Read Time: 21 minutes
1. [Bail To Man Who Killed In Job Scam] A single-judge bench of the Bombay High Court has recently granted bail to a man accused of murdering another man while luring him by offering a job after the police informed the court that there was no evidence recovered against him. The accused was initially booked under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. However, after the victim died, a crime under Section 302 was registered. The victim was a need of a job in 2021 and the accused was working with a company called Job Street Recruitment.
Bench: Justice SM Modak.
Case Title: Sagar Chandramauli Ponnala vs State of Maharashtra.
Click here to read more.
2. [Parent Can't Deprive Child To Meet Other Parent] A division bench of the Bombay High Court recently observed that parents have absolute right over the life and destiny of their children but either parent cannot deprive the child from having the company of another parent. The high court was hearing a habeas corpus plea filed by the father of an 8-year-old child who was studying in Udupi along with their mother and the mother's second husband. The bench in its order also noted that the mother and the second husband were threatening the child to ensure that he does not meet his biological father.
Bench: Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Gauri Godse.
Case title: ABC vs XYZ,
3. [Contempt Notice To IO] A division bench of the Bombay High Court has last week issued a contempt notice to the Assistant Police Inspector of Hinjewadi Police Station, Pune for charge sheeting a National Defence Academy professor maliciously. The High Court was hearing a plea in which the petitioner had received a certificate from Sassoon Hospital, Pune, stating that they had a disability of 41%. However, the original certificate went missing and the petitioner was charged with forgery under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Following an investigation, a chargesheet was filed in July 2017. However, on September 9, 2016, the hospital communicated with the Investigating Officer, informing them that the original record of the aforementioned certificate had been located.
Bench: Justice Nitin W Sambre and Justice RN Laddha,
Case title: Kamal Chandra Tiwari vs State of Maharashtra.
Clcik here to read more.
4. [BJP MP's Caste Certificate] A division bench of the Bombay High Court has recently quashed and set aside the order of the scrutiny committee that invalidated the caste certificate issued in favour of BJP MP Jaysiddheshwar Shivacharya Mahaswami while observing that mandatory procedures under Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) Act, 2020 were not followed.
Bench: Justice Sunil B Shukre and Justice Rajesh Patil.
Case title: Dr Jaysiddheshwar Shivacharya Mahaswamiji vs State of Maharashtra.
5. [Mumbai Train Blast] 17 years after the Mumbai Train Blast on 11 July 2006 the Bombay High Court is yet to commence its hearing for the confirmation of the death penalty awarded to 5 convicts by a Special Court under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA) and the appeals filed by the convicts against the conviction order of the special court. The plea filed by the Maharashtra Government, seeking confirmation of the death sentence, and the appeal filed by the convicts have been circulating among various benches of the Bombay High Court since the imposition of the death penalty in 2015.
6.[PIL For Priority Hearing For Senior Citizen] In a Public Interest Litigation filed by a Retired Army Officer seeking priority hearing for senior citizens in all courts in Maharashtra, the Bombay High court last week remarked that the petition was poorly researched. The division bench of the Bombay High Court also remarked that the petition looked like an article and did not add necessary government departments as a party.
Bench: Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Arif Doctor.
Case title: Captain Haresh Gaglani vs State of Maharashtra.
7. [Virtual Hearings in DRT] A division bench of the Bombay High Court issued a notice last week to the Registrar of the Debt Recovery Tribunal in plea seeking video conferencing facilities in the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The high court was addressing a plea filed by Advocate Mathew Nedumbara, who sought video conferencing hearings in the high court, debt recovery tribunals, and all district courts throughout Maharashtra.
Bench: Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Arif Doctor
Case title: Mathew Nedumbara vs High Court of Bombay
Clcik here to read more
8. [Nawab Malik] A single judge bench of the Bombay High Court rejected the medical bail plea filed by NCP Leader and Former Cabinet Minister Nawab Malik in PMLA case registered by the Enforcement Directorate against Malik. While rejecting the bail plea Justice Anuja Prabhudesai said that she will continue hearing the plea on merits after 2 weeks. Malik had approached the high court after a Special PMLA Court had rejected his bail plea in December 2022. The Enforcement Directorate had opposed the bail plea of Nawab Malik while arguing that Malik had connections with Haseena Parker and Salim Patel who are gang members of Dawood Ibrahim.
Bench: Justice Anuja Prabhudesai.
Case title: Nawab Malik vs ED.
9. [IT Rules] A division bench of the Bombay High Court last week while hearing the plea challenging amended IT Rules questioned if members of a political party moving to another party in Maharashtra be part of the government business.The question was posed by the division bench while hearing a plea challenging the amended IT Rules establishing a fact check unit. The high court is hearing petitions filed by stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra, the Editors Guild of India, 28 regional channels and the Association of Indian Magazines
Bench: Justice GS Patel and Justice Neela Gokhale.
Case title: Kunal Kamra & Ors vs UOI.
10. [Details of Child Marraige Prhibition Officers] The Bombay High Court, comprising Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Arif Doctor, sought specific details from the Maharashtra Government regarding the Child Marriage Prohibition Officer (CMPO) appointed by the State Government.The High Court asked for the following information from the state government:
1) The number of CMPOs appointed by the State Government.
2) Information on FIRs and the 821 prohibited marriages reported by the CMPO between 2018 and 2022.
3) Details of disciplinary actions taken against CMPO officers who failed to fulfill their duties.
4) Confirmation on whether the CMPO officers have submitted the prescribed periodical returns as mandated by the act.
Case title: Child Marriage Prohibition Committee vs State of Maharashtra.
11. [Section 498A] A division bench of the Bombay High Court last week said it could not direct the Union Government to make Section 498A (Cruelty against wife) compoundable. The Bench made the observations after reading the affidavit filed by the Central Government. the central government explained that in cases related to Section 498A, the police conduct a preliminary inquiry and attempt to resolve the matter through mediation. If reconciliation is not feasible, the police officials then proceed to register an FIR.
Bench: Justice AS Gadkari and Justice SG Dige.
Case title: Sandeep Sarjerao Sule vs State of Maharashtra.
12. [Who Fact Checks The FCU] A division bench of the Bombay High Court expressed on last week its endeavour to comprehend the entity responsible for overseeing the fact-checking unit. During the hearing of the petitions challenging the amended Information Technology Rules that introduced a fact-checking unit, the division bench, including Justice Patel, made the following remark. The bench also remarked that in a democratic process, the government holds the status of both a participant and a citizen.
Case title: Kunal Kamra & Ors. vs UOI.
13. [POCSO Age] The Bombay High Court has held that a mere minority of the girl by a few months cannot turn an act of consensual sexual intercourse into an offence of rape or sexual assault – if a young boy is castigated for being guilty of committing the rape on a minor girl, merely because she is below 18, but an equal participant in the act, he would suffer a severe dent, which he will have to carry lifelong, Court said. It was also pointed out that the ‘age of consent’ has to be distinguished from the ‘age of marriage’ as sexual acts do not happen only in the confines of marriage and not only the society, but the judicial system must also take note of this important aspect.
Bench: Justice Bharati Dangre.
Case title: Ashik Ramjan Ansari v. State of Maharashtra.
14. [Bail To Mother] The division bench of the Bombay High Court recently granted bail to a woman who had been convicted of throwing her baby girl out of the window at KEM Hospital, following the birth of twins, one of whom was a boy. The bail was granted pending appeal. The mother was convicted by the Sessions Court and sentenced to life imprisonment under Sections 302 and 317 of the Indian Penal Code for throwing her baby girl out of the hospital window after giving birth to twins.
Case title: Dipika Manish Parmar vs State of Maharashtra.
15. [Fake Vaccine] A division bench of the Bombay High Court has recently quashed the BMC's order to shut down Shivam Hospital in Charkop, Kandivali. The hospital's proprietors were booked under the fake vaccine case. The husband-wife duo who operated the hospital were allegedly booked for administering fake vaccines in July 2021. Subsequently, the hospital was sealed following their arrest. In April 2023, a single-judge bench of the high court granted bail to the couple. In its order, the division bench noted that while the allegations against the couple were serious but the high court did not find any prima facie substance to support them.
Case title: Dr Shivam Chhotulal Pataria vs BMC
Please Login or Register
