Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 9 to January 15, 2023

Chanda Kochhar v. CBI 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 15

Namdeo s/o. Digambar Giri v. Seema 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 16

Nitin Pandurang Shejwal v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 17

Anubha Srivastava Sahai v. National Testing Agency and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 18

Johnson and Johnson Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 19

Nisha Pradeep Pandya alias Nisha Amit Gor & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 20

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. v. Ravindra Adhar Gosavi 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 21

Sonali Shivram Dupare and Ors. v. Thane District Central Co-operative Bank and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 22

Asian Paints Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 23

Roppen Transportation Services Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 24

Deepti Prakash Ghate v. NKGSB Co. Op. Bank Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 25

Shirish B. Patel and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 26

 Vrushali Jayesh Kore v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 27

Reports/Judgments

Non-Confession Of Accused Doesn't Amount To Non-Cooperation, Accused Must Be Released Forthwith If Arrest Doesn’t Satisfy Section 41 CrPC: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Chanda Kochhar v. CBI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 15

Merely saying that the accused has not co-operated and disclosed true and full facts of the case, cannot be the sole reason for arrest, the Bombay High Court said in its detailed order granting interim relief of bail to Ex-ICICI Bank CEO Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar in the ICICI Bank-Videocon loan fraud case.

A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Prithviraj Chavan further sought accountability from judicial officers remanding accused and ordering their detention after arrest.

Merely Saying Wife Refused DNA Test Of Child During Cross Examination Not Sufficient To Draw Adverse Inference: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Namdeo s/o. Digambar Giri v. Seema

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 16

The Bombay High Court dismissed a man’s petition challenging the grant of maintenance to his wife, observing that a claim regarding wife's refusal during cross examination to undergo DNA test for ascertaining the paternity of girl child is not sufficient to draw an adverse inference.

Justice Kishore C. Sant of the Aurangabad bench said: “Mere submission that question was asked in cross-examination to wife that whether she is ready to go for DNA test, where she has answered that she is not ready itself would not be sufficient to draw adverse inference against the wife.”

Bombay High Court Orders Status Quo On Police Constable Selection, Asks Tribunal To Hear Merit List Dispute Expeditiously

Case Title: Nitin Pandurang Shejwal v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 17

The Bombay High Court refused to interfere in the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal’s decision to refer a dispute regarding the 2019 recruitment of police constables to a larger bench despite disapproving the procedure adopted by the tribunal.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep v. Marne said since the reference has already made to larger Bench and since both the sets of parties are already before the Tribunal, ends of justice would meet if the larger Bench of the Tribunal is permitted to decide the controversy before it.

While refusing to interfere with the tribunal's decision to refer the matter to a larger bench, the court made it clear that its decision is not a precedent. The court further said the Tribunal adopted procedure "unknown to law" by recalling its order in the first set of applications while hearing the second set, the court said. It is "incomprehensible" how the tribunal passed any order in the first set of applications while hearing altogether different applications, it added. The tribunal should have decided the second set of applications by directing impleadment of all applicants of the first set, the court said.

Would Not Be Appropriate: Bombay High Court Refuses To Order Postponement Of JEE Mains 2023

Case Title: Anubha Srivastava Sahai v. National Testing Agency and Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 18

The Bombay High Court refused to restrain National Testing Agency from conducting JEE Mains 2023 examination on the scheduled dates.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep Marne said that any orders passed to postpone may have a cascading effect and extraordinary circumstances do not appear to exist for restraining NTA from holding JEE (Main) in January 2023. “Lakhs of students must have been preparing for the examination. On the basis of the present PIL on behalf of a child right activist, it would not be appropriate to direct postponement of the examination scheduled pan India.”, the court said.

Bombay High Court Quashes Orders Cancelling Johnson & Johnson's License For Baby Powder Production, Says FDA Action 'Arbitrary'

Case Title: Johnson and Johnson Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 19

The Bombay High Court quashed the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration’s orders cancelling Johnson and Johnson’s license to manufacture its baby powder at the Mulund factory.

Johnson and Johnson will now be able to manufacture and sell its baby powder.

A division bench of Justice Gautam Patel and Justice SG Dige said FDA's action was unreasonably delayed and therefore arbitrary. "An administrator cannot use a hammer to kill an ant," said the court.

The court said it is not reasonable that the moment one sample from the batch is found not of standard quality, the license is cancelled. "It's an extreme approach. [There is] nothing to show FDA has adopted such a stringent standard with other J&J products or manufacturers," the bench said.

Observing that a watchdog like FDA is necessary, the court however said it cannot protract proceedings for weeks and months.

Bombay High Court Orders Stay On Transfer of Adoption Cases To District Magistrates, Asks Single Judge To Continue Hearing Matters

Case Title: Nisha Pradeep Pandya alias Nisha Amit Gor & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 20

The Bombay High Court granted interim stay on transfer of pending adoption matters to the District Magistrates and directed the courts to continue with adjudication in such cases.

The division bench of Justice G. S. Patel and Justice S. G. Dige, in a writ petition challenging the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act 2021 to the extent that the word ‘Court’ is replaced with ‘District Magistrates’, said that if the petition succeeds, any orders passed by the District Magistrates will immediately become vulnerable.

“While considering interim relief, we must bear in mind the primary objective which is the interest of the children and infants who are to be adopted whether these are domestic or foreign adoptions. The concerns of the adoptive parents are also involved," the court added.

Minor Contradiction In Deposition Would Not Render Entire Evidence Unacceptable: Bombay HC Upholds MSRTC ATI's Dismissal Due To Bribery Allegation

Case Title: Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. v. Ravindra Adhar Gosavi

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 21

Observing that a minor contradiction in witness deposition wouldn’t render the entire evidence of the witness unacceptable, the Bombay High Court upheld the dismissal of an Assistant Traffic Inspector (ATI) of MSRTC for allegedly demanding and accepting bribe.

Justice Sandeep V. Marne of Aurangabad bench allowed a writ petition by MSRTC challenging Labour Court’s decision to quash the ATI’s dismissal. There was a contradiction between the charge sheet in the domestic inquiry and the complainant’s testimony about who exactly accepted the bribe amount.

“existence of minor contradiction is deposition would not render the entire evidence of a witness completely unacceptable...Considering the overall evidence of the Complainant Shri. Dhivare, it does appear probable that the Respondent not only demanded the gratification but also probably accepted the same. Whether he accepted it himself or through Shri, Kayasth is not the relevant factor”, the court said.

Gross Irregularities: Bombay High Court Quashes Recruitment Process of Thane Co-operative Bank

Case Title: Sonali Shivram Dupare and Ors. v. Thane District Central Co-operative Bank and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 22

The Bombay High quashed the recruitment process of Senior Banking Assistant and Junior Banking Assistant of the Thane District Central Co-operative Bank finding gross irregularities in the recruitment process. The court noted that no affidavit has been filed by any respondent denying the affidavits alleging irregularities. Therefore, it court concluded that there were gross irregularities in the recruitment.

The court reiterated that the word ‘may’ can mean ‘must’ or ‘shall’ in context. When discretion is conferred on a public authority coupled with an obligation, the word ‘may’ should be construed as a command, the court stated relying on Mohan Singh and Ors. v. International Airport Authority.

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Order On Asian Paints In View Of Full Disclosure

Case Title: Asian Paints Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 23

The Bombay High Court quashed the reassessment order as the assessee, Asian Paints, disclosed fully and truly all facts material and necessary for the assessment.

The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Valmiki SA Menezes observed that the reasons do not disclose what material or fact was not disclosed by the assessee.

The petitioner/assessee is a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling paints, varnish, primer, etc. The business is carried on through various dealers who purchase the goods from the petitioner on a principal-to-principal basis and sell them to the ultimate customers.

Functioning Without License: Bombay High Court Compels Rapido to Shut Down Operations In Maharashtra Till 20th January

Case Title: Roppen Transportation Services Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 24

After stinging observations from the Bombay High Court, bike taxi aggregator Rapido undertook to close down all its services – bike taxi, rickshaw and food delivery in Maharashtra till January 20, 2023.

Rapido informed the court that the app has now become inoperative in the state.

A division bench of Justices GS Patel and Justice SG Dige told the petitioner it would dismiss the petition with costs if they refused to shut down their services after the bench was informed that Rapido doesn’t have license to operate any of these services.

The court was hearing Rapido’s plea challenging the state’s refusal to grant licenses to entities like it.

Award Against Guarantor Who Is Not Member Of Multi State Co-Op Society, Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Deepti Prakash Ghate v. NKGSB Co. Op. Bank Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 25

The Bombay High Court set aside an award passed pursuant to an arbitral reference made under Section 84(1) of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 (MSCS Act), since the award debtor was not a member of the Co-operative Society.

The bench of Justice Manish Pitale ruled that a dispute, which is not covered under Section 84 (1) of the MSCS Act, would not be capable of being referred to arbitration. Thus, the Court concluded that the arbitral award was rendered without jurisdiction against the petitioner/ award debtor.

The principal borrower, M/s. Erica Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., was advanced a loan and cash credit facility by the respondent Bank, NKGSB Co. Op. Bank Ltd (a Multi-State Co-operative Society). A Deed of Guarantee was executed and the petitioner, Deepti Prakash Ghate, along with other parties, were made guarantors.

EIA Report Doesn't Show Construction Against Rules: Bombay High Court Refuses To Quash BDD Chawls Redevelopment

Case Title: Shirish B. Patel and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 26

The Bombay High Court refused to interfere in redevelopment of over 207 BDD (Bombay Development Directorate) Chawls at N.M. Joshi Marg, Naigaon and Worli in Mumbai observing that the projects have all the necessary environmental clearances.

“The environmental clearance given by the Competent Authorities, does not demonstrate that the construction activity is against the provisions of any rules and regulations in force. The contention of the Petitioners cannot be accepted.”

Division bench of acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Santosh Chapalgaonkar disposed of a PIL challenging the redevelopment schemes of the century-old chawls claiming that the redevelopment will jeopardize the health of the residents.

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Under Section 498A IPC Against Judicial Officer

Case Title:  Vrushali Jayesh Kore v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 27

The Bombay High Court recently quashed an FIR against a judicial officer accused of subjecting her brother’s wife to physical and mental cruelty.

A division bench of Justice Anuja Prabhudessai and Justice R. M. Joshi of Aurangabad said that this case of Section 498A IPC is being used to settle personal score.

The court reiterated that an individual’s right to reputation and dignity is an integral part of Articles 21 and 19(2) of the Constitution.

The court said that unfounded criminal charges and long drawn criminal prosecution can have serious consequences such as mental drama, humiliation, and monetary loss. “It is to be noted that loss of character or bruised reputation cannot be restored even by judicial reprieve”, the court added.

Other Developments

Bombay High Court Issues Notice To Attorney General On Anil Ambani's Plea Challenging Retrospective Applicability Of Black Money Act

The Bombay High Court questioned the retrospective application of the Black Money Act in a petition filed by Anil Ambani, Chairman of Reliance ADA Group.

A division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and SG Dige issued notice to the Attorney General of India as Ambani has challenged the vires of the Act regarding retrospective criminalisation under the Act.

Ambani claims the IT department is taking action against him for transactions which relate back to the year 2006-2007 (i.e., 10 years before the promulgation of the BM Act with effect from 01.07.2015), and the year 2012-13.

100 Cr Defamation Suit | 'People Responsible For Saving Four Million Lives Being Branded As Mass Murderers': Serum Institute To Bombay High Court

Four million lives have been saved using vaccines, Covishield manufacturer Serum Institute of India told the Bombay High Court on Friday while responding to allegations that the vaccine is harmful.

The submission was made before a bench of Justice Riyaz Chagla during the hearing a Rs. 100 crore defamation suit filed by SII and its CEO Adar Poonawala against a social media influencer and another individual and restrain them from posting defamatory content against the company.

"People who are responsible for saving four million lives are now being branded as mass murderers. You may have your views but you can't publish it in this manner," Senior Advocate Aspi Chinoy submitted on Friday.

Cyrus Mistry Accident | How Can All This Be Considered In A PIL? Bombay High Court To Litigant Seeking Culpable Homicide Charge Against Dr Pandole

A PIL has been filed in the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to charge Dr Anahita Pandole (55) with culpable homicide under Section 304 (II) of the IPC for allegedly causing the death of Cyrus Mistry (54) and his friend Jehangir Pandole (49) in a vehicular accident in September 2022. The plea further seeks a direction for adding her husband Darius Pandole as an accused in the case.

It is the petitioner’s case that since Pandole had "consumed alcohol" the night before the accident, she shouldn’t just be charged under section 304A of the IPC for causing death due to rash and negligent driving punishable with upto two-years imprisonment. Moreover, her husband was aware of this and therefore he should be charged with abetment, the petitioner has said.

'State Has To Take A Decision': Bombay High Court Questions Maharashtra Govt For Its Indecision On Policy For Bike Taxis

Hearing bike taxi aggregator Rapido’s plea challenging the State’s refusal to grant licenses to entities like it, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday said the State cannot remain in a limbo when it comes to taking a decision in the matter.

A division bench of Justice G. S. Patel and Justice S. G. Dige said that the state cannot discriminate between different entities. “One situation we find unbalanced is to allow others….But in the meanwhile stopping Mr. Chinoy (Rapido) to do exactly what others are doing. You can't give someone special treatment," said the bench.

The state in a notification dated December 29, 2022 had said that there is no scheme for bike taxis and no fare structure policy in place.

ICICI Bank Loan Fraud Case: Bombay High Court Reserves Order On Venugopal Dhoot's Plea For Interim Bail

The Bombay High Court reserved its order on the petition filed by Videocon Group promoter Venugopal Dhoot seeking interim release on bail in the ICICI Bank - Videocon loan fraud case.

Dhoot alleged that his arrest on December 26, 2022 by the CBI was illegal as he was taken into custody despite cooperating with investigators. Therefore, the mandate under Section 41 of the CrPC wasn't followed, he argued. He has sought quashing of the FIR and remand orders, and bail in the interim.

The CBI counsel said there was no illegality in arrest.

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan had earlier granted bail to co-accused ex-ICICI bank MD Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar.

Videocon Group Chairman Venugopal Dhoot has approached the Bombay High Court in a quashing petition alleging illegal arrest by the CBI in the ICICI Bank – Videocon loan fraud case and sought his release.

Dhoot has claimed that his arrest and subsequent remand is without any basis and violates his fundamental rights. He has argued the CBI wrongly claimed he hasn’t cooperated with investigators. My statement was recorded on December 22, 2022 and I appeared again after belatedly learning about the section 41A notice issued to me, Dhoot has told the court.

Central Government Extends Tenure Of Justice Abhay Ahuja As Additional Judge Of Bombay High Court 

The Central Government extended the tenure of Justice Abhay Ahuja as Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court by one year from March 4, 2023.

Bombay High Court Questions Multiple FIRs Against NCP’s Anand Paranjape For Slogans And Comments Against CM Eknath Shinde

The Maharashtra government undertook not to arrest Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader and former MP from the Kalyan Constituency - Anand Paranjape - in the 11 FIRs registered against him after he allegedly raised slogans and posted comments against Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

A division bench comprising Justices Revati Mohita Dere and Prithviraj Chavan questioned the prosecution on the multiplicity of litigation and asked the state’s counsel to see if all FIRs, barring one case be closed. The court noted that identical sections were applied in the FIRs.

Post Against Sharad Pawar: Marathi Actor Ketaki Chital Moves Application In Bombay HC To Make NCP Supremo Party To Her Quashing Plea

Marathi film actor Ketaki Chitale has filed an application in Bombay High Court to make Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) supremo Sharad Pawar a party-respondent to her plea seeking quashing of 22 FIRs registered against her for a Facebook post.

Chitale was arrested on May 14, after she shared the post allegedly written by one advocate Nitin Bhave that refers to an "80-year-old man Pawar" and calls him a "mosquito" who "hates Brahmins." She was arrested on the basis of an FIR filed by Swapnil Netke, a local NCP functionary, in Thane district's Kalwa police station.

She was granted bail after approaching the High Court to quash the cases against her.

Chitale claims that Pawar is a public figure and most of the first informants are either his close aides or associated with him directly and/or indirectly. “Therefore Mr. Sharad Pawar is a proper and necessary party to the proceedings of this petition,” the plea read.

'Will Fight Till Last Breath, Want My Son's Killers Punished' : 74-Year-Old Mother's Quest For Justice In 20-Year-Old Custodial Death Case

A septuagenarian mother’s quest for justice for her son’s death 20 years ago has brought her before the Bombay High Court once again in a petition seeking to add names of four police officers as accused.

Asiya Begum, 74, is the mother of Khwaja Yunus who was about 27-year-old when he “disappeared” from the police’s hold in 2003 while being taken for investigations from Mumbai to Aurangabad. Yunus was a working software engineer in the United Arab Emirates before his arrest. He was taken into custody by Mumbai’s Ghatkopar police for his alleged involvement in a blast case in a Bus which killed two passengers and injured many others. Initially led by Yunus’s father Khwaja Ayub and later by the mother Asiya, first a Sessions Judge and later the Bombay High Court came to a conclusion that Yunus’s disappearance needed to be investigated as a murder case.