Sayaji Dashrath Kawade v. The State of Maharashtra 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 324
Priya Kedar Gokhale and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 325
Uttamrao Rambhaji Shelke v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 326
Sunita and Ors v. Sandipan Dyanoba Tathapare and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 327
Vikas Ramji Yadav Through Ramji Yadav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 328
Kishor Manohar Kamble and Anr v. Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 329
Swanath Foundation v. Union of India and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 330
Sunil Gupta and Ors. v. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 331
Agisilaos Demetriades v. The Union of India and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 332
Arun Krishnachandra Goswami v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 333
Morals & Ethics Can’t Form Basis For Conviction Under Prevention Of Corruption Act, Proof Of Demand & Acceptance Of Bribe Mandatory: Bombay HC
Case Title: Sayaji Dashrath Kawade v. The State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 324
The Bombay High Court held that a person cannot be convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (POCA) on the basis of morals and ethics. The basic requirement of demand and acceptance of bribe must be proven by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.
Justice S. D. Kulkarni overturned the conviction in a criminal appeal observing –
“The corruption is spreading like cancer in our great nation. The disease of the corruption has been with us since long time. The common man is facing this rampant corruption, but a person for the charges of corruption under the Act cannot be convicted on moral and ethics. When the law provides certain mandatory requirements for proving offence, no shortcut is permitted.“
Candidates Born In Maharashtra But Completed 10th/ 12th From Outside Due To Parent’s Army Posting Entitled To State Quota In Admissions: High Court
Case Title: Priya Kedar Gokhale and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 325
The Bombay High Court read down rule for Maharashtra quota reservation with respect to admission in 5-year law program in the State for candidates who are born/ domiciled in Maharashtra but who could not complete their 10th/ 12th from the State on account of their parent’s army posting.
The court stated that the condition of passing 10th and 12th standard from Maharashtra may not be unreasonable, however, relaxation should be made for cases where the candidate does not have a choice, such as the service conditions of the parents due to which they are posted throughout the country in the service of the nation.
God Is Not A Fiefdom Of Ruling Party: Bombay High Court Cancels Appointment Of Managing Committee Of Sai Baba Shirdi Trust
Case title: Uttamrao Rambhaji Shelke v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. with connected matter
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 326
The Bombay High Court’s Aurangabad bench quashed the appointment of the managing committee of the Sai Baba Shirdi Trust observing that trustees to a public trust must be appointed for the betterment of devotees and not for the “ruling government to accommodate their party workers or politicians”.
A division bench of Justices RD Dhanuka and SG Mehare held that the committee chaired by MLA Ashutosh Kale was illegally appointed by the previous Maha Vikas Aghadi led government in 2021, violating provisions of the special Shree Saibaba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi) Act, 2004 as well as directions of the court.
“Wife Knows Husband’s Salary”: Bombay HC Enhances Compensation To Driver’s Kin Under Employees’ Compensation Act Sans Salary Slip In 19 Yr Old Case
Case title: Sunita and Ors v. Sandipan Dyanoba Tathapare and Anr
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 327
The Bombay High Court’s Aurangabad bench enhanced compensation awarded to a deceased truck driver’s kin under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 relying on the oral testimony of the wife.
Justice SG Dige observed that the labour court wrongly discarded the wife’s evidence in the absence of a salary slip in a 19-year-old-case.
Bombay High Court Orders Inquiry Into Father’s Allegations That Police Prosecuted His Minor Son For Murder As Adult On Failure To Offer Bribe
Case Title: Vikas Ramji Yadav Through Ramji Yadav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 328
Bombay High Court ordered an inquiry to be conducted into a father’s allegations that his son was being wrongfully treated as an adult in a murder case despite being a juvenile.
Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Madhav Jamdar passed the order in a petition praying for a writ of habeas corpus for release or production of the petitioner detained at the Thane Central Prison.
The court directed the Additional Commissioner of Police, North Region, Mumbai, to conduct an inquiry into the allegations made by the father against the Police Inspector (PI) investigating the case.
Approval Granted By Pune Municipal Corporation To Straighten Ambil Odha Stream Valid: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Kishor Manohar Kamble and Anr v. Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 329
The Bombay High Court held that the approval granted by the Pune Municipal Corporation and the Deputy Municipal Commissioner (Vigilance) to straighten the Ambil Odha stream is valid as it is in line with the Town Development Scheme of 1989.
Justices R. D. Dhanuka and M. G. Sewlikar dismissed two writ petitions challenging the decision of Pune Municipal Corporation to straighten the Ambil Odha stream flowing through the city of Pune.
‘Anath’ Not Stigmatic: Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL To Change Nomenclature For Orphans In Govt Records
Case Title: Swanath Foundation v. Union of India and Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 330
The Bombay High Court dismissed a PIL seeking to change the nomenclature for an orphan in Government records from “anath” to “swanath” or self-made observing that there was no stigma attached to the word “anath”.
A division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar said that courts must be alive to the laxman rekha within which they must function.
[Debt Recovery] Service Of Summons Mandatory, Not Dispensed With Party Entering Appearance By Filing Vakalatnama: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Sunil Gupta and Ors. v. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 331
The Bombay High Court held that the appearance of an Advocate and filing of a Vakalatnama does not do away with the requirement to serve summons in a debt recovery application observing that serving of summons is a mandatory procedural requirement.
The court held that even assuming that requirement of service of summons was fulfilled, the order is still an ex-parte order as the advocate stopped appearing before the tribunal. There are sufficient grounds to set aside the order under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Bombay High Court Allows Agisilaos Demetriades’ Plea To Quash Preventive Detention Under PIT-NDPS Act
Case Title: Agisilaos Demetriades v. The Union of India and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 332
The Bombay High Court quashed a detention order under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, issued against Agisilaos Demetriades – brother of actor Arjun Rampal’s girlfriend – after he claimed that certain documents were provided to him in Hindi, a language he doesn’t understand.
SARFAESI – Dues Of Secured Creditor Superior To Dues To State Govt Departments: Bombay High Court Full Bench
Case Title: Arun Krishnachandra Goswami v. Union of India
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 333
The Bombay High Court directed that the amounts which have been wrongly paid to railways by the petitioner should be paid to the CGST authorities and SGST authorities within two weeks.
The division bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice A.S. Doctor noted that the taxpayer has made a mistake and instead of paying the Government of India through the CGST authorities and the State of Maharashtra through the SGST authorities, the entire amount was paid to the Government of India through Indian Railways.
411 Deaths Due To Malnutrition: Bombay High Court Summons Nandurbar District Collector
Case Title: Dr. Rajendra Sadanand Burma and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
The Bombay High Court on Monday summoned the Collector of Nandurbar district over high number of child and maternal deaths in the district due to malnutrition and lack of adequate medical facilities.
The court directed that report titled “Rapid Assessment of Child and Maternal Health by Team” submitted by intervenor Bandu Sane be served to the Collector who will file an affidavit in reply to this report and the petitions before September 21st, 2022. The court directed the collector to appear in person on September 23rd, 2022.
The court also directed the Director of Health Services to submit a comprehensive report about the issue before September 21st, 2022.
Bombay High Court CJ Dipankar Datta Recuses From Hearing PIL Seeking To Expedite Process For Appointment Of Judges
Case Title: Dr. Sharmila Ghuge v. Union of India and Ors.
Chief Justice Dipankar Datta of Bombay High Court recused from hearing a Public Interest Litigation praying for the process of appointment of judges at the high court to be expedited.
The PIL, filed by Dr. Sharmila Ghuge, professor of law at Mumbai University also prays that retired high court judges be appointed as ad-hoc judges till the process of fulfilling the sanctioned strength of 94 regular judges is completed.
Advocates’ Association Approaches Bombay HC Against National Consumer Commission’s Clean Chit To Judge Who Decided His Own Case
Case Title: Consumer Courts Advocates Associates v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission & Ors.
The Consumer Courts Advocates’ Association recently approached the Bombay High Court against the National Consumer Commission’s clean chit to a member-judge of the Maharashtra Consumer Commission who decided his own case.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s (NCRDC) order reads like a “character certificate” without giving the complainant a chance to be heard or even considering other complaints against the same member judge, the petition filed under Article 226 states.
Eight Law Students Move High Court Over Delayed Result By GLC Mumbai; Seek State Bar Enrolment, Admission To LLM
Case title – Abhishek Vishnudev Mishra and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Eight students of Government Law College, Mumbai (GLC) affiliated with Mumbai University, have filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court praying for declaration of their final semester results.
The petition alleges that the petitioners’ results were not declared along with the rest of the students. Another sixty-four students of the Mumbai University are facing similar issues. The delay in declaration of results has caused the students to lose employment and higher education opportunities.