Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 16 - December 22, 2024
Sanjana Dadmi
23 Dec 2024 9:30 AM IST
2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 636 to 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 649
Nominal Index:
Shriraj Nageshwar Aepurwar vs. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 636
ABC vs Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 637
Gujarati Kelavani Mandal & Anr. vs. The General Manager, Central Railway & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 638
M/s. Asahi India Glass Ltd. vs.Nadeem A. A. Dolare, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 639
Jaiprakash Bawiskar The State of Maharashtra & Anr, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 640
Rajendra Vishwanath Moon v. The State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 641
Adarsh Kumar Jain and Others v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 642
Sunita Balaji Tiwari and Ors. v. Protrans Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 643
Faiyaz Shaikh vs. State, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 644
M/s. Venus Worldwide Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 645
ABC vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 646
Case Title: Amol Kirtikar vs Ravindra Waikar, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 647
SecLink Technologies Corporation vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 648
Lalit Modi vs BCCI and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 649
Judgments/Final Orders:
Case title: Shriraj Nageshwar Aepurwar vs. State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 636
The Bombay High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on a writ petitioner alleging that a contract awarded by the Maharashtra government to Adani Power for supplying electricity was a "scam" and that the former Chief Minister was involved in corrupt practices while awarding the contract.
Not finding any merits in the petitioner's arguments, a division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar said "In our opinion, filing of such a petition/public interest litigation containing unsubstantiated and unsupported reckless averments runs the risk of some times even the good cause being lost."
No Mother Would Help Her Son Commit Rape By Spiking Victim's Drink: Bombay High Court Quashes Case
Case Title: ABC vs Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 637
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad, recently held that a mother will never help her son to rape a woman by herself spiking the victim's drink.
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Rohit Joshi quashed the First Information Report (FIR) lodged against a man and his mother, both booked for raping a woman and impregnating her.
Case title: Gujarati Kelavani Mandal & Anr. vs. The General Manager, Central Railway & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 638
Disposing of a petition seeking safety measures from police authorities for female students attending college located near a slum, the Bombay High Court directed the police take all appropriate steps and measures to ensure the safety of the students adding that any laxity on their part maybe viewed seriously by the court.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar passed the order after noting the police's affidavit stating the steps taken by it including deployment of beat marshals, mobile vans for survelliance as well designated beat marshals for the college.
Case Title: M/s. Asahi India Glass Ltd. vs.Nadeem A. A. Dolare
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 639
A single-judge bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne quashed a Labour Court's order directing reinstatement along with back wages to a worker dismissed for sleeping on duty. The High Court observed that while sleeping on duty was indeed a misconduct, the penalty of dismissal was disproportionate.
Case title: Jaiprakash Bawiskar The State of Maharashtra & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 640
The Bombay High Court has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought to direct the State authorities to take appropriate measures for the recovery of excise duty and interest said to have been illegally collected by the wine manufacturers.
Part-Time Service Recognized For Pension Benefits Under Old Scheme: Bombay HC
Case Title: Rajendra Vishwanath Moon v. The State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 641
A division bench of Justices Nitin W. Sambre and Vrushali V. Joshi held that part-time teaching service should count towards pension benefits under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982. It confirmed that the petitioner, who moved from part-time to full-time teaching, was entitled to pensionary benefits starting from his first appointment in 1999.
Special Allowance For Bank Employees On Deputation Cannot Be Excluded From Pay Fixation: Bombay HC
Case title: Adarsh Kumar Jain and Others v. Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 642
Justices Mangesh S. Patil and Prafulla S. Khubalkar ruled that employees of nationalized banks deputed to Debts Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) are entitled to include “special allowance” for the purpose of fixation. The court quashed part of a 2020 government communication that excluded the allowance from pay fixation.
Case title: Sunita Balaji Tiwari and Ors. v. Protrans Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 643
A single judge bench consisting of Justice Nitin B. Suryawanshi overturned a Labour Court order that dismissed a compensation claim under the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923. The claim was filed by the family of a truck driver who succumbed to an accident at work. The court established that the deceased was indeed employed by the Respondent.
Case title: Faiyaz Shaikh vs. State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 644
The Maharashtra government on Tuesday told the Bombay High Court that it has permitted the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) to carry out a rally in Pune's Baramati area to commemorate the Constitution Day and also to celebrate the birth anniversaries of Bharat Ratna Maulana Azad and Tipu Sultan on December 24.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan while accepting the statement, refused to quash a notice issued under section 149 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which clearly mandates that the procession should not stop nearby any religious place, particularly temple in this case. The judges, however, pulled up the State Police for always citing 'law and order situation' in such cases.
Case title: M/s. Venus Worldwide Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 645
The Bombay High Court recently imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on 'Venus Worldwide Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.' for "taking a chance" by filing a writ petition challenging a review order passed under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002, despite having a remedy of appeal under the 2002 Act.
Case Title: ABC vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 646
The Bombay High Court recently quoted American civil rights activist Maya Angelou while permitting a Hindu girl to continue her 'live-in relationship' with a Muslim boy, observing that love recognises no barriers.
A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande in an order passed on December 13, ordered the release of the girl noting that she was an adult and had a right to exercise her 'right to choice.'
Case Title: Amol Kirtikar vs Ravindra Waikar
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 647
The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed the election petition filed by Amol Kirtikar, a candidate from Uddhav Thackeray faction, who had challenged the election of Ravindra Waikar, a leader from Eknath Shinde faction, to the 18th Lok Sabha from Mumbai North-West constituency.
Single-judge Justice Sandeep Marne held that Kirtikar failed to establish how the alleged acts on part of the Returning Officer (RO), or Waikar 'materially affected' the outcome of the elections.
Case title: SecLink Technologies Corporation vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 648
The Bombay High Court today (December 20), upheld the tender awarded to Adani Properties Pvt. Ltd. by the State Government for redevelopment of Dharavi slums.
In doing so, a division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar found that the cancellation of an earlier tender and award of a new tender to Adani Propertied was not arbitrary or irrational.
Case Title: Lalit Modi vs BCCI and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 649
The Bombay High Court on Thursday imposed of cost of Rs 1 lakh on former chief of the Indian Premiere League (IPL) Lalit Modi for filing 'misconceived' petition seeking directions to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to pay on his behalf the penalty of Rs 10.65 crores imposed on him by the ED for violating the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA).
A division bench of Justice Mahesh Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain noted that despite clear orders of the Supreme Court, passed way back in 2005 in Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors that the BCCI does not answer the definition of 'State' within the meaning assigned to this term under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, Modi has filed the instant frivolous petition in 2018, seeking writ orders against the BCCI.
Other Orders/Observations:
The Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Maharashtra government to consider proper implementation of an Advisory issued by the Union Government way back in 2010, to grant medical bail or to put in house arrest, prisoners, who are identified to be 'terminally ill.'
A division bench of the Bombay High Court has stayed the operation of a single judge's order against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., which had ordered the company to pay an amount of Rs 4 crores for violating the Court's ad-interim order in relation to a trademark infringement case filed by Mangalam Organics Ltd.
A fresh Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the notification issued by the Maharashtra Governor on 14 October 2024, where 7 MLCs (Member of Legislative Council) were nominated to the State Legislative Council.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court seeking directions to the State for implementing the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2020 and for ensuring the safety of passengers travelling in transport aggregators vehicles.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) had been filed in the Bombay High Court seeking directions to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to withdraw the permission granted to the Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI) in relation to advertisements of mutual funds.
In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the issue of illegal hoardings and banners erected by political parties in public places, the Bombay High Court expressed its frustrations over the continued violation of its earlier directions.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday (December 19) issued contempt notices to various political parties in the State in relation to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning illegal hoardings and banners erected by political parties in public places.
The Bombay High Court was on Thursday informed that the parents of the now deceased accused in the Badlapur sexual encounter case, have been surviving by begging on streets as no one is giving them any job and even they have been forced to leave their own house and live on footpaths.
Bombay High Court Asks Maha Govt To Send Hindu Boy And Muslim Girl To Newly Notified 'Safe Homes' For Interfaith & Intercaste Couples
The Bombay High Court on Thursday ordered the Maharashtra government to make arrangements for sending a Hindu boy and Muslim girl to the State's newly notified 'Safe Homes' meant for 'interfaith' couples, for their protection.
The Bombay High Court on Friday while expressing displeasure over the 'harsh' air pollution in Mumbai, told the authorities that they cannot rely on the God for winds to clear the air and instead the authorities need to show some 'will' to cut down the air pollution in the city.
After it was informed that a Muslim man, who along with his family was allegedly forced to chant "Jai Shri Ram" on a Mumbai-bound train, had escaped an allegedly "planned" accident in Kankavli, the Bombay High Court on Thursday (December 19), warned the state police that if anything happens to the man or if he dies, the concerned police officers will be held accountable for the same.
