Nominal Index [Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 102-107]Salman @Mufti Mohammad Salman Azhari S/O Mohammad Hasan Razvi Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 102JIL W/O Priyank Manubhai Choksi Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 103X and Others. Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 104X & Ors. Versus Na 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 105J Versus A &...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 102-107]
Salman @Mufti Mohammad Salman Azhari S/O Mohammad Hasan Razvi Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 102
JIL W/O Priyank Manubhai Choksi Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 103
X and Others. Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 104
X & Ors. Versus Na 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 105
J Versus A & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
Tilakkumar Vijaykumar Mishra Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
Judgments/Orders
Gujarat High Court Dismisses Maulana Mufti Salman Azhari's Plea Against PASA Detention
Case Title - Salman @Mufti Mohammad Salman Azhari S/O Mohammad Hasan Razvi Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 102
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Maulana Mufti Salman Azhari challenging his detention under the Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act (PASA).
The Court ruled that despite Azhari's claims of not being given a proper opportunity to make a representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, the detention order was valid.
The division bench comprising Justices Ilesh J Vora and Vimal K Vyas observed, “As discussed, the contentions that proper opportunity to make representation as mandated under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, has not been given, having no any merits, as despite of language barrier the petitioner made effective representation through his brother as well as social worker and therefore, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, merely, non-supplying the documents and grounds of detention in the language understandable to him, would not vitiate his detention order.”
Case Title - JIL W/O Priyank Manubhai Choksi Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 103
The Gujarat High Court has recently ruled that family conversations secretly recorded by a wife to substantiate her claims of domestic violence and cruelty against the husband, his family are admissible as evidence, adding that in "family matters" all such documents become admissible regardless of their relevance or if they can be proved as per the Indian Evidence Act.
In doing so, the high court emphasized the relevance of such recordings, even if made without the husband's and in-laws' knowledge.
Case Title - JIL W/O Priyank Manubhai Choksi Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 103
The Gujarat High Court has recently observed that judicial magistrates have the power to order individuals, including accused persons, to provide voice samples for crime investigations.
Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Ritesh Sinha v State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, a single judge bench of Justice Gita Gopi in its July 16 judgment said, "Judicial Magistrate do have power to order a person to give a sample of his voice, such an order can be even against an accused, which would be for the purpose of investigation of crime".
Case Title: X and Others. Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 104
Setting aside an FIR lodged by a woman alleging dowry demand and cruelty by her husband and his family members, the Gujarat High Court emphasized that while tolerance should be foundation of a sound marriage, but often in such cases it is found that the family of the wife makes a "mountain out of a mole".
In its 44 page judgment a single judge bench of Justice Divyesh A Joshi noted that many times in such cases, the parents and close relatives of the wife make a "mountain of a mole". It thereafter said, “instead of salvaging the situation and making all possible endeavours to save the marriage, their action either due to ignorance or on account of sheer hatred towards the husband and his family members, brings about complete destruction of marriage on trivial issues".
Case Title - X & Ors. Versus Na
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 105
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed an FIR registered against a female lawyer engaged by a woman to pursue matrimonial case against her husband. The Court also granted relief to the wife and her mother, booked for abetting her husband's suicide.
Observing that there was no intention attributable to the three women, a single judge bench of Justice Divyesh A Joshi said, “the accused no.1 is mother-in-law, the accused no.2 is wife of the deceased, whereas the accused no.3 is an advocate by profession, who is taking care of legal remedy of the accused no.2. However bare perusal of the contents of the FIR coupled with the documents produced on record by learned advocates for the applicants, it cannot be said that there was any intention on their part to abet the commission of suicide to the deceased and therefore no mens rea can be attributed".
Case Title: J Versus A & Anr.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
The Gujarat High Court has recently held that a wife's right to maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) from a capable, able bodied husband is absolute, provided there are no disqualifying factors.
The Court emphasized that a husband's claim of inability to pay maintenance due to unemployment, poor business conditions, responsibilities towards other family members, or medical expenses is insufficient to deny this right.
Case Title - Tilakkumar Vijaykumar Mishra Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
In a recent ruling, the Gujarat High Court has granted relief to a student by directing the Mamlatdar to issue a domicile certificate to a student, Tilakkumar Mishra, waiving the minimum criteria of 10 years of continuous residency in the State of Gujarat during which the student lived in Abu Dhabi for three years to pursue his studies.
Justice Sunita K Vishen, who presided over the case, cited previous judgments and relevant rules, asserting “merely because student shifts himself outside the State of Gujarat for few years to pursue studies in a school outside the State of Gujarat as a boarding student and returns to the State of his permanent residence and also pursues further education of Standard-IX to XII, then in such circumstances the period for which he remained outside the State of Gujarat cannot be excluded while computing minimum continuous stay of ten years in the State of Gujarat.”
Other Developments
The Gujarat High Court Monday issued a notice on a Surat-based gaming zone's plea against its closure by the authorities following the TRP Game Zone fire in Rajkot which resulted in the death of 27 people earlier in May.
A single judge bench of Justice Sangeeta K. Vishen issued notice to the respondents including the state government and the Surat Municipal Corporation and listed the matter on August 12.
Various linguistic and religious minority schools told the Gujarat High Court on Monday that even though they are given aid by the government, it would not make them 'State' as understood under Article 12 of the Constitution of India as they are not carrying out any public duty.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi was hearing a batch of petitions moved by various linguistic and religious minority schools challenging the 2021 amendments to the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Act applying a centralised process of recruiting teachers and principals in such schools.
Expressing concern at the "indiscriminate" disposal of Ahmedabad's sewage and industrial waste into the Sabarmati river turning it into a "cesspool of dangerous" drug-resistant bacteria, the Gujarat High Court directed the concerned authorities to include all stakeholders for working out reutilisation of treated industrial wastewater.
A special division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati made the observations in its August 2 order while hearing a 2021 suo-motu plea concerning pollution of the Sabarmati river. The bench had earlier taken note of a video allegedly pointing to “flouting of standards” involving the Mega pipeline in the city.
Flagging various issues concerning traffic congestion in Ahmedabad, the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday asked the authorities to implement within 15 days the "mandatory requirement" of wearing of helmet by two wheeler riders including the pillion rider.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi were hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) moved by 20 residents of the city pertaining to the construction of a bridge at Ahmedabad's Panjrapole cross roads which they claimed is leading to reduction of green cover.
While hearing a matter wherein an alleged “agricultural land” had been declared as “excess land” by the authorities, the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (August 7) orally remarked that the “law of pleadings” cannot be changed by any “wrong practices”.
The high court made the observations after noting that certain factual averments formed part of the grounds mentioned in writ petition which was filed by the appellants before the single judge bench.
The Gujarat High Court Thursday issued notice on a plea seeking stay of an order setting aside an international arbitral award on various grounds including that the fee charged by the arbitral tribunal was exorbitant.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi said, “Let a notice be issued to the Respondent, returnable date 28-8-2024…It is clarified that the interim application in the instant appeal will be considered on the next date fixed. Any transfer or alienation of the assets by the Respondent would be subject to the result of the order passed in the interim application”.
While hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking improvement of a state highway in Mahisagar district, Gujarat High Court on Friday expressed its displeasure with the affidavit of the concerned official stating that the road was "not totally damaged but had developed potholes", observing that every sentence in a PIL is not to be opposed.
Taking a "strong exception" to the official's response, a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi said that it shows the official's “vehemence” which "cannot be approved of", adding that PILs are not adversarial in nature.
Gujarat High Court Initiates Suo Motu Plea On Appointment Of State Waqf Tribunal Member
The Gujarat High Court on Friday initiated a suo motu petition in connection with appointments made to the State Waqf Tribunal, while it was hearing a plea challenging the appointment of one of the member's–Anwar Hussain Shaikh.
Earlier this year, Shaikh was appointed as a member of the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal. However, this appointment faced opposition, with three persons, claiming to be the Mutawallis/Trustees of the Bibiji Masjid Rajpur (waqf in question), filing a Public Interest Litigation.