Gujarat High Court Monthly Digest : September 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

11 Oct 2025 10:00 AM IST

  • Gujarat High Court Monthly Digest : September 2025

    Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 139 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 152NOMINAL INDEXX v/s Y 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 139Punambhai Ashabhai Waghela v/s Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 140Yusuf Mehmudkhan Pathan v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 141Yatin K. Desai (Leuva Patel) v/s Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 142Gujarat Power Corporation...

    Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 139 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 152

    NOMINAL INDEX

    X v/s Y 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 139

    Punambhai Ashabhai Waghela v/s Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 140

    Yusuf Mehmudkhan Pathan v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.  2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 141

    Yatin K. Desai (Leuva Patel) v/s Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 142

    Gujarat Power Corporation Limited v. Tata Power Renewable Energy Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 143

    Zonal Manager, Bank of India v. Presiding Officer & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 144

    Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 145

    Chandra Prakash Jain v/s Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 146

    Jaysukhbhai Rambhai Avaidya v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.  2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 147

    X v/s State of Gujarat and Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 148

    GPC Infrastructure Ltd. v/s Gandhinagar Municipal Corporation and Batch 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 149

    X v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 150

    Kush Rashmikantibhai Dave & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 151

    Rajsinhbhai Chhanganbhai Kadchha & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 152

    Foreign Law Can't Dissolve Hindu Marriage Performed Under HMA Even If Couple Is Domiciled Abroad Or Acquires Foreign Citizenship: Gujarat HC

    Case title: X v/s Y

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 139

    The Gujarat High Court has held that a marital dispute between two Hindus whose marriage was conducted in India can be entertained only under the Hindu Marriage Act and foreign family law shall not be applicable even if the couple are domiciled or have citizenship of a foreign country.

    The court thus underscored that the applicability of a foreign law to dissolve a marriage which has been performed under the provisions of the HMA is "impermissible".

    Gujarat High Court Upholds Order Denying Reinstatement Of 448 Employees On Ground Of Not Withdrawing Voluntary Retirement In Time

    Case title: PUNAMBHAI ASHABHAI WAGHELA v/s INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

    R/LPA NO. 84 of 2024 In R/SCA/13803/2021 AND Batch

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 140

    The Gujarat High Court dismissed a batch of appeals challenging an order refusing to grant 448 individuals reinstatement with Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. on the ground that they had opted for voluntary retirement and did not withdraw from the concerned scheme within the validity period.

    The court observed that the employees had admitted that they filed applications for withdrawal from the scheme after the 20.03.2007 the date on which the validity ended. It also rejected the employees contention that that they had a "vested right" to withdraw the application before being relieved from service.

    Yusuf Pathan Encroached On Govt Land, No Allotment Order Was Issued By Vadodara Municipality: Gujarat High Court

    Case title: YUSUF MEHMUDKHAN PATHAN v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR

    R/SCA NO. 9027 of 2024

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 141

    The Gujarat High Court recently upheld an order directing Vadodara Municipal Corporation to take steps to remove encroachment of a plot by former cricketer and TMC MP Yusuf Pathan.

    In doing so the court held that "long possession" of the plot by Pathan, without paying consideration, would not give him any rights over the land adding that it cannot perpetuate such an illegality. Finding Pathan to be an encroacher the court said that there was no order passed allotting the plot to him.

    Gujarat High Court Asks Litigant Challenging 'Jolly LLB 3' Movie Teaser To Peruse Allahabad HC Order Dismissing Similar Plea

    Case title: YATIN K. DESAI (LEUVA PATEL) v/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

    R/SCA/12553/2025

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 142

    The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (September 11) asked a litigant challenging the teaser of the upcoming movie 'Jolly LLB 3' to go through the order of the Allahabad High Court–which dismissed a plea for restraining the release of the movie, and thereafter take a call with respect to his plea.

    During the hearing in the pre-lunch session, the petitioner who appeared in person submitted before Justice Niral R Mehta that he was challenging the certificates issued by CBFC.

    Update: When the matter was heard on September 16, the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition.The plea was thus disposed of.

    Writ Court Interfering With Every Procedural Order In Arbitral Proceedings Is Contrary To Aim Of A&C Act: Gujarat HC

    Case Name: Gujarat Power Corporation Limited v. Tata Power Renewable Energy Limited

    Case Number: R/Special Civil Application No. 6910 of 2025

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 143

    The Gujarat High Court while dismissing a writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution observed that the Writ Court can exercise their power only in cases where the only if the order in questions is “completely perverse”, or the order in questions is crippled with “bad faith” or the order in questions falls in the category of “rarest of rare circumstances”.

    The bench of Justice Mauna M. Bhatt further held that if the Writ Court exercises its jurisdiction in curing every procedural lapse in arbitral proceedings, the same would amount to opening Pandora's box, which would be contrary to the principle of minimum judicial intervention.

    'Vicitmization': Gujarat High Court Upholds Order Reinstating Bank Employee Compulsorily Retired For 'Heated Exchange' With Colleague

    Case Title: Zonal Manager, Bank of India v. Presiding Officer & Anr.

    Case Number: Letters Patent Appeal No. 330 of 2025

    Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 144

    The Gujarat High Court upheld the reinstatement of services of an employee of Bank of India who was compulsorily retired in 2002, holding that the bank had failed to establish charges of misconduct and assault against him and that the penalty amounted to victimization and unfair labour practice.

    The Court held that the case against the employee suffered from an absence of substantial evidence, as crucial witnesses were not examined and that the case appeared one of "heated exchange" between two bank employees and thus the major penalty was excessive.

    Surat Rape Case: Gujarat High Court Grants Narayan Sai 5-Day Temporary Bail To Meet Ailing Mother

    Case title: NARAYAN @ NARAYAN SAI v/s STATE OF GUJARAT

    CR.MA/2/2025 IN R/CR.A/1756/2019

    Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 145

    The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (September 18) granted five-day temporary bail to Narayan Sai–convicted and sentenced to life by sessions court in 2019 in a rape case– to meet his "ailing" mother.

    A division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice PM Raval in its order said:

    "Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances and grounds urged in the application and having regard to the period of incarceration, case is made out for releasing the applicant on temporary bail for a period of 5 days from the date of his release with police surveillance".

    Gujarat High Court Rejects PIL By Rajkot Resident Claiming Illegal Construction Of Multiplex Cinema Hall In Porbandar

    Case title: JAYSUKHBHAI RAMBHAI AVADIYA v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

    R/WPPIL/45/2025

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 146

    The Gujarat High Court on Friday (September 19) dismissed a PIL moved by a resident of Rajkot claiming illegal construction of Multiplex Cinema Hall in Porbandar district, after noting that the litigant had not been able to establish his credentials.

    The court further noted that there was no material in the plea, other than newspaper reports, to show how the petitioner found that the construction was illegal.

    'Absolutely Irresponsible': Gujarat High Court Declines To Quash FIR Against Lawyer For Disclosing POCSO Victim's Name To Media

    Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat and Anr.

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 147

    The Gujarat High Court refused to quash the FIR against a woman advocate booked for disclosing the name of a POCSO victim by giving a media bite, stating that she behaved "absolutely irresponsibly as a professional as well as a human".

    Justice Nirzar Desai in his order further observed that what was more glaring is that the applicant could not protect the "dignity, reputation, and privacy of a minor victim of an offence under the POCSO Act", despite being a woman and, "prima facie appears to have placed her professional interests and publicity above and ahead the interest of the minor victim".

    Gujarat High Court Upholds Jurisdiction Of State Tribunal For Public Works Contract Disputes Involving Municipal Corporation

    Case title: GPC INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. v/s GANDHINAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION and Batch

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 148

    The Gujarat High Court dismissed a batch of petitions filed by private contractors involved in public works contract disputes with municipal corporations, in view of a state government notification providing for routing such disputes to be adjudicated by tribunal under the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act 1992.

    For context the 1992 Act provides for the constitution of a Tribunal to arbitrate in disputes arising from works contracts to which the State Government or a public undertaking is a party and to provide for matters connected therewith.

    Magistrate Can't Keep Adult Woman In Shelter Home Against Her Will, Violative Of Her Fundamental Rights: Gujarat High Court

    Case title: X v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS

    R/SCA (HABEAS CORPUS) NO. 12581 of 2025

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 149

    The Gujarat High Court has said that while a magistrate has the power to pass an order to protect the safety of a woman–who had lodged a rape complaint, and send her to a shelter home after she refused to go to her own home, however she cannot be kept there indefinitely against her will.

    It also said that once a woman who is a major makes a request to leave the shelter home, the magistrate is duty bound to release the woman.

    'Disgraceful': Gujarat High Court Slams Lawyer For Creating False Demolition Panic, Moving Midnight Appeal

    Case title: DHANVANTIBEN VIJAYBHAI PUROHIT & ORS. v/s GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT & ORS.

    R/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 196 of 2025

    Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 150

    The Gujarat High Court deprecated the conduct of an advocate who claimed that due to non-grant of injunction order by trial court, the authorities would demolish his clients' flats overnight, noting that he misused the high court's machinery by moving an appeal late at night without even ascertaining the correct facts.

    Calling his conduct "deplorable" and "disgraceful" the court said that the lawyer, being a senior member of the bar, must not forget that they are officers of the court and have a duty to provide assistance.

    Sub-Inspector Exam: Gujarat High Court Rejects Pleas By Unsuccessful Aspirants Challenging Mandate Of Scoring 40% Marks In Each Subject

    Case title: KUSH RASHMIKANTBHAI DAVE & ORS. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 151

    The Gujarat High Court rejected a plea moved by certain candidates challenging the result of Sub-Inspector exam wherein the selection board required candidates to secure 40% marks in each of the four subjects.

    The court held that the purpose of selection would stand defeated if instead of ascertaining knowledge of candidate in each subject their overall assessment is considered.

    Gujarat High Court Vacates Stay On Auction Of Shops Constructed In Residential Area In Rajkot Citing Grant Of Development Permission

    Case title: RAJSINHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI KADCHHA & ANR. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 152

    The Gujarat High Court recently vacated its earlier order staying a proposed auction for sale of commercial shops constructed in residential premises known as Rangoli Park Apartments in Rajkot.

    For context, the court had on August 26 directed the Gujarat Housing Board not to auction the commercial shops scheduled on August 28. Vacating the stay the court noted that the development permission pertained to construction for both residential and commercial units and when the possession of units was taken by the petitioners–who had challenged such construction–in 2017 the shops were in existence.

    Next Story