LiveLaw reported 204 judgments from the Gujarat High Court in 2023. Here are some important judgments1. Gujarat High Court Backs Centre's Policy Denying Entry In India To Foreigners Convicted For Sexual OffencesCase Title: Dhanraj Rajendra Patel v. Union of IndiaCase Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 10The Gujarat High Court recently came in support of Centre's policy refusing entry in India...
LiveLaw reported 204 judgments from the Gujarat High Court in 2023. Here are some important judgments
Case Title: Dhanraj Rajendra Patel v. Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 10
The Gujarat High Court recently came in support of Centre's policy refusing entry in India to foreigners convicted of rape or foreigners who are found to be morally depraved.
Dismissing a US-citizen's plea, Justice Biren Vaishnav observed, "The petitioner has been convicted as a sex offender and the endorsement is so made on his passport too. In the exercise of a statutory power flowing from the provisions of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, guidelines have been issued that foreigners who are morally depraved are not permitted to enter the territorial limits of India. The country is within its rights to prescribe norms valid to prevent such people from setting foot on the Indian soil."
Case Title: Swati Rajiv Goswami v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 11
The Gujarat High Court has held that citizens have a right to know the rules and regulations under which they are denied the permission to hold peaceful protests. It added that refusal of the Police to publicize such rules amounts to "killing and smothering" the very purpose of the Right to Information Act.
Case Title: High Court of Gujarat v. Gujarat Information Commission and 1 other Case
Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 12
Allowing a petition preferred by the Gujarat High Court administration, a single bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav quashed the order of the State Information Commission requiring the administration to disclose certain third party, personal information sought by a judicial officer under Right to Information Act. The bench reiterated that information which is “personal" in nature and which does not serve any public interest cannot be provided under the Right to Information Act.
Case Title: Divyesh Govindbhai Kunvariya v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 13
In the context of departmental proceedings, the Gujarat High Court has held that a delinquent employee is entitled to engage a counsel for his defence where the inquiry officer himself is a legal expert.
Allowing the plea made by one such employee, Justice A.S. Supehia observed, "In the present case, since the Inquiry Officer himself is a City Civil Judge and expert in the legal proceedings, the assistant of a legal practitioner for defending the case of the petitioner cannot be denied...The Apex Court has emphatically held that if any person, who possesses legal acumen is appointed as an inquiry officer in an inquiry initiated against an employee, the denial of a legal practitioner for assistance in inquiry to the charged employee will be unfair."
Case Title: Chaudhary Chetnaben Dilipbhai v. Chaudhary Dilipbhai Lavjibhai
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 17
The Gujarat High Court recently reiterated that the time limit for filing an appeal challenging a judgement or order of Family Court arising out of a matrimonial dispute under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act) is 90 days.
The order addresses the confusion created by the two provisions since whereas the appeal prescribed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act is 90 days from the date of order, Section 19 of the Family Courts Act stipulates only a period of 30 days for filing an appeal.
Case Title: Harisinh Abhesinh Parmar v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 21
A single judge bench of the Gujarat High Court held that the non-requirement of custodial interrogation cannot by itself be a ground to grant anticipatory bail to an accused. "Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline anticipatory bail. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail," Justice Samir J. Dave observed.
Case Title: High Court of Gujarat v. Chandravadan Dhruv & 1 Other
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 23
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed and set aside State Information Commission's order directing disclosure of the salary and allowances of a former Additional Judge of the Gujarat High Court under the RTI Act. Chandravadan Dhruv had filed an application under the RTI Act on 14.06.2016 seeking certain information, one of which was to provide information regarding the Salary and allowances paid to the said judge for performing her duty as Additional Judge, Gujarat High Court.
Case Title: Imran Karimbhai Madam v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 24
A single judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has reiterated that prosecution witnesses could not be recalled for cross-examination under section 311 of the CrPC on the ground that certain important questions were not asked during the cross-examination.
While dismissing the criminal revision petition, Justice Umesh A. Trivedi observed that the petitioner has not mentioned what is left to be asked to the said witnesses and therefore has failed to show that without recalling the witnesses, court is unable to deliver the judgement.
Case Title: Hitesh Ishwarbhai Misareeya & 1 Other v. State of Gujarat & 1 other
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 27
The Gujarat High Court has held that settlement between parties in cases where an offence is committed under Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 cannot be accepted.
The application was filed before the High Court under section Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the FIR related to the offences punishable under Sections 304, 313, 314, 120(B), 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 22 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 as well as the Criminal Case pending beforeAdditional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad.
Case Title: Nimish Mahendra Kapadia v. The Dy. Secretary, Gujarat Information Commission
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 38
The Gujarat High Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by a practising advocate seeking details, under the RTI Act, of the correspondences between government advocate and various offices of the State regarding a matter in which he had appeared for the petitioning party. The advocate sought the details purportedly to ascertain the reasons on part of State in preferring an appeal.
Case Title: Maunish Dinkar Shaw & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 48
The Gujarat High Court recently reiterated that father being a natural and lawful guardian, removal by him of his son below 5 years of age from his mother is not an offence under Section 361 (Kidnapping from lawful guardianship) of IPC.
While quashing the criminal proceedings against the applicants, the single judge bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora observed: “In order to constitute an offence under Section 361 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be a kidnapping of a person from lawful guardianship. Here the applicant is himself the lawful guardian of the minor. It cannot therefore, be said that, he committed an offence under Section 361 of the Indian Penal Code by getting the custody of his own son from his wife.”
Case Title: Piyam Jigesh Dave v. SAL School of Architecture & Ors.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 58
The Gujarat High Court recently directed the SAL School of Architecture, Ahmedabad to issue NOC to one of its student of Bachelor of Architecture course who after completion of one academic year at SAL, has taken provisional admission in Nirma University.
The single judge bench of Justice Bhargav D. Karia held: “Respondent No.1 (SAL School of Architecture) cannot deny NOC when the petitioner does not want to study with the respondent No.1-Institute and more particularly, when the petitioner has studied 3rd Semester in the Nirma University and in such circumstances, in order to see that the petitioner continue the study of Bachelor of Architecture without any hindrance, respondent No.1 is hereby directed to issue NOC to the petitioner within two days from today.”
Case Title - Patel Dharmeshbhai Naranbhai vs Dharmendrabhai Pravinbhai Fofani
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 70
Holding that right to safe food is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Gujarat High Court today observed that the right to free trade in food items like meat, or any such food has to be subserving to the public health and food safety requirements.
The bench of Justice N. V Anjaria opined thus while disposing of a bunch of PIL Pleas filed by meat vendors and associations in Gujarat challenging the closing of their establishments/shops by official authorities on account of not complying with food safety laws, selling meat in unhygienic conditions or through unlicensed shops.
Case Title: Karthik Deepak Sharma Versus Director General, Nirma University
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 72
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed an application seeking relief to appear for regular examinations filed by a law student who was found to be involved in misconduct and was caught cheating during the end semester examination.
While giving a holistic view to the regulations on unfair practices framed by the university administration, Justice Sangeeta K Vishen held, “...if the student, is found possessing any kind of electronic devices, during the examination irrespective of whether it is used or not used, the same is termed to be a misconduct and therefore, one is not to go only by the penalty imposed but the nature of the malpractices committed by the petitioner as well. It is not in dispute that the malpractice, was committed by the petitioner and to suggest that the instant misconduct would not be covered by Regulation 5(iv), such suggestion, is difficult to be accepted.”
Case Title: Mahebubbhai Bhachubhai Bhati Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 104
The Gujarat High Court has said the Inspector General of Police (IGP) himself is required to take a decision on the applications for furlough leave and Prison Rules do not envisage exercise of such power on basis of file notings by the Administrative Officer in the IGP's office.
The ruling came in a case where an applicant challenged the rejection of their furlough leave application by the Administrative Officer (Jails), Gujarat State, on the apparent orders of the Additional Director General of Police/Inspector General of Police. The rejection was based on negative opinion from police officials in the area where the offense had occurred and the applicant's conviction under Section 125(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case Title: Jyantilal Vadilal Shah & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 106
Observing that there is a rampant misuse of Section 498A of IPC by complainants to harass family members of the husband, the Gujarat High Court has quashed an FIR against an octogenarian woman.
Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt said the FIR will cause greater hardships to the 86-year-old and no fruitful purpose would be served if such further proceedings are allowed to be continued. The court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with ulterior motive to pressurise accused or to settle the score, the bench added.
Case Title - RAHUL GANDHI Versus PURNESH ISHWERBHAI MODI
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 114
Dismissing Congress leader and Former MP Rahul Gandhi's revision plea to stay the conviction in the criminal defamation case over his 'Modi Thieves' remark, the Gujarat High Court today observed that the case against Gandhi concerns a large identifiable class (Modi Community) and not just an individual.
The Court added that being a senior leader of the oldest political party in India and a "prominent figure in the realm of the Indian political landscape", Gandhi is vested with a duty to ensure that the dignity and reputation of a large number of persons or any identifiable class is not "jeopardised" due to his political activities or utterances.
Case Title: M Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 121
Upholding the acquittal of an accused in a rape case, the Gujarat High Court said there was a major discrepancy with regard to the time of the incident.
“If at all offence is committed at a particular time, there cannot be inconsistent time of offence in between the deposition and the contemporaneous record like First Information Report registered by the first-informant herself,” said the division bench of Justice Umesh A Trivedi and Justice MK Thakker.
Case Title: Jivanbhai Nagjibhai Makwana Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 124
The Gujarat High Court, while expressing distress over the misuse of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act), quashed a complaint filed by a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) member against another BJP leader who held the position of President of Chotila Nagarpalika.
Justice Sandeep Bhatt expressing concern, said, "While the Act is essentially meant for protecting the members of a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe from atrocity or oppression, at the same time, it cannot be allowed to be misused. It is a greater responsibility on the investigating officer to investigate such offence wisely and/or very sharply and in a fair manner."
Case title - RAJPARA SAUMIL KANUBHAI vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 126
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking the live-streaming of proceedings at the Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) observing that "everything can't be live streamed, it can't be mandated by the court as it about the infrastructure"
"Every tribunal and every forum cannot be expected to live-stream the proceedings. They will do it in phases. There is no occasion to issue a mandate at this moment." Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal remarked as the bench, also including Justice NV Anjaria, dismissed the PIL plea.
Case Title: Rameshbhai Danjibhai Solanki & 7 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 136
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that accusations related to the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) can be pursued by a woman, provided she claims instances of harassment and cruelty that occurred while her marriage was still in effect.
Justice Jitendra Doshi held, “... allegations of the offence u/s 498A of the IPC even can be maintained at the instance of the divorcee wife, provided that she alleges the incident of harassment and cruelty which could have been meted out while marriage was subsisting.”
Case Title: ROHIT JAYANTILAL PATEL vs. STATE OF GUJARAT and others
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 140
The Gujarat High Court has DISMISSED as 'misconceived' a PIL plea seeking a direction to the state govt to implement the (then) Governor's 2012 decision authorizing the use of the Gujarati Language in addition to English in the court proceedings before the HC. The PIL plea, which also challenged the October 2012 decision (taken on the administrative side) of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court rejecting the proposal to permit the use of the Gujarati Language, was moved last year by a Social Worker Rohit Jayantilal Patel through Senior Advocate Asim Pandya.
Case Title: Cargo Motors ( Gujarat ) Limited vs Kritikant Shivajirav Jadav
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 144
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that when it comes to employment termination cases, the award of backwages is not automatic alongside reinstatement. However, the High Court emphasized that if the employer is found at fault, then full 100% wages can be granted.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal And Justice N.V. Anjaria observed, “It is settled law that in a case of termination of employment, though award of backwages is not automatic with the award of reinstatement, but in case the fault is found on the part of the employer, 100% wages can be provided. The fundamental principle is that no one can take benefit of its own wrong.”
Case Title: Jenil Dilipkumar Patel vs State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 145
While observing that it is the prerogative of the State government to determine the number of seats available for MBBS courses under the State quota, the Gujarat High Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking a direction upon the authorities to augment the number of seats in Gujarat. The petition sought to compensate for the reduction in seats for the open category due to the amalgamation of a 10% Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota into the open category.
Case Title: Shubhra Hiteshbhai Gupta vs State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 146
The Gujarat High Court last month dismissed multiple petitions challenging the State government's decision to implement a minimum age limit of six years for admission to Class 1 from the current academic year. While doing so, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice NV Anjaria further added that forcing children to go to a pre-school below the age of 3 years is an 'illegal act' on the part of the parents.
Case Citation: Mujahid Nafees Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 154
The Gujarat High Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking to provide fitting places for burial to different religious communities in the state as it noted that earlier, for the same relief, a PIL had been moved by the petitioner and the same was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the petitioner.
"This is a wholly misconceived second PIL filed by the petitioner for the same relief for which, earlier a PIL had been filed, and the same was dismissed as withdrawn and no liberty was granted to the petitioner to file another PIL," a bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee observed as it dismissed the PIL plea.
Case Title: Krinaben W/O Tushar Suryakant Trivedi Versus N P Garasiya, Police Sub Inspector, Special Investigation Team
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 156
In a recent ruling by the Gujarat High Court, it was held that contempt of court proceedings cannot be initiated against a police officer for arresting an accused without a warrant, without prior notice under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), if the officer provides a valid explanation before the magistrate.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Shashtri and Divyesh A. Joshi observed, “Here in this case on hand, the concerned police officer has narrated the grounds expressly in a clear terms in the check-list at the time of production of the accused and copy of the check-list was given to the concerned court at the time of production of the documents and presentation of the accused, therefore, conscious of the Investigating Officer is satisfied at the time of arrest. The ground mentioned in Section 41A and Section 41(1)(ii)(a) of the CrPC provides “to prevent such person from committing any further offence”.
Case Title: Kutubuddin Ansari Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 158
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the dismissal of a defamation case filed by the 'Face' of 2002 Gujarat Riots, Kutubuddin Ansari, a victim of the riots, against the makers of the 2013 film 'Rajdhani Express.'
The case revolved around the unauthorized use of Ansari's image in the movie, which he claimed had damaged his reputation and personal safety.
Justice Sandeep N Bhatt observed, “It is rightly found by the Courts below that the complainant has not produced any evidence before the lower Court that the accused have used the photograph of the complainant with the intention of damaging the personal reputation of the complainant. Even the lower court has recorded in its order that no evidence has been produced that the complainant has suffered any loss due to such act of the accused.”
Case Title: Chandanji @ Gato Chhanaji Thakor Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 161
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State to compensate a man who was unjustly incarcerated for nearly three years despite a court order suspending his sentence and granting him bail back in September 2020.
The court ordered the State to grant Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation to the applicant and urged District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) to identify similar cases of delayed release.
Referring to the present case is 'an eye opener', Justices A. S. Supehia And M. R. Mengdey observed, “Considering the plight of the applicant, who has remained in jail despite the order of this Court due to the negligence on the part of the jail authorities, though he has already released yesterday, we are inclined to grant compensation for his illegal incarceration in the jail for almost three years.”
Case Title: Child In Conflict With Law Through Guardian Versus State Of Gujarat R/Criminal Revision Application No. 1024 Of 2023
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 162
The Gujarat High Court recently invalidated the decision of a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) in Vadodara directing a child in conflict with law, booked under various provisions of the IPC and the Arms Act, to be tried as an adult.
In a 131-page judgment, Justice Gita Gopi reiterated the procedures to be followed while assessing such a child under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act 2015.
According to the FIR, the accused had allegedly entered the complainant's house, committed dacoity, and threatened the complainant with dire consequences after looting gold and silver jewellery, along with cash amounting to approximately Rs 16.90 lakh.
Case Title: Padmaben Rajendrabhai Vyas Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 165
The Gujarat High Court, in a significant dissenting opinion from a previous order issued by the Coordinate Bench, has ruled that individuals under a Habeas Corpus petition cannot be compelled to undergo medical tests to determine their mental stability. The Division Bench comprising Justice A. I. Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi held, “In our considered opinion, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 cannot be forcefully subjected to medical test in order to ascertain their mental stability (ability) that too in habeas corpus petition on vague allegations that they are practicing black magic.”
Case Title - Jahirmiya Rehamumiya Malek Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 170
Finding 4 Gujarat Police officers GUILTY of committing Contempt of Court (for violating Apex Court's DK Basu Guidelines) and sentencing them to undergo simple imprisonment of 14 days for publicly flogging Muslim men in the Kheda district last year, the Gujarat High Court on Thursday observed that the custodians of law and order should not become depredators of civil liberties.
In its 39-page order, a bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi stressed that the police officers should have the greatest regard for the personal liberty of citizens as they are the custodians of law and order and, hence, they should not flout the law by stooping to bizarre acts of lawlessness.
Case title - Ajayraj @ Vijendrasinh Kirodilal Meena Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 178
The Gujarat High Court has said that in the competitive examination, many candidates burn the midnight oil to secure a government job and therefore, any misconduct, misbehaviour, malpractices and cheating in such exams has to be dealt with strictly. A bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar observed thus while denying anticipatory bail to one Ajayraj Meena who has been accused of appearing in the competitive examination for the post of Clerk on behalf of the co-accused (Udayraj Brijlal Meena) by creating forged documents.
Case Title: Arvind Kejriwal Versus Gujarat University
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 181
The Gujarat High Court has observed that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's persistence in challenging Prime Minister Narendra Modi's qualifications despite an undisputable record produced by the Gujarat University is not in good taste.
While dismissing Kejriwal's review petition against its order setting aside CIC's direction to disclose information on degrees held by the Prime Minister, Justice Biren Vaishnav said, “This court, without getting into the intentions of the applicant in filing the review application would tend of agree with the submission of Mr. Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India that though there is a contemporaneous record in the form of the Office Register undisputably showing the qualification of the Prime Minister, the review applicant having lost in his legal remedy as the petition was allowed, continues to harp upon his pursuit in following a cause by proceeding in this review application in a manner which does not reflect good taste in public life.”
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 194
The Gujarat High Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which sought a ban on the use of loudspeakers in mosques for azaan, terming it a "wholly misconceived PIL." The petitioner had requested a ban on the use of loudspeakers during various times of the day for the Islamic call to prayer. Chief Justice Sunita Aggarwal questioned the petitioner's claim of disturbance due to noise pollution, enquiring if other religious practices, such as playing music during puja or bhajan in temples, did not cause similar public disturbance.
Case Title: Kalpataru Projects International Limited Versus Ssa Projects Pvt. Ltd
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 195
The Gujarat High Court has issued a significant ruling, asserting that the obligatory 120-day period for submitting a Written Statement in Commercial Cases should be reassessed. In overturning a decision by the Commercial Court disallowing the petitioner to file their written statement, the Bench emphasized that in the present case, the unavailability of the court itself due to a change in forum would leave the petitioner in a vulnerable position. In such instances, the court declared that the timeframe would be deemed to have been "frozen."
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 197
On Thursday, during a hearing, the Gujarat High Court conveyed dissatisfaction with the State for casually filing intra-court appeals emphasizing the importance of obtaining the proper opinion of Government counsels on the merits of the case.
The matter was being heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P Mayee.
The Court observed that the intra-court appeal was filed with an unreasonable delay of 481 days to contest the single judge's order, explicitly stating that there was no dispute about the conversion of the land from new tenure to old tenure in 2005.
38. 'Training Makes A Lot Of Difference': Gujarat High Court Directs Advocate General To Establish Judicial Academy For Aspiring Lawyers LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 199
The Gujarat High Court has directed the Advocate General of the State to devise a plan for the establishment of a judicial academy aimed at training aspiring lawyers.
This directive comes in response to two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) addressing various issues related to the conduct and training of lawyers within the court.
The matter was being heard by a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 200
While a series of petitions seeking to criminalise marital rape is presently pending before the Supreme Court, the Gujarat High Court, in an important observation, recently said that rape is a rape, be it performed by a man the 'husband' against his own 'wife'.
Disagreeing with the marital rape exception as provided under Section 375 of IPC (Exception 2), which exempts a husband from punishment if he commits sexual acts against the consent of his wife (being 18 or above in age), the Court noted that marital rape is illegal in 50 American States, 3 Australian States and many other countries.
Case Title: State Of Gujarat Versus Prakash @ Piddu Mithubhai Mulani & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 202
The Gujarat High Court has recently observed that a single injury resulting in death can be categorized as 'murder' under Clause 3 of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). With this, the Court, upon convicting the accused, emphasized that he took advantage of the victim's vulnerability and displayed calculated cruelty in delivering a fatal blow.
The Court's decision came in response to an appeal filed by the State challenging the acquittal of the accused. The State had argued that the Trial Court had overlooked crucial pieces of evidence, such as the dying declarations, the accused's surrender with the weapon, and forensic reports confirming the presence of the deceased's blood on the knife.