Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 143-162]M/S. Spire Enterprise vs Government E-Marketplace SPV 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 143Cargo Motors ( Gujarat ) Limited vs Kritikant Shivajirav Jadav LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 144Jenil Dilipkumar Patel vs State Of Gujarat LLx Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 145Shubhra Hiteshbhai Gupta vs State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 146Girishbhai Ambalal...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 143-162]
M/S. Spire Enterprise vs Government E-Marketplace SPV 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 143
Cargo Motors ( Gujarat ) Limited vs Kritikant Shivajirav Jadav LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 144
Jenil Dilipkumar Patel vs State Of Gujarat LLx Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 145
Shubhra Hiteshbhai Gupta vs State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 146
Girishbhai Ambalal Rathod Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 147
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 148
Umaben Jayantbhai Shah D/O Late Ramanlal N. Shah vs NA 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 149
XYX Vs. State Of Gujarat Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 150
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chandrakant Gokalbhai Patel 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 151
Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 152
XYZ Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 153
Mujahid Nafees Vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 154
Rajan Ankleshwaria v. Vinni Ankleshwaria 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 155
Krinaben W/O Tushar Suryakant Trivedi Versus N P Garasiya, Police Sub Inspector, Special Investigation Team 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 156
Nipun Praveen Singhvi Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 157
Kutubuddin Ansari Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 158
Bhavesh Kamleshbhai Patel Versus Commissioner, Municipality Administration 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 159
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 160
Chandanji @ Gato Chhanaji Thakor Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 161
Child In Conflict With Law Through Guardian Versus State Of Gujarat R/Criminal Revision Application No. 1024 Of 2023 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 162
Judgments/Orders This Month
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.”
Gujarat High Court Upholds Fairness Of 'Random Algorithm' Method In Tender Selection Process
Case Title: M/S. Spire Enterprise vs Government E-Marketplace SPV
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 143
In a recent judgment, the Gujarat High Court has reaffirmed the fairness and transparency of a selection process involving the use of a random algorithm for awarding a tender to outsource manpower services.
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee, the use of a random algorithm in the selection process for outsourcing manpower services is the most transparent and fair approach. The Court's decision came in response to a challenge to the selection process for outsourcing manpower services.
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.
Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR Against Former SBI Deputy Manager In Currency Deficit Case From 2006
Case Title: Girishbhai Ambalal Rathod Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 147
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a FIR filed against a former Deputy Manager (Accounts) of the State Bank of India (SBI) in connection with a currency deficit incident dating back to 2006 while observing that the departmental inquiry findings, which resulted in exoneration for the petitioner, established that the essential element of the offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code was lacking.
Justice JC Doshi observed, “The finding in the departmental proceeding indicates that the petitioner was not entrusted the property. Thus, the basic ingredients of offence punishable under Section 409 of the IPC is lacking. In addition thereof, there is ten years of yawning and unexplained gap for registration of the FIR.”
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 148
The Gujarat High Court today allowed a plea filed by a 12-year-old, who was allegedly raped by her father, to abort her nearly 27-week pregnancy. The Court also granted her a compensation of Rs. 2.5 lakhs. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave passed this order after perusing the medical report of the victim which was prepared by Sir Sayajirao Gayakwad General Hospital in Vadodara pursuant to the Court's September 4 order.
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 148
Allowing a plea filed by a 12-year-old, who was allegedly raped by her father, to abort her nearly 27-week pregnancy, the Gujarat High Court today observed that there is no higher insult to a woman than trying to touch her dignity.
Calling the case as shocking and painful, the bench of Justice Samir J. Dave, quoting from 'Durga Saptashati', observed thus: "स्त्रिया: समस्ता: सकला जगत्सु [जगत की समस्त स्त्रियां तुम्हारा ही स्वरूप हैं] अर्थात हे देवी जगदम्बे, जगत में जितनी भी स्त्रिया हैं वह सब तुम्हारी ही मुर्तिया हैं । इसलिए अगर स्त्री चाहे तो वह सब कर सकती हैं जो वह करना चाहती हैं, यह ताकत सिर्फ़ उसीमे हैं जो बड़े बड़े संकटों का नाश कर, श्रेष्ट से श्रेष्ट और कठिनतम कार्य भी पूर्ण कर सकती हैं । जरुरत हैं तो सर्वशक्तिमान नारी को स्वयं को पहचानने को ।"
Case Title: Umaben Jayantbhai Shah D/O Late Ramanlal N. Shah vs NA
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 149
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that even though Section 371 of the Indian Succession Act stipulates two modes of determining territorial jurisdiction of courts for grant of succession certificate, the second mode is only an alternative which can be invoked if the petitioner demonstrates that the deceased had no permanent place of residence.
Section 371 prescribes that the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of his death, or, at that time had no fixed place of residence, the District Judge within whose jurisdiction any part of the property of the deceased may be found, may grant a certificate.
Case Title - XYX Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 150
The Gujarat High Court today allowed a 17-year-old girl to terminate her pregnancy of around 17 weeks. The Court, however, in an oral remark said that the father of the girl should not pressurize her daughter to terminate her pregnancy. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave made this remark as it took note of the medical report of the girl and her statements recorded before the police and the magistrate.
Case Title: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chandrakant Gokalbhai Patel
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 151
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that signing settlement claims in Lok Adalat does not amount to misconduct, emphasizing that even if an employee's actions appear to be an error in judgment or negligence in performing their duties, such actions do not qualify as misconduct unless the company can demonstrate that they have caused irreparable harm, thus highlighting the need to establish the severity of negligence in such cases.
Case Title: Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 152
While handing down a verdict in favor of Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd., which had sought relief under the "Vera Samadhan Yojana-2019," a tax amnesty scheme introduced by the State of Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court, has affirmed that a minor error in the intimation should not prevent the petitioner from availing the benefits of the scheme, especially when they have met the essential criteria for eligibility.
Case Title - XYZ Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 153
The Gujarat High Court today allowed the medical termination of a minor rape survivor's 19-week pregnancy while noting that a victim can not be allowed to continue with her pregnancy if she is unwilling.
The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave observed thus while dealing with the plea moved by the elder sister of the 16-year-old rape victim seeking to terminate her over 17-week pregnancy. Hearing the plea on September 9, the Court formed a medical panel of the Doctors of GEMRS Medical College & General Hospital Vadnagar to examine the girl and submit a report to the Court.
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: Rajan Ankleshwaria v. Vinni Ankleshwaria
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 155
The Gujarat High Court recently held that in a dispute over the custody of a minor child, an order that does not finalise the question of custody qualifies as an interlocutory order and not an interim order, and clarified that an appeal against an interlocutory order is not permissible as per Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Shastri and Divyesh A. Joshi highlighted that an interlocutory order does not terminate the proceedings or finally decide the rights of the parties and concluded that the rights regarding the return of the child's custody were not finally decided by the impugned order.
Case Title: Krinaben W/O Tushar Suryakant Trivedi Versus N P Garasiya, Police Sub Inspector, Special Investigation Team
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 156
n 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: Nipun Praveen Singhvi Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 157
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State government to ensure that in future, appointments of the Chairperson and Technical Members of the Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, under Section 43 of the Gujarat Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, are not delayed.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee was hearing a PIL filed by Nipun Praveen Singhvi, a practicing advocate and RTI activist. Singhvi sought directions to challenge the composition of the Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal and demanded the appointment of a Chairperson and Technical Member. He also requested the creation of a website and the transfer of administration from the Urban Development Ministry to the Department of Law and Justice.
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: Bhavesh Kamleshbhai Patel Versus Commissioner, Municipality Administration
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 159
While observing that elected officials must ensure that their public duties do not conflict with their electoral interests and should refrain from actions that could tarnish the credibility of the institution they represent, the Gujarat High Court upheld the removal of a Municipal Councillor for misconduct during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal And Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee observed, “It is expected from the elected members that they must ensure that no conflict arises between the public duties and their electoral interest. Moreover, they must not ask the officials to act in any way which would create a conflict between their duties and responsibilities. It is further expected that the elected member should not do anything that brings disrepute to the institution to which he is elected or affect its credibility.”
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 160
The Gujarat High Court recently denied bail to a woman advocate facing conspiracy and abetment charges related to the alleged repeated sexual assault, rape of a minor girl.
The bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar noted that prima facie the accused-woman advocate played an active role in the commission of the crime and screened the offender and derailed the investigation and hence, her custodial investigation was necessary.
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.