Nominal Index [Citations 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 27 to 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 41]XYZ vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 27Ambernath Vikas Aghadi vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 28Ramesh Dada Kalel vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 29Yusuf Khan s/o Bahadur Khan vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 30Dr Mohinder Kumar vs The Chairman, NABARD, 2026 LiveLaw...
Nominal Index [Citations 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 27 to 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 41]
XYZ vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 27
Ambernath Vikas Aghadi vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 28
Ramesh Dada Kalel vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 29
Yusuf Khan s/o Bahadur Khan vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 30
Dr Mohinder Kumar vs The Chairman, NABARD, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 31
Rahul Sambhu Kabade vs Subhashsingh Surajsingh Thakur, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 32
Digant Parekh (HUF) vs Akruti Kailash Construction, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 33
Seetabai Pandharinath Temghare vs Union of India, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 34
HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Adil Lutfi Peters, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 35
Kapil vs Union of India, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 36
Rushikesh @ Monya Shamrao Waghere vs Commissioner of Police, Pimpri Chinchwad, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 37
Rushikesh @ Monya Shamrao Waghere vs Commissioner of Police, Pimpri Chinchwad, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 38
Ramesh Gaichor vs NIA, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 39
Ashwani vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 40
Sailappan Sodali Muthu vs The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 41
Judgments & FInal Orders
Case Title: XYZ vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 27
The Bombay High Court while observing that the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 is not meant to punish victims of sexual exploitation, ordered the release of a woman who was rescued during a police raid and was sent into the custody of a protection home on the ground that she has not source of income, nor family and thus she may again indulge in 'immoral' activities.
Case Title: Ambernath Vikas Aghadi vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 28
In a bid to settle the political chaos in Ambernath Municipal Council (AMC), the Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Collector of Thane to decide afresh, recognising an alliance, either of the Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde Faction) along with the Nationalist Congress Party (Ajit Pawar Faction) or that of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) along with the 12 'expelled' but elected Councillors of the Congress party and the NCP.
Case Title: Ramesh Dada Kalel vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 29
The Bombay High Court on Monday, while upholding a man's conviction and life sentence for raping a minor girl, bemoaned the 'danger' of 'over-emphasis' on the rights of the accused while 'ignoring' the rights of the victim. A division bench of Justice Manish Pitale and Justice Manjusha Deshpande highlighted the fact that it is the victim, who sets the criminal law into motion and yet the rights of the victim are often ignored completely.
Case Title: Yusuf Khan s/o Bahadur Khan vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 30
While denying bail to one of the prime accused in the 2022 brutal murder of pharmacist Umesh Kolhe by a group of Muslim men over his support to the controversial statements made by former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma against Prophet Mohammed, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday held that the offence was heinous, and strikes at the conscious of the society.
Case Title: Dr Mohinder Kumar vs The Chairman, NABARD
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 31
The Bombay High Court last week, came to the rescue of an employee of National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), who challenged the penalty of 'Reprimand' imposed on him by the Central Complaints Committee (CCC) for 'video recording' his female colleagues who often 'disturbed' the working hours by 'sitting together, giggling, gossiping and singing.'
Case Title: Rahul Sambhu Kabade vs Subhashsingh Surajsingh Thakur
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 32
The Bombay High Court while refusing to condone the delay of 203 days in filing a first appeal challenging a trial court's order, deprecated the practice of litigants blaming advocates for the delay without making the said advocate a party and without initiating any action against the said lawyer.
Case Title: Digant Parekh (HUF) vs Akruti Kailash Construction
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 33
The Bombay High Court held that the mere pendency of a civil suit relating to the enforcement of an agreement for sale or recovery of consideration does not bar the Registrar from deciding an application for membership or deemed membership under Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Court observed that the MCS Act confers power upon the Registrar to decide membership when the society does not perform its duty, and the Registrar can confer membership in such a situation, subject to the decision in the civil suit.
Case Title: Seetabai Pandharinath Temghare vs Union of India
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 34
The Bombay High Court has held that mere non-endorsement of travel particulars on a valid privilege pass held by a railway employee does not, by itself, disentitle the employee from being treated as a bona fide passenger under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989. The Court observed that where the pass was valid on the date of travel and there was no evidence of misuse or excess travel beyond entitlement, denial of bonafide status on technical grounds is unjustified.
Case Title: HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Adil Lutfi Peters
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 35
Holding that the finding by a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) based on fact cannot be challenged through a writ of certiorari on the ground that the finding was incorrect as "inadequate and insufficient" material was adduced, the Bombay High Court recently imposed hefty costs of Rs 2 lakhs on HDFC Ergo Genral Insurance, for challenging a Rs 45.25 lakh compensation awarded to an Air India crew.
Case Title: Kapil vs Union of India
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 36
The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) has held that Public Sector Banks (PSBs) are autonomous entities entitled to prescribe their own eligibility and disqualification criteria and the mere absence of a uniform instruction from the Government of India does not render such conditions arbitrary. The Court observed that it cannot interfere with the recruitment choices of the Banks unless a specific recruitment condition is shown to be arbitrary, discriminatory, or violative of constitutional guarantees.
Case Title: Rushikesh @ Monya Shamrao Waghere vs Commissioner of Police, Pimpri Chinchwad
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 37
In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court held that Preventive Detention is a 'punishment without a trial' and thus, a detention proposal made by a sponsoring authority without prior verification of the in-camera witness statements is materially defective and illegal and such a detention order cannot sustain in law.
Case Title: Rushikesh @ Monya Shamrao Waghere vs Commissioner of Police, Pimpri Chinchwad
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 38
In a bid to ensure that there is no delay in processing the preventive detention orders, the Bombay High Court recently ordered the Maharashtra Government to cut short the long chain of officers, through whom a proposal to detain an individual moves.
Case Title: Ramesh Gaichor vs NIA
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 39
The Bombay High Court on Friday granted bail to Ramesh Gaichor and Sagar Gorkhe, both arrested since 2020 for their roles in the Elgar Parishad - Bhima Koregaon case. A division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Shyam Chandak granted bail on the ground of long incarceration.
Case Title: Ashwani vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 40
The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) last week expressed serious concern over repeated and systemic lapses by officers of the Drugs Department in adhering to the mandatory timelines prescribed under Rule 45 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. The Court observed that failure to analyse drug samples within the stipulated period not only vitiates prosecutions but also jeopardises public health by allowing sub-standard drugs to remain in circulation.
Case Title: Sailappan Sodali Muthu vs The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Citation: 2026, LiveLaw (Bom) 41
The Bombay High Court has held that a notice issued under Section 314 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act), cannot be sustained if it is issued mechanically and without disclosing which specific statutory provisions have been contravened. The Court observed that the power under Section 314 can be exercised only upon the Commissioner recording satisfaction that there is a contravention of Sections 312, 313 or 313A of the MMC Act, and such satisfaction must be reflected on the face of the notice itself.
Other Developments:
The Bombay High Court on Monday criticised the Maratha Community protestors who had brought the city of Mumbai to a standstill in September 2025, for 'littering' the roads of the city and overstaying on the streets while demanding reservation for the community.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday (January 22) issued notice to Maharashtra Government on a plea by YouTuber and United Kingdom (UK) based doctor Sangram Patil, booked for allegedly making 'objectionable' social media posts against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other BJP leaders.
Sharply criticising the Maharashtra Government for its failure to arrest Cabinet Minister Bharat Gogawale's son Vikas, who was booked in a rioting case regarding civic polls in Mahad, Raigad district, last month, on Thursday, the Bombay High Court remarked if Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis is 'so helpless' that he is unable to do anything in this case wherein the son of his own sitting minister is said to be 'absconding' but is in constant touch with the father.
Day After Bombay High Court Raps Maharashtra Govt, Minister's Son Surrenders In Mahad Rioting Case
A day after Bombay High Court came down heavily on the Maharashtra Government for its failure to arrest Cabinet Minister Bharat Gogawale's son Vikas, booked in a rioting case during civic polls in Mahad, Raigad, today the court was informed that Vikas and other accused in the case have surrendered before the local police.
The Bombay High Court on Friday criticised the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) for the failure to bring down the rising levels of air pollution in Mumbai and neighbouring areas and therefore indicated that it may on the next date, pass 'coercive' orders of stopping the salaries of the Commissioners of both Mumbai and Navi Mumbai.