The Bombay High Court questioned whether the rule of law truly exists in Maharashtra, strongly criticising the failure to arrest a minister’s son in a criminal case. The court asked if the Chief Minister is “so helpless” that even ministers’ children continue to evade the police without consequences.
The Bombay High Court granted interim relief to singer Kumar Sanu in his Rs 50 crore defamation suit against ex-wife Rita Bhattacharya. Justice Milind Jadhav restrained her and media outlets from publishing defamatory or false statements about him publicly.
The Bombay High Court quashed a Rs 27 lakh GST demand, holding that transfer of MIDC leasehold rights to a third party is not taxable. The division bench set aside the anti-evasion notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act.
The Bombay High Court has sought the Maharashtra government’s response to UK-based doctor and YouTuber Sangram Patil’s plea seeking the quashing of an FIR over alleged objectionable social media posts against BJP leaders. The matter will be heard next on February 4.
The Bombay High Court held that factual findings of a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cannot be challenged through certiorari merely alleging insufficient evidence. Reappreciation of evidence lies outside writ jurisdiction, which must operate within strict limits under Article 226.
The Bombay High Court has criticised the growing tendency of litigants to blame their advocates for procedural delays without initiating disciplinary action or impleading them as parties, holding that such bald allegations cannot justify condonation of delay.
The Bombay High Court denied bail to Yusuf Khan, accused in the 2022 murder of Amravati chemist Umesh Kolhe, noting a terrorist gang formed to avenge dishonor to their faith. The case stems from post supporting Nupur Sharma.
The Maharashtra government told the Bombay High Court that granting parole to gangster Abu Salem risked absconding and could trigger serious diplomatic complications with Portugal, the extraditing nation. Opposing his plea, it suggested only two days emergency parole maximum.
The Bombay High Court held that a government-employed doctor earning Rs 1.38 lakh per month is financially independent and capable of maintaining herself decently and with dignity. The Court therefore set aside the maintenance awarded to her under the Domestic Violence Act.
The Bombay High Court held that a delayed Section 498A FIR filed 11 months after separation was intended to pressurize the husband, constituting cruelty. The Court set aside the decree of restitution of conjugal rights and remanded the maintenance issue for fresh consideration.
