 show cause notice classifying his account as fraud.

Trial Court Cannot Decide Application For Amendment Of Plaint Without Considering Application For Return Of Plaint: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Akshay Quenim vs Royce Savio Pereira

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 394

The Bombay High Court has held that when a defendant files an application for return of the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, the Trial Court must first examine that application before considering any amendment sought by the plaintiff. The Court emphasised that jurisdiction cannot be conferred on a Court by way of amendment if it inherently lacks jurisdiction at the time of filing of the plaint.

Bombay High Court Objects To Trial Court Granting Bail To Rape Accused On Ground Of His Upcoming Marriage

Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Aakash Sandhi Bindu

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 395

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (September 1) cancelled the bail granted to a man booked in a gang rape case by a trial court on the ground that his marriage was scheduled to take place and that there were no injuries on the victim's private parts. Single-judge Justice Dr Neela Gokhale noted that the Additional Sessions Judge at Dindoshi (Borivali Division) had on February 24, 2025 granted bail to one Aakash Bindu on the ground that his marriage was to take place in the first week of March 2025.

Date Of Service Of Summons Is Starting Point For Limitation Period To File Written Statement: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Gautam Dham Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs Funds and Properties of Parsi Panchayat, Bombay

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 396

The Bombay High Court has held that the limitation period for filing a written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 begins from the date of service of summons along with a copy of the plaint, and not from the date of filing of the Vakalatnama by the defendant. The Court emphasised that the responsibility to serve the plaint rests upon the plaintiff and that the defendant cannot be expected to apply to the court office to obtain a copy of the plaint merely because a Vakalatnama has been filed earlier.

Bombay High Court Dismisses Anil Ambani's Plea Against SBI Classifying His Loan Account As "Fraud"

Case Title: Anil D Ambani vs State Bank of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 397

The Bombay High Court on Friday refused to quash the order passed by the State Bank of India (SBI), which classified the loan account of Reliance Communications and also its chairman Anil Ambani as "fraud." A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale pronounced the order. Notably, Ambani and his company account's classification as "fraud" was made on June 13, 2025, under the Reserve Bank of India's Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management and SBI's internal policy.

Unauthorised Use Of Celebrity Voice Using AI Tools Violates Rights : Bombay High Court Grants Relief To Asha Bhosle

Case Title: Asha Bhosle vs Mayk Inc.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 398

The Bombay High Court has held that making Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools available which allow the conversion of any voice into that of a celebrity without consent amounts to a violation of personality rights. Single-judge Justice Arif Doctor was hearing a suit filed by legendary playback singer Asha Bhosle, who approached the Court against companies accused of developing and offering AI-based applications that cloned her voice to generate songs and other content. The applications also allegedly used her image and likeness for merchandise, posters and online promotion without her permission.

'Arrest Brings Humiliation, Casts Scars Forever': Bombay High Court Orders Maharashtra Govt To Pay ₹1 Lakh For Illegal Arrest

Case Title: Vasantha Perampally Nayak vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 399

The Bombay High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the Maharashtra government for wrongly invoking offences against a Karnataka-based man and thereafter illegally arresting him and keeping him in custody for nearly 20 days. A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Sandesh Patil noted that two officers - Pradeep Kerkar and Kapil Shirsath, Inspector and Police Sub-Inspector of the Bandra Police Station, had initially sought permission from their superiors to register an FIR against one Vasantha Nayak under sections 420 (cheating) , 406 (criminal breach of trust), 465 (forgery), 477A (fabrication of accounts) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, while registering the FIR, the officers invoked section 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant) against Nayak, without informing the superiors.

Mere Registration Of FIR Or Pendency Of Proceedings Before DRT Does Not Bar Reference To Arbitration: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Mangal Credit and Fincorp Limited Versus Ulka Chandrshekhar Nair

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 400

The Bombay High Court bench of single-judge Justice Advait Sethna has held that the disputes between Mangal Credit and Fincorp Limited and Ulka Chandrshekhar Nair are arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) even though allegations of fraud and forgery were raised and a criminal was filed in which no progress has been made.

'Mere Awareness Of Contract Or Likelihood Of Receiving Incidental Benefits Not Sufficient To Establish Privity': Bombay High Court

Case Title: Shree Construction Company vs Bagwe Housing Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 401

The Bombay High Court has held that mere knowledge of a contract or incidental benefits flowing from it cannot create privity of contract or confer enforceable rights against third parties. The Court ruled that in the absence of a direct contractual relationship, no cause of action arises.

Proceedings For Conciliation & Arbitration Under MSME Act Cannot Be Clubbed: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Dodal Electro Instruments vs The Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 402

The Bombay High Court has set set aside two ex-parte orders passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC), Daman holding that the council acted in breach of mandatory two stage procedures under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSMED Act”). The court remitted the matter for fresh arbitration in accordance with law.

Other Developments:

Bombay High Court Issues Notice On Plea By Filmmaker Challenging CBFC's Objection To Use Of 'Janki & Raghuram' In Movie

The Bombay High Court on Monday issued a notice to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) asking it to respond to the petition filed by the makers of the Chhattisgarh based film 'Janki' which is objected to because of its title and also to the names of the lead actors in the film. The CBFC, according to the makers, have objected to the title of the film 'Janki' as it is the name to Goddess Sita. The central agency has further objected to the name of the male lead in the film which is 'Raghuram.' The film revolves around the lead characters Raghuram and Janki and their relationship amid huge action.

Bombay High Court Refuses To Allow Bhima Koregaon Accused Dr Anand Teltumbde To Travel Abroad For Delivering Lectures

After the Bombay High Court on Wednesday expressed disinclination to permit rights' activist Dr Anand Teltumbde to travel to Amsterdam and the United Kingdom for attending academic assignments, the accused in the Elgar Parishad - Bhima Koregaon case, withdrew his plea. A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Bhonsale while expressing it's view against permitting Teltumbde, asked him to consider delivering lectures virtually.

Bhima Koregaon Case: Bombay High Court Reserves Order In Hany Babu's Plea For Bail

The Bombay High Court on Friday closed for orders, the bail application filed by former Delhi University Professor Hany Babu, who has been booked for his alleged role in the Elgar Parishad - Bhima Koregaon case. A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Bhonsale closed the application filed by Babu, for orders.

'Usual Way To Siphon Off Public Land': High Court Objects To Allotment Of 33 Acres Of Govt Land For Slum Rehabilitation In South Bombay

The Bombay High Court recently questioned the state's attempt to dispose of nearly 33 acres of government land encroached upon by slum dwellers in the posh Cuffe Parade and Colaba area in South Mumbai, under the garb of redevelopment and rehabilitation of 65,000 slums. A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe was shocked to note that prime lands of the government were encroached by the slum dwellers, and now they have constituted a society and resolved to appoint a developer to construct a rehab building under the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA). The bench sought to know if the State's 'cabinet' permitted disposing of such vast lands in such a fashion.