Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 240Depriving An Employee Of Leave Encashment Which Is Akin To Salary And Is Thus A Property Violates His Constitutional Right: Gujarat HCCase title: Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v/s Sadgunbhai Semulbhai SolankiCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1Dismissing Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's plea against a labour court order directing it to...
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 240
Case title: Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v/s Sadgunbhai Semulbhai Solanki
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 1
Dismissing Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's plea against a labour court order directing it to pay arrears of leave encashment to a retired employee, the Gujarat High Court underscored that depriving a person of leave encashment–which is akin to salary and is thus a property, violates his statutory rights in the Constitution of India.
Case title: Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati vs Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 2
Observing that an identical PIL is pending before the Bombay High Court raising the same issue, the Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 3) dismissed a plea seeking a restrain on the operation on certain mobile game platforms on the ground that the games in question constitute games of chance and not games of skill.
In doing so the court granted the petitioner–Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati, liberty to approach the Bombay High Court in an intervention plea in the pending matter and raise the issue there.
Case title: Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited vs Gupta Power Infrastructure Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 3
The Gujarat High Court bench of Mrs. Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Mr.Justice Pranav Trivedi of has held that the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act' 1996 as to challenge the award passed under Section 18(4) of the MSMED Act' 2006, would be governed by the agreement between the parties which has conferred exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court.
Case title: Thakor Vipulji Gamaji & Ors. vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 4
The Gujarat High Court recently lamented the failure on part of the Police, the prosecution and the trial court in an assault case, which came to be transferred to a POCSO Court, eight years after commencement of trial.
In his December 24 order, Justice Sandeep Bhatt observed that the victim had "categorically" deposed in her testimony in 2018 that at the time of incident, she was 15 years old. But despite this no action
Case title: Mahesh Langa v State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 5
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (January 9) granted regular bail to journalist Mahesh Langa in a cheating and forgery case registered by the Detection of Crime Branch (DCB) Ahmedabad over allegations of his involvement in a firm which allegedly defrauded government exchequer by availing "bogus" Input Tax Credit.
Justice MR Megdey while pronouncing the order said, "Application is Allowed".
Case title: Infodesk India Pvt. Limited Versus The Union Of India & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 6
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that where a subsidiary company provides goods or services to its parent company in its independent capacity, it cannot be said that such services fall under 'intermediary service' under Section 2(13) of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
The provision defines “intermediary” as a broker, an agent or any other person who arranges or facilitates the supply of goods or services or both, between two or more persons.
Case title: Ramabhai Jivabhai Keshwala vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 7
Referring to a Supreme Court order on illegal mining of sand/minerals, the Gujarat High Court reiterated that even if an offence under Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act is made out on which magistrate cannot take cognizance without complaint by authorized officer, it however does not debar police from lodging a case for theft of sand/minerals.
Case Title: Dharini Shah & Ors. vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 8
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 17) dismissed a PIL moved by residents of Ahmedabad pertaining to the construction of a bridge at Panjrapole cross roads over the Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Marg (IIM road), claiming that it will lead to reduction of green cover in the city.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi while pronouncing the order said, "The instant Public Interest Litigation is dismissed". The PIL was moved by 20 residents of the city with respect to the bridge construction covering an area length of 652 metres.
Case title: Radhikkumar Jayantibhai Dhameliya vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 9
The Gujarat High Court has recently directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) to look into the allegations raised by a man–booked in a case alleging VISA fraud and cheating, who had claimed differential treatment by the Police Officials with respect to him and special treatment to the co-accused in the matter.
The petition sought for a direction to Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad to initiate legal/departmental proceedings against the Police Inspector, Anand Nagar Police Station for giving 'special treatment' to the co-accused in a FIR registered under the Sections 406 (Criminal Breach of Trust), 420 (Cheating) and 114 (Presence of abettor at the crime scene) of IPC.
Case title: Mount Carmel High School & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. and batch
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 10
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (January 23) dismissed a batch of writ petitions moved by various linguistic and religious minority schools challenging the 2021 amendments to the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Act which applied a centralised process of recruiting teachers and principals in such schools.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi while pronouncing its order said, "All the writ petitions in this bunch are dismissed".
Case title: Program Officer, ICDS & Anr. vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 11
After examining the duties and responsibilities of the Anganwadi worker provided in a government resolution, the Gujarat High Court recently set aside a single judge's order which had directed the state to appoint a woman with 70% permanent disability as an anganwadi worker.
The court said this after noting that the role necessitates the physical capability to perform tasks which involves taking care of infants, children and mother.
Case title: Ileshkumar Valabhai Kher v/s State of Gujarat and Batch
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 12
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (January 30) granted regular bail to three persons accused in the TRP Game Zone Fire incident wherein twenty-seven individuals, including four children, perished in the massive fire that engulfed the game zone in Rajkot's Nana-Mava locality on May 25, 2024.
Justice MR Mengdey further rejected the regular bail plea of four accused who have been booked in the case.
Case title: Jayanti Ishwarbhai Parmar v. Sabbir Mohammed Zubair
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 13
A Single Judge Bench of Justice M.K. Thakker upheld the Labour Court's rejection of a recovery application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court held that without a pre-existing right, claims for additional wages, bonus, and rent were not maintainable under this provision. It explained that Labour Courts cannot adjudicate new claims under Section 33(C)(2), as their jurisdiction is similar to that of an executing court.
Case title: Mount Carmel High School & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. and batch
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 14
Upholding the 2021 amendments to Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Act which allowed the State to make rules regarding recruitment of teachers and principals in linguistic and religious minority schools, the Gujarat High Court said that the language of the provisions did not denote that the State had any "unfettered, uncannalized or unlimited power" to make regulations.
It further emphasized that though power of the state to regulate is not unfettered however mere conferment of power by enabling provisions alone cannot be perceived as infringement of protection granted to minority institutions under Article 30 of the Constitution of India.
Case title: Bet Bhadela Muslim Jamat Through President Kadarbhai Abhubhai Malek & Anr. vs State of Gujarat and Batch
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 15
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (February 4) dismissed a batch of petitions seeking protection from demolition of certain alleged religious structures at Beyt Dwarka.
The petitions challenged the notices by Okha Nagarpalika directing removal of "unauthorised construction/encroachment within three days", failing which, demolition of the same had been been indicated.
Case title: Sharifbhai Hasambhai Sakaryani v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 16
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (February 3) expunged its remarks on the conduct of High Court Advocates' Association President Brijesh Trivedi, after noting his regret over the heated exchange with Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, during the hearing of a 2011 PIL last month.
The court further took note of Trivedi's assurance that such an "occurrence will not be repeated in future".
Case title: Gujarat Operational Creditors Association v/s Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. & Ors.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 17
Terming a contempt plea seeking action against Arcellor Mittal Nippon Steel India and others as well as their advocates "disingenuous" and an "epitome of frivolity", Gujarat High Court expressed its displeasure with the applicant Gujarat Operational Creditors Association and its counsel Deepak Khosla for moving the plea and for making "unwarranted remarks" on the judges of the court.
Case title: Gujarat Operational Creditors Association v/s Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 18
A division bench of the Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (February 5) opined that videos of the Court proceedings which are live streamed are required to be removed from YouTube after a specific period.
A division bench Justice AS Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi in its order however said that the discretion in this regard is with the Chief Justice.
Case title: Pragnesh Thummar v/s State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 19
The Gujarat High Court denied regular bail to a man booked under the NDPS Act for being the "main manufacturer" of the contraband Mephedrone which was found to be of commercial quantity, after considering the role stated to be played by the man noting that his act would have effect on the youth of the nation.
Gujarat High Court Denies Regular Bail To Journalist Mahesh Langa In Alleged Case Of GST Fraud
Case title: Maheshdan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 20
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (February 6) dismissed the regular bail plea of journalist Mahesh Langa in an alleged case of GST fraud including the fraudulent availing of Input Tax Credit and forgery of documents registered by Rajkot police.
Justice MR Mengdey while pronouncing the order said, "Dismissed".
The court in its order while dismissing the bail plea said that it is not inclined to exercise its judicial discretion in favour Langa "at this stage".
Case title: Gemarbhai Dalabhai Desai & Ors. v/s S.K. Patel Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Mechanical & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 21
In a contempt plea for non-compliance of an order on extension of increment to retired government employees, the Gujarat High Court expressed its "shock" on noting that the department added as respondent was incorrect and the court was "misled" and not informed of this by the litigant's counsel and even State's counsel "failed" to do so.
Noting that the employees were in fact serving in Sardar Sarvovar Narmada Nigam Ltd and not Narmada Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpsar Department which was arraigned as a respondent, a division bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi said that these departments have "different identities" and are "distinct" from each other while also noting that based on the single judge's September 2023 directions certain benefits had already been extended.
Case title: Ramsingbhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati vs Dahayabhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati & Ors.
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 22
In a plea challenging the imposition of Rs. 25,000 cost by the trial court in rejecting a litigant's review plea, the Gujarat High Court observed the trial court had not concluded that the review plea was "vexatious or false", underscoring that courts have power to impose costs for frivolous litigation but it should be reasonable.
Taking note of the fact that the district court's registry was insisting on deposit of cost, affecting the petitioner's right to appeal against the trial court order, the high court remarked that the same was "deplorable" as there was no such observation made by the trial court.
Case title: X vs Y
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 23
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a wife's revision plea challenging a family court order which rejected her Order VII Rule 11 CPC application for rejection of her husband's 'composite suit' for nullity of marriage and divorce alleging cruelty, after noting that there is no prohibition on filing such a suit or joint petition.
The court further observed that while examining the wife's application for rejection of plaint, the family court was not supposed to elaborately go into the facts but to only check if cause of action was made out.
Case title: Mukeshbhai angalji Makwana & Anr. vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 24
While hearing a plea for quashing a cheating FIR where the petitioners alleged that Police was asking them to "settle", the Gujarat High Court on Monday (February 10) orally remarked that these kind of cases were "repeatedly" coming before it where the police seemed to be "more vigilant" in matters concerning property disputes or recovery of money.
In doing so the court, which although was not inclined to entertain the present plea, further orally said that the police cannot insist on parties to settle or threaten the persons concerned which would be abuse of their power, underscoring that police authorities are to simply investigate the case and not conciliate anything.
Case title: Chaitan Vyas vs Pandit Deendayal Energy University
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 25
The Gujarat High Court dismissed with Rs. 50,000 cost an examiner's appeal who had alleged that Pandit Deendayal Energy University (PDEU) “manipulated the results to preserve its reputation” by illegally assigning marks to 30 students who had actually failed as per his assessment, underscoring that the plea was “a sheer abuse of the process of the Court.”
Case title: Ganpatsinh Chimanbhai Rathwa vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 26
While rejecting a PIL alleging irregularities in implementation of the scheme framed under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), the Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (February 11) said that since a statutory remedy exists for addressing any grievances on the scheme's implementation a PIL cannot be entertained.
Case title: Rakhidevi Umashankar Agarwal W/o Umashankar Shyamlal Agarwal vs Religare Finvest Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 27
While quashing criminal proceedings in a cheque bouncing case against a woman stated to be the former director of a textile company, the Gujarat High Court noted that she had resigned in 2013 and shouldn't be held liable for a cheque issued in 20197 reiterating that criminal liability in such cases primarily falls on drawer company.
Case title: Kandhal Sarmanbhai Jadeja v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 28
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State to decide the representation of Samajwadi Party MLA Kandhal Jadeja, who alleged non-completion of work for which a grant was given to Kutiyana Nagarpalika claiming that while money was given for development of public utilities on a land it now appeared as garbage land in photographs.
In doing so the court also noted that Nagarpalika in its affidavit "simply" denied Jadeja's allegations and did not give any details to answer the same, adding that it should have given details on the utilization of the grant.
Case title: Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 29
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (February 17) dismissed journalist Mahesh Langa's plea to quash an FIR registered by Gandhinagar Police against him for alleged corruption, criminal conspiracy and theft where he is accused of obtaining "highly confidential government documents".
Case title: National Highways Authority of India v/s Kishorbhai Valjibhai Jethani & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 30
The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi has held that the plea that limitation period for challenging the award under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) did not start as the signed copy of the award was not received by the party, cannot be raised for the first time in appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act.
Case title: Anishaben Sharifbhai Solanki & Ors. vs Sachinbhai Bharatbhai Suvagiya & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 31
While quashing an order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) which had dismissed a claim petition, the Gujarat High Court observed that it was unfortunate that instead of "taking a holistic view" the tribunal had sought to fund minor inconsistencies to throw out the claimant's plea for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
In doing so the court observed that the tribunal had adopted an "insensitive approach" by taking a hyper-technical view, when it should have tried to grant fair compensation to the victim of road accident.
Case title: X v/s Balvandsingh Hanubha Rana & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 32
Enhancing the compensation to Rs. 13,09, 240 along with interest to a 5-year-old boy who became paralytic after a road accident, the Gujarat High Court said that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal–which had awarded over Rs. 2 Lakh– had “failed to understand” the effect of paralysis on the boy's upper body which left him “deadwood at the nascent age”.
In doing so the court further underscored that the boy's 'normal living' had turned into misery and 50% physical disability which had been assessed was infact "100% functional disability".
Case title: Mohammad Sadik @ Sajju Mohammad Rafik Gulam NabiPathan vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 33
The Gujarat High Court recently granted regular bail to an man booked under NDPS Act, in view of long incarnation of three and a half years and after noting that out of 29 witnesses only two had been examined where the trial court had not give any time bound schedule of the examination of such witnesses
Case title: Tofan Sudarshan Shahu vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 34
The Gujarat High Court recently granted regular bail to a man booked in a case under the NDPS Act after observing that while the trial had not progressed substantially, the matter had been adjourned almost 78 times leading to “prolonged incarceration” and "blink hope of a speedy trial" in the case.
In doing so the high court further noted that there were many NDPS cases pending before the concerned court which required urgent disposal.
Case title: Cadila Pharmaceuticals Limited v/s XYZ & Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 35
Quashing an order referring to the labour court an alleged dispute between a company and a female foreign national employed as a personal assistant–who had also levelled rape allegations, the Gujarat High Court said that there was no application of mind regarding a "prima facie opinion" on if an industrial dispute existed.
Observing that the assistant labour commissioner's order was defective, the court said that whether an employee is a workman or not is a mix question of law and facts which can be decided after adducing evidence, not permissible at the stage of making reference; however prima facie opinion is a must before a reference order is made.
Case title: Bhavini Nagendrasinh Chauhan vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 36
The Gujarat High Court refused to grant further age limit relaxation to a 35-year-old candidate who had applied in the civil judges recruitment process, noting that the same was not provided for in the Gujarat State Judicial Services Rules, 2005.
The court was examining whether the candidate could have been granted the relaxation who claimed to be within the age limit on the first day of filing of application form, but exceeded the age limit on the last date of submission of the form.
Case title: M/s Total Infratech Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 37
The Gujarat High Court stated that the assessee is entitled to the interest on refund under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
In this case, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer passed and uploaded the manual order in the ITBA system on 12/05/2022 which was accounted on CPC 26/07/2022 with refund of Rs.2,20,41,042/- and the refund was issued by the CPC and therefore nothing is pending before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
Case title: Ramilaben Vitthalbhai Jambu v/s LIC India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 38
Underscoring the "pious intention" of compassionate appointment which is to give relief to the deceased employee's kin, the Gujarat High Court stopped short of imposing costs on a litigant for suppressing material facts after noting that she only intended to secure the appointment of her son at LIC after her husband's death.
In doing so the court observed that the litigant had not disclosed any facts about the financial condition of her family, and the court "prima facie" observed that her only aim was to get "compassionate appointment for her son by one way or the other".
Case title: Dinesh Dhulabhai Parmar & Anr. Damyantiben Naranbhai Chauhan & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 39
The Gujarat High Court has held four senior citizen women guilty of contempt of court, for entering into an agreement to sell a disputed property and creating third party rights despite a 2010 status quo order.
However, noting the age of the contemnors, the court did not send them to civil imprisonment; instead it fined them with Rs 2000 each, quashed the agreement to sell the property and further imposed cost of Rs 1 Lakh on them to be paid to the registry as well as Rs 50,000 to be paid to the petitioners.
Case title: Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 40
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (March 11) directed the concerned authorities to decided Asaram Bapu's son Narayan Sai's plea for furlough expeditiously, preferably within 30 days.
In 2019 Sai was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by a Sessions Court in Surat in a rape case. His appeal against this decision is pending before the high court.
Case title: Imran Kumelahmed Khan Legal Heir of Late Kumelahmed Abdulhamid Khan v/s State Bank of India & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 41
The Gujarat High Court recently rejected a man's plea against dismissal of his application for rejection of suit filed by a bank to recover a loan taken by the man's deceased father, claiming he was not liable to pay his father's bank loan as debt is not heritable property under Muslim Law.
The court however said that the contentions made by the son would require a "detailed inquiry during the course of trial" of the recovery suit.
Case title: Sandip Hasmukhbhai Chudasama & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 42
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash an FIR against developers/partners of a real estate development firm accused by home buyers of neither finishing the project called Suranva Residency nor handing over possession of the flats in question or returning the booking amount.
In doing so the court underscored that the partners of the firm were obliged to either finish the project, or return the money to the homebuyers and even if there was an dispute inter-se partners the buyers cannot become victims of the same.
Case title: Sadhviji Jayshrigiri Guru Jagdishgiri v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 43
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash a 2017 FIR for cheating and criminal breach of trust lodged against a Sadhavi (female monk) accused of duping a man of approximately Rs. 1.255 crores taken on the pretext of clearing his land which was acquired by the State Housing Board.
Observing that prima facie allegations were made out, the court referred to the FIR and noted that upon the trust given by the petitioner-Sadhavi, the man (first informant) had also entrusted 16.200 kg of gold to her, which she allegedly took and ran away with.
Case title: Maheshan Prabhudan Langa vs State of Gujarat & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 44
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (March 21) granted anticipatory bail to journalist Mahesh Langa booked in an FIR for alleged corruption, criminal conspiracy and theft where he is accused of obtaining "highly confidential government documents" which are stated to belong to the Gujarat Maritime Board(GMB).
However Langa is presently in judicial custody in a case pertaining to alleged GST fraud; the high court had earlier rejected his regular bail plea.
'Unacceptable': Gujarat High Court Imposes ₹2 Lakh Cost On Man For Joining VC Hearing From Lavatory
Case title: Gujarat State Co-operative Marketing Federration Ltd. v.s President Officer & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 45
The Gujarat High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 2 Lakh on a man for attending court proceedings through video conferencing from a lavatory and has further asked him to perform community service by cleaning the gardens in the high court premises for two weeks.
In doing so the court rejected the man's contention that he had used the high court's website for the first time and thus committed a mistake noting that the 42-year-old man has a B.Sc. degree, and is working in a company.
Case title: AMW Auto Component Limited Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajkot 1
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 46
The Gujarat High Court bench of Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice D.N.Ray has held that after approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code), all liabilities prior to the approval of the plan stand extinguished. Therefore, the Income Tax Authority cannot be permitted to issue a notice under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) seeking to revise the assessment after the approval of the Plan.
Case title: Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Institute of Technology & Anr. vs Kirti H Niralgikar & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 47
The State has assured the Gujarat High Court that the State Educational Institutions Service Tribunal shall conduct judicial proceedings strictly as per the daily working hours, and CCTV cameras as well as virtual hearing facility shall be made available within two months.
The submission was made by the government pleader in a matter, where the parties had earlier raised concerns about the tribunal's functioning, installation of CCTV cameras and lack of virtual hearing facility leading to prolonged proceedings. The court had in its previous order directed its Registrar General and education department's Chief Secretary to report on the functioning of the tribunal.
Gujarat High Court Delivers Spilt Verdict On Temporary Bail Sought By Asaram Bapu In Rape Case
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 48
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (March 28) gave a spilt verdict on the temporary bail plea moved by Asaram Bapu who was convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in 2023 and is serving a life sentence.
Notably, the Supreme Court had in January this year granted interim bail till March 31 to Asaram Bapu on medical grounds.
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 49
In a split verdict given by the Gujarat High Court on Friday on Asaram Bapu's temporary bail plea, Justice Sandeep Bhatt in his dissenting opinion said that it seemed that Asaram was only interested in extending the interim bail granted by Supreme Court earlier this year on medical grounds, without "properly utilizing the time period".
Justice Bhatt further said that though the court is aware that the applicant is 86-years-old, he however observed, "but we cannot shut our eyes from the fact that the applicant is a convict of the charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and is undergoing sentence of life imprisonment".
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 50
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (March 28) allowed three months temporary bail to Asaram Bapu who was convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in 2023 and is serving a life sentence.
Justice AS Supehia– the third judge who heard Asaram's plea after a division bench earlier today delivered a split verdict, in his order said,
"Thus on an overall appreciation of the respective orders passed by the (division) bench including the view favourable to applicant and the dissenting view and in light of the order of the Supreme Court, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for interim bail...It cannot be said that an 86 years old ailing person...can confine his treatment to particular therapy or particular system of medicines."
Case title: Rohan Dyes and Intermediaries Ltd. & Anr. v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 51
The Gujarat High Court quashed two show cause notices issued by customs department to a chemical manufacturing company after noting that the notices had been pending adjudication for 15 and 13 years respectively and deserved to be set aside due to "inordinate lapse of time".
Quoting 'Time' by British rock band Pink Floyd, a division bench of Justice Bhargav Karia and Justice DN Ray in its order observed:
"The impugned SCNs have remained pending for more than 15 years and 13 years respectively. Considering the aforesaid decisions, this Court has no hesitation in holding that due to an inordinately long lapse of time , the impugned show cause notices dated 08.03.2010 and 03.11.2011 can no longer remain pending for adjudication and must be quashed and set aside on that score alone. Accordingly, the petition succeeds and the impugned Show Cause Notices F No.DRI/AZU/INV45/2009 dated 08.03.2010 and 03.11.2011 are hereby quashed and set aside".
Case title: X v/s High Court of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 52
The Gujarat High Court has observed that assessment of judicial officers' decisions for the purpose of promotion is a subjective exercise and it would be impossible to maintain uniformity in such assessments, adding that questioning the same would dent the sanctity of the recruitment process.
It further observed that if the officer's annual confidential reports (ACR) are relied on to question the assessment of the officer's judgments (which is conducted by the high court) and marks in the assessment are allotted based on the ACR, then it would be an "anathema to the recruitment process".
Case title: Irshadunnisha & Anr. v/s Makbulhusen Abbasali Saiyed Heirs of Deceased Abbasali Haji Muradali Saiyed & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 53
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a trial court's eviction order which had held that the tenants had breached the terms of tenancy concerning a property which was originally given on rent to be exclusively used for a cycle repair business but was eventually being used to conduct business of seat covers and accessories.
The high court was hearing a revision plea against judgment of the Appellate court which had quashed and set aside the order passed by the trial court in a civil suit. The trial court had allowed a plea for eviction of defendants; this was challenged by defendants before the appellate court which allowed the defendants' appeal. Against this the plaintiff moved the high court.
Case title: XYZ v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 54
The Gujarat High Court granted over Rs. 12 Lakh as compensation to a rape survivor–who was minor at the time of the incident in 2018–observing it is a “serious case of rape” where the survivor had passed though “aggravating circumstances”, physical harassment and mental trauma.
In doing so, the Court noted that the Trial Court passed a "non-speaking order" where it failed to provide adequate reasoning for awarding Rs 3 Lakh as compensation despite the gravity of the case wherein, the girl was raped several times and had to undergo medical termination of pregnancy. The court thus said that trial court should have awarded a higher compensation amount.
Case title: Imran Dawood v/s Patel Mithabhai Pashabhai & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 55
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a 2015 sessions court order which acquitted six men in a case related to the killing of three British Nationals near Prantij, during the 2002 state-wide riots which followed the Godhra Train Burning incident.
In doing so the court observed that there had been no test identification parade in the matter and the dock identification was conducted for the first time after a gap of six years. The court thus ruled that the manner in which dock identification of the accused was conducted cannot be a relevant fact to convict them.
Case title: Nileshbhai Jayantilal Joshi vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 56
The Gujarat High Court granted regular bail to the 64-year-old father accused of murdering his son, chopping his body parts and packing it in polythene bags noting that the father has been in custody since July 2022 and the alleged act prima facie appears to be out of “sheer frustration” rather than a criminal mindset.
The Court observed the record indicated that the father “must have been fed up with the conduct of his son” as the deceased son "fell prey to several vices including drugs and alcohol", was unemployed and would demand money from the father.
Case title: X v/s Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 57
Quoting Former US Assistant Secretary for Children and Families Wade Horn who said "Children ought not to be victims of the choices adults make for them", the Gujarat High Court rejected a father's plea for child custody under Guardians and Wards Act noting that the custody was earlier decided by family court with consent of parties to remain with the mother.
In doing so the court however also emphasized that often in custody battles the child becomes the unintended victim of their parents conflict, hence keeping in mind the best interest and the needs of the child, the nature of custody orders must be considered as "temporary orders made in the existing circumstances".
Case title: District Development Officer & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 58
The Gujarat High Court has deprecated the conduct of the State government for filing an appeal against a writ order with a delay of 276 days, observing that when it is added as a party to the proceedings along with the local authorities, then it cannot watch the proceedings from the fence by neither filing any affidavits nor making any submissions on its stand.
The High Court said that in case the State government chooses not to contest the proceedings, then it cannot refrain the statutory local authorities from implementation of the judgment and orders of the Court by directing them to challenge such orders without involving itself in such proceedings.
Case title: Bharvad Meghankaben Nareshbhai v/s National Texting Agency (NTA) Through Its Director General & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 59
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a 2025 NEET–UG aspirant seeking to reopen application portal after failing to submit necessary documents due to their unavailability within the prescribed deadline.
In doing so the court observed that the applicant failed to make out an “exceptional case” to re-open the window/portal to submit her application, adding that just because she could not submit the documents the same does not create any right in her favour to direct the authorities to open the portal for her.
Institute For Plasma Research Not 'State', Employees Can't File Writ Petitions: Gujarat High Court
Case title: Himanshu Dineshchandra Parekh v/s Institute for Plasma Research & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 60
The Gujarat High Court has upheld an order dismissing a man's writ petition against termination of services as an engineer by the Institute for Plasma Research, on the ground that the institute is an independent and autonomous body and merely because it is under the authority of Department of Atomic Energy it cannot be termed as 'State'.
The court was hearing an appeal against a single judge's order which had that the petition is not maintainable against the Institute as it was not a “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 61
The Gujarat High Court quashed a cruelty FIR against a woman alleged to be the girlfriend of a married man, reiterating that a woman who is stated to be the girlfriend of the husband cannot be roped in by the complainant wife as a "relative" to make allegations under IPC Section 498A.
The petitioner argued that she is the "paramour" of the husband of the complainant, and except the allegation that the petitioner was in relationship with husband of the complainant, there is no other allegations levelled against her.
Case title: Mohammed Sajjad Mohammed Imtiyaz v/s State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 62
The Gujarat High Court rejected a successive bail plea moved by a man who was stated to be in the Border Security Force after observing that the prosecution had alleged his active involvement in a "serious offence against the welfare of nation".
The court further noted that the trial had already begun and there was no fresh ground shown by the petitioner for grant of bail.
Gujarat High Court Declines Narayan Sai's Furlough Plea In 2014 Surat Rape Case
Case title: Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 63
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (April 30) dismissed the furlough plea moved by Asaram Bapu's son Narayan Sai who was convicted for rape and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2019 by a Sessions Court in Surat.
After hearing the arguments by the parties, Justice MR Mengdey said, "I'm not inclined...dismissed".
Case title: Gulabsinh Devusinh Jhala & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 64
Upholding the dismissal of nine railway constables who were "entrusted" to travel on Sabarmati Express, the Gujarat High Court observed that if they had departed in the train instead of taking another train, the 2002 Godhra Train Burning incident could have been prevented.
In doing so the court observed that the petitioners had made bogus entries in the train register and had shown "derelict negligence and carelessness towards their duty". In a 110 page order pronounced on April 24, Justice Vaibhavi D Nanavati held:
"It is not in dispute that the petitioners were assigned the duty to return by Sabarmati Express, however, while making the note to travel by Sabarmati Express, petitioners travelled by Shanti Express...If, the petitioners had departed in Sabarmati express train itself to reach Ahmedabad, the incident that have occurred at Godhra could have been prevented. The petitioners derelict negligence and carelessness towards their duty. The said charges stands proved".
Case title: State of Gujarat v. Kalubhai Amarshi Aghara
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 65
The Gujarat High Court upheld a 28-year-old trial court order acquitting a man accused of his wife's murder by setting her ablaze and thereby dismissed the State's appeal, after finding the prosecution's reliance on the victim's dying declarations unreliable.
A division bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Nisha M. Thakore, in its order said, “looking to the medical condition of the deceased, we are of the opinion that the history recorded by the doctors and the dying declarations, as mentioned hereinabove, become doubtful and the evidence emerging from the dying declarations and the oral testimony lacks sterling quality, which is not compelling enough to reverse the acquittal recorded by the trial Court.”
Case title: Umeshkumar Pratapsingh Parmar & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 66
The Gujarat High Court directed the State to carry out the appointment exercise which regard to five meritorious candidates whose candidature to the post of Section Officer was rejected following "re-evaluation" of answer sheet and publishing of revised final result, stating that the rules prohibit re-evaluation, permitting only re-checking.
It thus said that action of the Gujarat Public Service Commission in accepting applications received by certain candidates seeking re-evaluation was "illegal".
Case title: Samsuddin Jainulabiddin Shaikh & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 67
In a plea by 58 individuals residing in Ahmedabad's Chandola Lake whose hutments were removed during the demolition drive by the state authorities last month, the Gujarat High Court remarked that the residents act of having "illegal and unauthorised constructions" on Lake Land cannot be "ignored".
While the court "rejected" the petitioners' plea for stay of further demolition till rehabilitation is granted as "devoid of merits", the court however said that it is open for the petitioners to approach the authorities with individual applications for rehabilitation.
Case title: Devrajbhai Tulsibhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 68
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a PIL petition seeking to stop the alleged illegal operation of a trust from the premises of Gandhi Ashram in Sabarmati, observing that no roving inquiry can be conducted on an apprehension without there being any substance shown to the court.
The PIL moved by an advocate claimed that one Manav Sadhna Trust being operated by one of the Trustee of Original Sabarmati Harijan Ashram Trust, within the Gandhi Ashram precincts has resulted in deprivation of donations fund in the name of Sabarmati Harijan Ashram Trust.
Case title: Prashant S/o Prakash Harishchandra Vazirani vs. State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 69
The Gujarat High Court has rejected the bail plea of a cardiologist accused of performing angioplasty upon healthy persons in a bid to get funds from the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PMJAY) scheme for a private hospital.
In doing so the court observed that the material on record indicated a "strong prima facie" case against the petitioner where his involvement in the alleged offence cannot be ruled out.
Gujarat High Court Slaps ₹20 Lakh Cost On PIL Litigant Found Involved In Blackmailing Scandal
Case title: Ajay Rameshbhai Trivedi vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 70
Dismissing a PIL seeking demolition of alleged illegal and unauthorised constructions near Lajpore Central Jail in Surat, the Gujarat High Court said that the litigant misused the PIL mechanism for personal gain and that abuse of court process by an unscrupulous person who was caught blackmailing cannot be permitted.
In doing so the court imposed exemplary cost of ₹20 Lakh on the petitioner, Ajay Rameshbhai Trivedi.
Case title: Technovaa Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Gandhinagar & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 71
The Gujarat High Court bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N.Ray has held that Penalty orders under Sections 270A, 271(1)(c), and 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Income Tax Act) cannot be issued after the approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code).
Once the Resolution Plan is approved by the Adjudicating Authority, all claims, including statutory dues, stand extinguished, and no further proceedings in respect of such dues can be initiated.
Case title: ABC v/s State of Gujarat and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 72
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (May 12) directed the medical termination of a minor rape survivor's 33-week pregnancy, ordering the authorities to carry out the procedure at the earliest after obtaining "express consent" of the parents and explaining the risks to them in the language they understand.
Justice Nirzar S Desai passed the order after examining a report submitted by senior expert doctors at PDU General Hospital in Rajkot who had been earlier directed by a co-ordinate bench to examine the 13-year-old survivor for termination of pregnancy. The court was hearing the minor girl's plea seeking medical termination of pregnancy.
Case title: Harsh Mahesh Tanna vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 73
The Gujarat High Court recently observed that passport authorities do not have any authority to decide whether an accused has the right to travel abroad as such an authority is only vested with the Trail Court which may impose conditions, if accused moves a travel plea.
In doing so, the Court directed the Passport Authority to renew the petitioner-accused's passport for a period of 10 years as per the Passport Act, 1967 and Rules.
Case title: M/s Sopariwala Export Pvt. Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 74
The Gujarat High Court has referred a matter to the GST Council to decide on whether the compensation cess is leviable on goods supplied to merchant exporter.
The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N. Ray observed that “……..no notification is issued by the Central Government or State Government under the Compensation Cess Act and therefore, the assessee is made liable to pay Compensation Cess at normal rate i.e. 160% on the supply of goods to merchant exporters for export…….”
Case title: X v/s Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 75
The Gujarat High Court upheld decisions of the trial court and appellate court which denied restitution of conjugal rights to the wife, after noting that she had attempted to commit suicide which amounts to extreme coercive behaviour with an intention to emotionally manipulate and mentally distress the husband.
The court further noted that the wife had also printed "defamatory posters" claiming that the husband was missing observing that this was "public humiliation" which can leave a lasting scar on mental health and emotional stability of the spouse.
Case title: Minaxi Chandulal Shah & Ors. vs Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 76
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the validity of a 2023 amendment to Section 13 of Registration of Births and Death Act that transferred the authority to inquire into the delayed registration of birth and deaths beyond a year from Judicial Magistrate to Executive Magistrate or District Magistrate(DM).
The court was hearing a plea challenging the amendment to Section 13 on the ground that it is against Section 3(2)(a) BNSS wherein any inquiry regarding evaluation of evidence is to be adjudicated by Judicial Magistrate and the Executive Magistrate under Section 3(2)(b) BNSS can only conduct an administrative/executive inquiry.
Man Agrees In Gujarat High Court To 'Re-Marry' Wife As Per Customs In Her Native Place
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 77
In a peculiar case before the Gujarat High Court, a man seeking production of his wife stated to be detained by her parents, agreed to visit her native place and re-marry as her the customs there.
The couple got married in the absence of their families and the woman's family–belonging to Rajasthan, were desirous of performing certain marriage rituals in their native place in the presence of the husband and his family.
Case title: Tahera Ahmed Patel w/o Late Ahmed Yusuf Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 78
Five years since the death of a "weigh-man"–working in a government recognized fair price shop–due to Covid-19 while performing emergency duty of distributing essential commodities, the Gujarat High Court directed the state government to grant financial assistance of Rs 25 Lakh to the deceased's wife within six weeks.
The court observed that the State government had "erred in rejecting the application" of the petitioner wife of the deceased, in view of administrative direction which was issued to the District Supply Officers in the State for submitting the list of such employees by a particular date.
Case title: Tathya Pragneshbhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 79
The Gujarat High Court has granted temporary bail of four days to a man booked causing an accident in 2023 at Iskon Bridge in Ahmedabad which claimed nine lives, on account of medical condition of his mother.
The accused Tathya Patel had moved an application seeking temporary bail on account of surgery of his mother. The state opposed the application arguing that date of operation has been fixed as per the convenience of the mother of the applicant. The state said that earlier when the operation was postponed, the applicant had not immediately surrendered; subsequently, on 18.05.2025, he was taken by the police to the Jail authority.
Case title: Dipakkumar Kirtilal Shah v/s Navinkumar Bansidhar Maheshwari
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 80
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a trial court order which sent a man stated to be suffering from a disability to 30-day civil imprisonment for selling a shop despite a status quo order against such sale.
The high court rejected the contention of the petitioner's counsel that civil imprisonment imposed on the petitioner was wrong and that the court should have have weighed other options available to it–attachment of the property of the person guilty of such disobedience.
Case title: Jabir Bin Yamin Behra v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 81
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (June 2) granted 10-day parole to Jabir Behra, one of the 11 persons convicted in the case concerning the burning of Sabarmati Express in Godhra in 2002.
Notably, Behra was one of 11 individuals convicted and sentenced to death by the trial court in 2011. Against this order the convicts had moved the high court. The high court had in 2017 commuted the death penalty imposed on Behra and others, to life imprisonment.
Case title: Sunil Surendrakumar Kakkad v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 82
The Gujarat High Court has permitted director of IT firm, Sai InfoSystem (India) Ltd Sunil Kakkad who has been booked in alleged multi-crore bank fraud case, to travel to UAE for exploring business opportunities with companies to outsource back-end IT Support & Enterprises Resource Planning software requirements to India.
Kakkad was reportedly arrested in 2014 in Liberia and has been allegedly accused of cheating public sector banks, which is being probed by the CBI. A related money laundering case is being probed by the ED.
Case title: M/s Addwrap Packaging Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 83
The Gujarat High Court stated that omission of Rule 96(10) Of CGST Rules, 2017 operates prospectively but applies to all pending proceedings.
The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and D.N. Ray was addressing the issue where a group of petitions have challenged the vires of Rule 96(10) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as substituted by the Central Goods and Services Tax (12th Amendment) Rules, 2018 with effect from 9.10.2018.
Case title: Yash Textiles v/s Vinayak Fashions
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 84
The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray and has held that Once the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Section 34 application—having been filed beyond the limitation prescribed under Section 34(3) and its proviso—any finding on the validity of the arbitral award as void ab initio was without legal authority. Entertaining a time-barred application under Section 34 was a grave error of law on the part of the learned Court.
State Tax Authorities Not Mandated To Issue DIN With Orders Or Summons: Gujarat High Court
Case title: M/s NRM Metals (India) Private Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 85
The Gujarat High Court stated that state tax authorities not mandated to issue din with orders or summons.
The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia and P.M. Ravalobserved that “there is no mechanism of issuance of DIN on any of the communication, notice, summons, orders issued by the State Tax Authorities. In such circumstances, the contention raised on behalf of the assessee, that the DIN is not mentioned in any of the summons and the previously attachment order being without any basis, is rejected.”
Case title: Narayan Sai vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 86
The Gujarat High Court has granted five days temporary bail to Narayan Sai–convicted and sentenced to life in a rape case– to meet his father Asaram Bapu on 'humanitarian grounds', after considering Asaram's medical condition and the fact that the father and son had not been able to meet personally.
Notably, Asaram Bapu, who has been convicted in a separate rape case in Rajasthan and is serving life imprisonment, is presently also on temporary bail.
Case title: Onali Ezazuddin Dholakawala & Anr. vs Police Commissioner & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 87
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State to redress the grievance of two Muslim shop owners who were allegedly prevented by their neighbours from entering their commercial property in Vadodara despite judicial orders, underscoring the State's "duty to maintain the law and order”.
Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar in his order observed that the two petitioners Onali Dholakawala and Iqbal Tinwala are owners of the property in question who wanted to enjoy the same and had approached the state authorities, however till date nothing had been done.
Gujarat High Court Extends Asaram Bapu's Temporary Bail In Rape Case Till July 07
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harplani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 88
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (June 27) extended the temporary bail of Asaram Bapu, who has been convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in Gandhinagar and is serving a life sentence, till July 07.
Case title: Balwantsinh Setansinh Vaghela Versus Ministry Of Home Affairs
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 89
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (June 27) closed proceedings in a PIL concerning the disappearance of nine Indians who left Dominica for USA in December 2022, after it was informed that despite best efforts of Indian Embassies and Central Government the missing persons could not be located.
Case title: State of Gujarat vs Unique Identification Authority of India, UIDAI, Govt. Of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 90
The Gujarat High Court has directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to disclose to the State government, Aadhar card details of five persons, who are claimed to be Bangladeshi nationals, accused of cheating and forgery in a case concerning alleged exchange of forged 100 Riyal currency notes in exchange of Rs. 15,000.
Case title: Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation and transfer Pricing v. M/s Adani Wilmar Ltd.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 91
The Gujarat High Court stated that DTAA (Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement) prevails over Section 206AA of Income Tax Act for TDS on payments to non-residents without PAN. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi was addressing the appeals pertains to alleged short deduction of TDS and raising demand by invoking provisions of section 206AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case title: Paschim Gujarat Vij. Co. Ltd. vs Mithabhai Nageshi Maheswari & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 92
The Gujarat High Court upheld a trial court order granting over Rs. 6 Lakh compensation to the mother of an 18-year-old boy who died due to electrocution caused by low-hanging live electric wires which got entangled with trees under which the deceased was standing to cut grass for grazing cattle.
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 93
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (July 3) extended for one month the temporary bail of Asaram Bapu who has been convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in Gandhinagar and is serving a life sentence.
Noting statement made by Asaram Bapu's counsel that he wont seek further extension of temporary bail, the court clarified that further prayer for extension of temporary bail will not be entertained on medical grounds.
Case title: Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 94
The Gujarat High Court has initiated suo-motu contempt case against a man who was captured seated on a toilet seat during the court's online proceedings last month.
In doing so the court observed that the "infamous video tarnishing the image of this Court" was widely circulated in social media and requires to be "immediately banned and deleted".
The court, which in its order took "serious note" of a June 28 news report on the incident, further directed the high court's Registrar, Information Technology to inform on the mechanism to stop contumacious litigants in participating in live-streaming proceedings observing that such uncontrolled behaviour had become frequent.
Case title: Dipak Kishorbhai Salunke v/s State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 95
The Gujarat High Court recently denied bail to a man accused of spying and sharing confidential details about the Indian Army to an alleged ISI agent stated to be residing in Pakistan who allegedly posed as a woman having a Facebook account in the name of Poonam Sharma.
In doing so the court observed that material suggests a "larger conspiracy involving ISI agents" posing a threat to national security noting that the applicant allegedly shared "sensitive information on border areas". It further observed that following the alleged incident, terrorist attacks had occurred inclduing drone and other hostile activities which were carried out in border areas by Pakistan.
Case title: State of Gujarat vs Anilbhai Babubhai Dudhat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 96
The Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal of a man accused of rape wherein the victim became pregnant, observing that the victim who was 18-years-old at the time had remained "silent" about the alleged offence until "advanced stage of pregnancy" and never informed her family members, which depicted a "clear case of consent".
The court further said that there was no medical evidence to prove the sexual intercourse was forcible or without her consent, and the repeated incidents of their sexual relations over a period of time indicates a consensual relationship.
Case title: State of Gujarat vs Paresh Shantilal & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 97
The Gujarat High Court recently upheld the acquittal of husband and his kin booked in a dowry death and abetment to suicide case, wherein the wife had died by suicide after setting herself ablaze.
The trial court had in 2014 acquitted the husband and his kin who were booked under IPC Sections 498A(Cruelty), 306(abetment of suicide), 304B (Dowry Death) and provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case title: X vs State of Gujarat and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 98
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (July 9) reinstated a judicial officer dismissed from service for alleged misconduct, engaging in corrupt practices and dereliction of duty wherein he purportedly forced a party to handover seized oil-tankers to its owners which were booked for theft of high-speed diesel, terming it unfair and unlawful.
The court further emphasized that unless there are clear-cut allegations of misconduct, disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated "merely on the basis that a wrong order" has been passed by the judicial officer or on the ground that the judicial order is incorrect, or that they have been negligent in ignoring any fact.
Gujarat High Court Fines 'Journalist' ₹1 Lakh For Abusing PIL Jurisdiction
Case title: Sunilbhai Ratanlal Maittal vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 99
The Gujarat High Court imposed cost of Rs. 1 Lakh on a man claiming to be the Chief Editor of Navsari Times Weekly, for filing a PIL based on "false statement and misleading" the court regarding grant of development rights to a company for commercial construction on a land while claiming that it falls in a residential zone.
Case title: X vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 100
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (July 9) directed the police to look into a man's grievance alleging cheating and forgery by a fertility hospital wherein he claimed that a DNA test revealed that he is not the biological father of the child born to him and his wife through IVF procedure.
The plea has alleged "cheating, criminal breach of trust and forgery" levelled against the fertility hospital.
Case title: Punjabhai Karsanbhai Barad/Aahir vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 101
The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR for voluntarily causing hurt and criminal intimidation lodged against a man whose name was mistakenly shown as an accused in one place and as a complainant in another place in the same FIR.
Noting that no steps were taken to correct the error, but an investigation was carried out and a charge-sheet was filed, the court said that continuing the FIR would be nothing but an "abuse of process of law".
Case title: State Of Gujarat vs Natubhai Golanbhai Khuman & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 102
Upholding the acquittal of a woman's in-laws accused of dowry death, the Gujarat High Court said that demanding money from her to meet legal expenses for applying for their bail in another case would not amount to dowry and can't be regarded as harassment related to "Illegal demand for dowry" leading to the woman's suicide.
Case title: Umarbhai Bachubhai Kabariya & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 103
Dismissing a plea seeking a declaration that provisions of the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act 2020 be declared ultra-vires, the High Court on Monday (July 14) noted that the plea filed was a "wholly misconceived petition", noting that the validity of the statute had already been adjudicated by the court in its judgment last year.
Gujarat High Court Directs Man Captured On Toilet Seat During VC To Deposit ₹1 Lakh By July 22
Case title: Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 104
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (July 14) directed a man, who was captured seated on a toilet seat during online proceedings last month, to deposit Rs 1 Lakh with the court's registry by July 22.
Case title: Chetangiri Kailashgiri Aparnathi & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 105
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (July 11) imposed exemplary costs of Rs 20 Lakh each on seven individuals who filed a PIL challenging development permission granted to a builder, for not disclosing their credentials properly— calling it "doubtful".
Gujarat High Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Against Company For Alleged Default Of CSR Obligations
Case title: KHS Machinery Private Ltd & Anr. vs Registrar of Companies & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a criminal complaint registered against a company claiming default of its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) obligations, after noting that the offence alleged–including the penalty–had been decriminalized by Companies (Amendment) Act 2020.
Justice JC Doshi in his order referred to Supreme Court's decision in T. Barai v. Henry Ah Hoe and Anr. (1983) wherein it was held that that in case the punishment prescribed is reduced by an Amendment Act, then the benefit is to be given to the accused.
Gujarat High Court Upholds Validity Of GST Advisory On Interest For Delayed Tax Payment
Case title: Reliance Formulation Private Limited vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Ghatak 21, Division 2
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the validity of the GST advisory on interest for delayed tax payment.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the reference to Section 79 of the GST Act in the advisory is only to put the assessee on guard as to such outstanding liability as per the record of the Authority so that the assessee can either make the payment of such liability if agreed or may oppose the same when the notice in Form GST DRC-01D is received by the assessee for recovery of such amount.
IELTS 'Scam': Gujarat High Court Directs Magistrate Court To Decide Police's Closure Report Afresh
Case title: Amitkumar Surendrabhai Chaudhary vs State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 108
The Gujarat High Court has ordered a Magistrate Court in Mehsana to decide afresh the closure report filed by Police in a case pertaining to alleged fabrication of ILETS results.
Justice L S Pirzada upheld the sessions court's order on not accepting police's summary report but set aside its direction on appointment of another officer to investigate the case further. The High Court rather directed the Magistrate court to hear the matter "afresh" without being influenced by either sessions court's order of the high court's order.
Case title: Suo Motu vs Samad Abdul Rehman Shah
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 109
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (July 22) directed a man, who was captured seated on a toilet seat during online proceedings last month, to do community service for 15 days.
Noting that he had already deposited Rs 1 Lakh with the court's registry, in view of his unconditional apology and willingness to undertake community service, the Court closed the contempt action initiated suo motu.
Case title: Suo Motu vs Bhaskar Tanna
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 110
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (July 22) closed the suo motu contempt proceedings initiated against senior advocate Bhaskar Tanna for appearing on VC while drinking from a beer mug.
Case title: Sazid Ali Khan v. Office of Principal Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise Commissionerate, Vadodara-I & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 111
The Gujarat High Court held that GST officers issuing summons/arrest memo are not required to be cross-examined by assessee.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi observed that the assessee wants to cross-examine the persons who belongs to the department who have either issued the summons or arrest memo. Such persons are not required to be cross-examined by the assessee.
Case title: Umesh Varjanbhai Panchal & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 112
The Bar Council of India informed the Gujarat High Court that it had decided to grant "one time relief strictly" confined to LL.B. pass outs of grant-in-aid colleges named in the writ petitions filed by certain law graduates, and issue enrolment certificates to such petitioners till academic session 2025-2026.
In doing so the court appreciated the positive step taken by the bar body while accepting the suggestions and directions of the court which had earlier asked the BCI to rethink and appropriately decide on granting enrolment certificates wherein institutions have not paid fee for retrospective recognition.
Case title: Mohmmad Sarifvisad Purvala & Ors. vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 113
The Gujarat High Court refused to interfere with demolition action of dwelling units in Ahmedabad's Rangwala Challi, observing the petitioners residing their had carried out construction despite notice asking them stop and had also gone on to break the seal put by authorities to use the property which had no development permission.
Noting the property was located in 300 metre radius of a protected monument, the court underscored the petitioners had taken law in their own hands and such citizens who have no regard to law are not entitled to any relief.
Case title: Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation vs. Shaikh Asif Ahmed Mohammed Hanif
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 114
The Gujarat High Court upheld Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's order terminating services of three persons appointed as Station Fire Officers on the ground that they secured appointment by resorting to dubious documents underscoring that illegal acts would also cover even those actions committed prior to appointment.
The high court was hearing Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation's plea challenging single judge's order which had set aside the termination of Station Fire Officers by the Corporation, who were on probation from 2016 to 2019.
Case title: Sachinbhai Mansukhbhai Patel & Anr. vs State of Gujarat and Another Appeal
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 115
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (July 28) acquitted three men who had been convicted in 2006 by a sessions court in Anand for rioting and for being members of unlawful assembly, in connection with the 2002 Post-Godhra riots.
The high court observed that no Test Identification Parade was conducted and in absence of the same the dock identification of accused was doubtful. It further observed that how the prosecution witness identified the accused was not stated nor had the witness mentioned the role of each of accused whom he saw in a crowd of over 100 people.
Case title: Aasiyabanu Mohammed Afzal Shaikh vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 116
The High Court has directed the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Board (GSHSB) to henceforth ensure that the list of instructions preceding questions for Class 10 and 12 examinations, shall specifically state which questions are to be attempted by visually impaired students.
Case title: KM Bhut vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation:2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 117
The Gujarat High Court upheld the compulsory retirement of a 58-year-old judicial officer, noting that while such an action was not a punishment, the court can't interfere with the "wisdom" of the full court and exercise judicial review when the judicial officer had himself not alleged patent illegality or malafides regarding the decision making process.
A division bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice RT Vachchani in its order observed that order of compulsory retirement is not a punishment. It however observed that "a single un-communicated adverse remark in the entire service record or doubtful integrity" is enough to retire a Judicial Officer compulsorily in public interest.
Case title: Abdul Vahab Mohammed Shabbir Sopariwala vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 118
The Gujarat High Court rejected a plea challenging the constitution of a committee formed to consider necessity of Uniform Civil Code for the State, observing that the panel was constituted by an executive order and in absence of any statutory provision, the selection of the members is in the absolute domain of the State.
The court further said that by merely constituting a committee it cannot be said that prejudice is caused to any class of people when it is always open for them to make a representation espousing their views on the UCC to the Committee.
Case title: ABC vs State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 119
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a 2010 FIR lodged against an accused who was a minor at the time of the alleged incident, noting that the concerned police authorities must not have had knowledge of Section 83 of IPC, which is applicable on children between 7-12 years.
Case title: Maheshdan Prabhudan Langa v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 120
The Gujarat High Court dismissed the regular bail plea of journalist Mahesh Langa in a money laundering case lodged in connection with two FIRs which included the offence of cheating, observing that he had a number of antecedents and that while being in custody he had influenced witnesses.
For context, a sessions court had in November last year granted anticipatory bail to Langa in a cheating FIR registered against him on a complaint filed by an individual running an advertising agency. The court had granted the bail after noting that as per the contents of the FIR, the dispute between the parties was for non payment of money which is "primarily in civil nature". It had then also noted that the alleged cheating had happened between March 2023 and October this year and the complainant had not explained the delay in filing the complaint.
Case title: Rajubhai Dalsinghbhai Ninama v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 121
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (August 1) pulled up the Vadodara Jail Authority for "illegally" detaining a convict for 2 months and eight days while failing to rectify the error in calculating the set off period the convict was entitled to, observing that the authority acted arbitrarily and in complete disregard of the convict's fundamental rights.
Quoting Mahatma Gandhi who had said, “The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others", the high court observed that despite repeated opportunities, the authorities failed to act with empathy and continued with their illegal and arbitrary approach. It further directed a comprehensive exercise to calculate the set-off period for all convicts, asking the Inspector General of Prisons to ensure that atmosphere of jails is akin to an Ashram.
Case title: Sahdev Ranchodbhai Brahman v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 122
The Gujarat High Court last week imposed a cost of ₹25,000/- on a husband who had uploaded 'obscene' photographs of his wife on WhatsApp and Instagram, accompanied by filthy comments and had made them viral.
A bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar passed the order while quashing the FIR and all consequential proceedings initiated against the husband, after noting that the matter had been amicably settled between the parties.
Case title: Rathod Nareshbhai Mansukhbhai & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 123
Noting that employees right to House Rent Allowance is not absolute, the Gujarat High Court has asked the state government to form a committee to consider pleas moved by various government employees working in schools in urban and rural areas, aggrieved by categorization of various cities and House Rent Allowance policy in this respect.
The court was hearing a batch of pleas of government employees from Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar and Bhavnagar regarding grievance on grant of HRA and CLA. The State Government had said that cities are classified into the different categories and based on the classification of cities under the different categories, the payment of the HRA and CLA would be decided.
Case title: Suo Motu v/s Devesh Bhatt & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 124
The Gujarat High Court held a lawyer guilty of contempt of court for levelling "false" and "scandalous" allegations against judges of the high court and judicial officers, sentencing him to three-months imprisonment along with cost of Rs. 1 Lakh.
A division bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice RT Vachchani passed the order in a batch of contempt applications initiated suo motu over the years (beginning from 2011) against the contemnor, an advocate practicing in the High Court as well as other courts in the State.
Case title: X vs Union of India & Others
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 125
The Gujarat High Court declared provisions of a 2008 Standing Order and CRPF Assistant Commandant (Ministerial) Recruitment Rules 2011 as "ultra-vires" to the Constitution and the 2017 HIV/AIDS (Prevention & Control) Act, for being discriminatory to HIV/AIDS positive persons in CRPF in matters of promotion.
In doing so the court expressed its disappointment with the Centre for not aligning its standing order and 2021 recruitment rules in consonance with the 2017 Act calling it a "sorry state of affairs".
Case title: State of Gujarat v/s Raijibhai Fulabhai Sodha
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 126
The Gujarat High Court strongly "deprecated" the State police for not informing about the death of an accused which took place in 2016, whom the court had convicted for murder of his wife last month, thereby underscoring the "negligence" on the police's part in making the court hear the matter and waste judicial time.
The court asked the Public Prosecutor to bring the negligence to the notice of the concerned Superintendent of Police to take appropriate action against the concerned police officials.
Gujarat High Court Extends Asaram Bapu's Temporary Bail Till August 21 In Rape Case
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 127
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (August 7) extended temporary bail of Asaram Bapu till August 21, who was convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in Gandhinagar and is serving a life sentence.
Notably on July 3, the high court had extended Asaram Bapu's temporary bail for one month, after noting statement by Asaram Bapu's counsel that he wont seek further extension of temporary bail. The high court had then further clarified that further prayer for extension of temporary bail will not be entertained on medical grounds.
Case title: Manish Bhupendrabhai Panwala v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 128
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a 2009 case registered against a journalist for allegedly disturbing a lion while it was feeding, "outside" the forest limits in Gir National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary.
In doing so the court observed that merely disturbing a lion would not fall within the ambit of hunting as defined under the Wildlife Protection Act. The court however remarked that while conduct would not amount to an offence, it indicated insensitivity and recklessness; it however took note of the remorse expressed by the petitioner.
Case title: Hirenbhai Mahendrabhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 129
Noting that a complainant in a criminal case was given investigation papers by the Investigating Officer before filing of chargesheet, the Gujarat High Court directed the concerned Superintendent of Police to take action against the erring cop.
The court said that either the officer did not know of the settled law or had perhaps acted with ulterior motive, adding that the act prima facie appeared to be dangerous and must be curtailed at the initial stage. It thus directed the concerned SP to submit compliance report on action taken against the erring police officer.
Case title: Employees State Insurance Corporation & Ors. v/s Gaurav Zalavadia
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 130
The Gujarat High Court restored an order transferring nearly 500 doctors of Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), which was earlier set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on the ground of violating DOPT guidelines regarding posting of spouses near each other.
In doing so the court found no infirmity in the transfer order challenged on the ground that the respondent doctor had not been accommodated as per posting of his spouse, noting that it was due to administrative exigencies.
Case title: Sunil Hiralal Manodwara v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 131
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a man accused of fraudulently availing benefit of Input Tax Credit of over Rs.10 crores by allegedly showing fictitious transactions on record from companies whose GST registration came to be cancelled.
The counsel for the GST authorities has opposed the application contending that the applicant herein initially created forged firms on the basis of the documents like Aadhar card, Pan card etc., and thereafter, had shown fictitious transactions with those firms.
Case title: X vs. None
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 132
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that under Muslim law, when a couple mutually decides to dissolve their marriage i.e. Mubaraat, they are at liberty to do so through mutual verbal consent without drawing up a written agreement.
For context, under Muslim law process of Mubaraat refers to divorce/dissolution of marriage through mutual consent between the husband and wife. The court was hearing an appeal jointly filed by the husband and wife challenging an April 19 family court order by which, family suit was dismissed treating it as not maintainable. They claimed that family court had committed in error in declaring that dissolution of the parties' marriage by way of 'mubaraat' is not maintainable.
Case title: Bhavsing Chhaganbhai Bilval since Deceased Through his Legal Heirs v/s State of Gujarat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 133
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (August 14) upheld a sessions court order convicting a policeman for culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the custodial death of a 22-year-old man in 1989.
For Context, the incident took place in October 1989. The sessions case was registered in 1990 and the sessions court passed the conviction order and sentence in 2000.
Case title: Kamlesh Gangabharti Goswami v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 134
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (August 17) dismissed a PIL alleging misappropriation of funds of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MNREGA) in Dahod district, after noting that the plea was seeking a roving inquiry when there were no allegations made against any officer which cannot be permitted.
The court further in its order noted the plea was based on research done by the petitioner who was resident of another district claiming to an RTI activist; the court also noted that such an allegation can be probed by the competent authority under the act.
Gujarat High Court Extends Asaram Bapu's Temporary Bail In Rape Case Till September 3
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 135
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (August 19) extended Asaram Bapu's temporary bail, who was convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in Gandhinagar and is serving a life sentence.
After hearing the matter for some time, the court extended Asaram Bapu's temporary bail till the next date of hearing i.e. September 3, after noting that Rajasthan High Court had listed his bail plea in a separate rape case on August 27 while directing his medical examination in the meantime.
Case title: State of Gujarat & Ors. v/s Adarsh Gujarat Anganwadi Union & Ors
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 136
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (August 20) partly reversed a single judge's 2024 order which had declared that Anganwadi Workers (AWWs) and Anganwadi Helpers (AWHs) shall be treated at par with the regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts in the State or Central Government.
While it set aside the single judge's directions to treat anganwadi workers and helpers at par with government employees and formulation of a policy for their regularization, the court however noted that the wages granted to anganwadi workers were paltry despite directions of the Supreme Court. It thus directed the authorities to increase the minimum wages granted to AWWs and AWHs which is to be paid within six months along with arrears.
Case title: Sorathiya Hareshbhai Rameshbhai v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 137
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (August 23) cancelled the premature, "illegal" release of a murder convict, following a "pardon" granted by the then Additional DGP Jail in 2018 after observing that the same was granted without authority and without following due procedure.
Quoting from the Brihadaranyakopanishad, the high court at the outset said, "Law is the king of kings, far more powerful and right than they; nothing can be mightier than law, by whose aid, as by that of the highest monarch, even the weak may prevail over the strong"
In doing so the high court said that the basis on which the authority granted pardon was a 2017 circular issued by the state government which in fact pertained to remission of convicts and not the grant of pardon to convicts.
Case title: High Court of Gujarat v/s Babubhai Sampatbhai Pateliya & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 138
The Gujarat High Court has ordered deletion of strictures passed against its Registry by a single judge over delay in implementing its earlier directions for installation of CCTV cameras in "every corner of the Registry" as well as "important places" in the high court campus.
The court further stayed the monitoring of the issue by the single judge, while observing that he lacked the authority to direct the Registry on the issue as the exclusive domain lies with the administrative control of the high court's Chief Justice.
Case title: X v/s Y
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 139
The Gujarat High Court has held that a marital dispute between two Hindus whose marriage was conducted in India can be entertained only under the Hindu Marriage Act and foreign family law shall not be applicable even if the couple are domiciled or have citizenship of a foreign country.
The court thus underscored that the applicability of a foreign law to dissolve a marriage which has been performed under the provisions of the HMA is "impermissible".
Case title: Punambhai Ashabhai Waghela v/s Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 140
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a batch of appeals challenging an order refusing to grant 448 individuals reinstatement with Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. on the ground that they had opted for voluntary retirement and did not withdraw from the concerned scheme within the validity period.
The court observed that the employees had admitted that they filed applications for withdrawal from the scheme after the 20.03.2007 the date on which the validity ended. It also rejected the employees contention that that they had a "vested right" to withdraw the application before being relieved from service.
Case title: Yusuf Mehmudkhan Pathan v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 141
The Gujarat High Court recently upheld an order directing Vadodara Municipal Corporation to take steps to remove encroachment of a plot by former cricketer and TMC MP Yusuf Pathan.
In doing so the court held that "long possession" of the plot by Pathan, without paying consideration, would not give him any rights over the land adding that it cannot perpetuate such an illegality. Finding Pathan to be an encroacher the court said that there was no order passed allotting the plot to him.
Case title: Yatin K Desai (Leuva Patel) v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 142
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (September 11) asked a litigant challenging the teaser of the upcoming movie 'Jolly LLB 3' to go through the order of the Allahabad High Court–which dismissed a plea for restraining the release of the movie, and thereafter take a call with respect to his plea.
During the hearing in the pre-lunch session, the petitioner who appeared in person submitted before Justice Niral R Mehta that he was challenging the certificates issued by CBFC.
Update: When the matter was heard on September 16, the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition.The plea was thus disposed of.
Case Name: Gujarat Power Corporation Limited v. Tata Power Renewable Energy Limited
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 143
The Gujarat High Court while dismissing a writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution observed that the Writ Court can exercise their power only in cases where the only if the order in questions is “completely perverse”, or the order in questions is crippled with “bad faith” or the order in questions falls in the category of “rarest of rare circumstances”.
The bench of Justice Mauna M. Bhatt further held that if the Writ Court exercises its jurisdiction in curing every procedural lapse in arbitral proceedings, the same would amount to opening Pandora's box, which would be contrary to the principle of minimum judicial intervention.
Case Title: Zonal Manager, Bank of India v. Presiding Officer & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 144
The Gujarat High Court upheld the reinstatement of services of an employee of Bank of India who was compulsorily retired in 2002, holding that the bank had failed to establish charges of misconduct and assault against him and that the penalty amounted to victimization and unfair labour practice.
The Court held that the case against the employee suffered from an absence of substantial evidence, as crucial witnesses were not examined and that the case appeared one of "heated exchange" between two bank employees and thus the major penalty was excessive.
Surat Rape Case: Gujarat High Court Grants Narayan Sai 5-Day Temporary Bail To Meet Ailing Mother
Case title: Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 145
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (September 18) granted five-day temporary bail to Narayan Sai–convicted and sentenced to life by sessions court in 2019 in a rape case– to meet his "ailing" mother.
A division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice PM Raval in its order said:
"Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances and grounds urged in the application and having regard to the period of incarceration, case is made out for releasing the applicant on temporary bail for a period of 5 days from the date of his release with police surveillance".
Case title: Jaysukhbhai Rambhai Avaidya v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 146
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (September 19) dismissed a PIL moved by a resident of Rajkot claiming illegal construction of Multiplex Cinema Hall in Porbandar district, after noting that the litigant had not been able to establish his credentials.
The court further noted that there was no material in the plea, other than newspaper reports, to show how the petitioner found that the construction was illegal.
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat and Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 147
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash the FIR against a woman advocate booked for disclosing the name of a POCSO victim by giving a media bite, stating that she behaved "absolutely irresponsibly as a professional as well as a human".
Justice Nirzar Desai in his order further observed that what was more glaring is that the applicant could not protect the "dignity, reputation, and privacy of a minor victim of an offence under the POCSO Act", despite being a woman and, "prima facie appears to have placed her professional interests and publicity above and ahead the interest of the minor victim".
Case title: GPC Infrastructure Ltd. v/s Gandhinagar Municipal Corporation and Batch
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 148
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a batch of petitions filed by private contractors involved in public works contract disputes with municipal corporations, in view of a state government notification providing for routing such disputes to be adjudicated by tribunal under the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act 1992.
For context the 1992 Act provides for the constitution of a Tribunal to arbitrate in disputes arising from works contracts to which the State Government or a public undertaking is a party and to provide for matters connected therewith.
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 149
The Gujarat High Court has said that while a magistrate has the power to pass an order to protect the safety of a woman–who had lodged a rape complaint, and send her to a shelter home after she refused to go to her own home, however she cannot be kept there indefinitely against her will.
It also said that once a woman who is a major makes a request to leave the shelter home, the magistrate is duty bound to release the woman.
Case title: Dhanvantiben Vijaybhai Purohit & Ors. v/s Government of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 150
The Gujarat High Court deprecated the conduct of an advocate who claimed that due to non-grant of injunction order by trial court, the authorities would demolish his clients' flats overnight, noting that he misused the high court's machinery by moving an appeal late at night without even ascertaining the correct facts.
Calling his conduct "deplorable" and "disgraceful" the court said that the lawyer, being a senior member of the bar, must not forget that they are officers of the court and have a duty to provide assistance.
Case title: Kush Rashmikantbhai Dave & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 151
The Gujarat High Court rejected a plea moved by certain candidates challenging the result of Sub-Inspector exam wherein the selection board required candidates to secure 40% marks in each of the four subjects.
The court held that the purpose of selection would stand defeated if instead of ascertaining knowledge of candidate in each subject their overall assessment is considered.
Case title: Rajsinhbhai Chhanganbhai Kadchha & ANR. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 152
The Gujarat High Court recently vacated its earlier order staying a proposed auction for sale of commercial shops constructed in residential premises known as Rangoli Park Apartments in Rajkot.
For context, the court had on August 26 directed the Gujarat Housing Board not to auction the commercial shops scheduled on August 28. Vacating the stay the court noted that the development permission pertained to construction for both residential and commercial units and when the possession of units was taken by the petitioners–who had challenged such construction–in 2017 the shops were in existence.
Case title: Hardik Bharatbhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 153
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (September 29) quashed a non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against BJP MLA Hardik Patel after he gave an undertaking that he shall appear before the magistrate for attending the proceedings in a case related to a 2018 FIR registered against him.
Case title: Mancha Masjid Through Trustee/Mutawalli v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 154
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (October 3) declined to interfere with an order refusing to restrain the proposed partial demolition of a mosque stated to be 400-years old, to widen a road leading towards Sabarmati railway station in Ahmedabad.
The court was hearing an appeal by the Muttawali of Mancha Masjid against rejection of his writ petition challenging action of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC), to set back a part of premises of the mosque, situated at Saraspur and which is believed to be constructed approximately 400 years ago.
Case title: Jayeshkumar Krishnakant Acharya v/s Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 155
Upholding the premature retirement of a judicial officer in 2016, the Gujarat High Court observed that an order of compulsory or premature retirement made in public interest or in the interest of administration is not a punishment.
The court dismissed a plea moved by a former judicial officer challenging a 2016 notification notifying his premature retirement, who was serving as an Ad-hoc Additional District Judge at Nadiad, Kheda. The petitioner was retired prematurely, in public interest, on attaining the age of 53 years.
Case title: Mahadev Enterprise Thro Pruthvi Sanjaybhai Solanki & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 156
The Gujarat High Court has said that appellate court under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has the sole discretion to direct a person challenging conviction for cheque dishonour to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, while considering the attending circumstances.
Case Title: Shah Enterprise v/s State of Gujarat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 157
The Gujarat High Court held that the doctrine of merger does not preclude the decree holder from claiming post award interest at 18% under section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). The court quashed an order passed by the Principal District Judge by which it rejected the review application. The court directed the State of Gujarat to recalculate and pay interest on the sum adjudged in the arbitral award.
Case title: Deep Rajendrakumar Shah v/s State of Gujarat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 158
The Gujarat High Court refused to discharge a man booked for allegedly giving complainant's bank account details to cops accused of trying to extort and seek gratification in lieu of de-freezing the complainant's bank account.
The court observed that "prima facie" there appeared to be ample material to put the accused to trial.
Case title: Mahendrasinh Balusinh Raol v/s State of Gujarat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 159
The Gujarat High Court has observed that while police officers enjoy certain legal protections, they are not above the law. The Court noted that being found intoxicated while on duty undermines the integrity and efficiency of police personnel and erodes public trust in law enforcement agencies.
A bench of Justice RT Vachhani made these observations while dismissing a criminal revision application filed by Mahendrasinh Balusinh Raol, a police constable convicted under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, for being found in an inebriated state while on duty in 2003.
Case title: M/s Honey Fun N Thrills Co. Through Its Proprietor v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 160
In a matter where an alleged whistleblower in a municipal corporation had purportedly supplied a "forged" document used in a tender but refused to come forward alleging threat to life, the Gujarat High Court on Monday (October 6) orally said that India is not a country with no rule of law.
The matter pertains to a contract awarded by Vadodara Municipal Corporation to the respondent entity, which was questioned by the petitioner.
Case title: GHK Hospitality and Infrastructure Ltd. v/s PSP Projects Ltd.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 161
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (October 6) closed a Section 37 appeal filed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act pertaining to a 10-year dispute which was referred to mediation and was amicably resolved in two sittings.
Disposing of the appeal, the court, while lauding the efforts of the mediator, also orally remarked that "mediation has that magic".
Case title: Superintendent (AE) Thro Arihant Kumar Jain v/s Virbhadrasinh Pratapsinh Chauhan & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 162
The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that once a penalty, interest, fee etc., deposited by a registered person in his electronic ledger is credited to the government's account, the tax liability is discharged to the extent of the deposit made to the Government.
Case title: Vadodara Municipal Corporation v/s Ranjit Buildcon Ltd.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 163
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (October 7) dismissed a Section 37 appeal under Arbitration and Conciliation Act filed by Vadodara Municipal Corporation concerning a construction contract dispute, noting that sufficient explanation for condoning delay of 137 days in filing appeal was not given.
During the hearing, the court, on being informed that the appeal could not be filed because the then executive engineer was on leave for three months and had also resigned and the new officer was occupied pre-monsoon preparation because of which delay happened, said that this explanation was not to the court's satisfaction.
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. and Batch
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 164
The Gujarat High Court has held that persons claiming to be "victims" of religious conversion can also be booked for the said offence if they subsequently indulge in the act of inducing other persons to convert.
It thus rejected the contention of several men accused of religious conversion, that they were themselves victims of religious conversion and FIR against them is misconceived. The court said that had those persons, after getting converted, not indulged into any activity of further converting other persons, they could have been said to be victims of religious conversion.
Case title: Mahatma Gandhi Charitable Trust v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 165
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (October 8) directed Rajkot Municipal Corporation to decide the objections/ representation made by Mahatma Gandhi Charitable Trust which runs an engineering college in Mavdi— seeking exclusion of the college playground from the town planning scheme.
In doing so the court said that while "development is appreciated" however it cannot be made at the "cost of student's playground".
Case title: Rathod Gaffarmiya Allauddin & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 166
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (October 09) ordered status-quo till October 16 on the proposed demolition of certain shops in Gandhinagar district, claimed to be encroaching on a public road by the state authorities.
The court further granted seven days' time (ending on October 16) to the shop-keepers to produce documents to support their claim and if they are unable to do so, the authorities can take appropriate action after October 16.
Income Tax | Manual Filing Of Appeal By NRI Valid For DTVSV Scheme Benefits: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Tejal Mayur Rao v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 167
The Gujarat High Court held that the manual filing of an appeal by an NRI is valid for DTVSV (Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024) Scheme Benefits.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi were addressing the case where the petitioner/assessee has challenged the communication issued by the respondent authorities, whereby the declaration made by the assessee under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 ('DTVSV Scheme, 2024'), is rejected on the ground that the appeal filed by the assessee was invalid.
Case title: Income Tax Bar Association & Anr. v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 168
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (October 13) directed Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to extend the due date for filing income tax return (ITR) to November 30 for those assesse's who are required to file an audit report.
This the court said after noting that as the specified date of filing tax audit report had been extended to October 31, then as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act the due date for filing ITR has to be extended keeping one month gap between the two.
Case title: MS Shaikh v/s High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 169
The Gujarat High Court set aside compulsory retirement of a judicial officer made 16 years ago, noting that the adverse remark regarding the officer's doubtful integrity was not based on tangible material and there was also a likelihood of bias in the mind of committee which took the decision.
Case title: Girish Harsukhray Vasavada & Anr. v/s Shanakarlal Govindji Joshi & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 170
The Gujarat High Court has said that there is no provision in the CrPC/BNSS which empowers the first appellate court to suspend the sentence or release an accused solely on the ground of enabling him to file a revision plea challenging conviction before Higher Courts.
The court observed that the legislature did not intend to confer power to the appellate Court to stay or suspend the sentence or to extend the time granted to the accused to surrender so as to enable him to file revision application.
Case Title: Vineet Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 171
The Gujarat High Court held that statutory interest mandatorily payable under Section 56 GST Act on refunds delayed beyond 60 days.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the provision of section 56 of the GST Act is a mandatory provision and the interest which is required to be paid under section 56 is compensatory in nature for delayed payment of refund which otherwise is not in dispute.
Case Name: Fivebro Water Resources Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v/s Bijay Murmuria & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 172
The Gujarat High Court bench led by Justice Niral R. Mehta held that the NCLT has jurisdiction under section 60(5)(c) of the IBC to adjudicate the lease and license dispute during the liquidation proceedings.
The petitioners, Fivebro Water Services Pvt. Ltd. and another, had the lease and license agreements with the corporate debtor for its premises in Ahmedabad and Mumbai. Thereafter, the liquidation of the corporate debtor was ordered.
Case Title: Tithi Chandrajit Shah v/s Rajendrabhai Alias Samirbhai Natvarlal Shah & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 173
The Gujarat High Court held that once heads of two families amicably resolve disputes through composite family arrangement and a consent arbitral award, individual family members cannot later challenge the award even if they were non-signatories on grounds of non-receipt of a signed copy of the award or lack of individual consent.
Case Title: Arcelormittal Nippon Steel India Limited v/s NCLT
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 174
The Gujarat High Court has recently held that the President of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has no authority to transfer cases from one State to another through administrative orders.
The ruling came in proceedings linked to the Essar Steel insolvency process, where the court also found that repeated recusals by NCLT Members in Ahmedabad were neither "legal" nor "justified."
Case Title: Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation v/s M/s The Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd. & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 175
The Gujarat High Court held that negligence or inaction on the part of counsel cannot justify condonation of unexplained and long delay. The court further held that the court is not prohibited from dismissing the petitions under section 34 for non prosecution.
Case Title: M/s Techtix Engineers v/s Megastone Logipark Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 176
The Gujarat High Court held that an application under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) cannot be rejected merely on the ground that a certified copy of the agreement was not produced along with it when the same agreement containing the arbitration clause is already on the record and undisputed between the parties.
Case title: Chirala Sesha Srinivas, Inspector of Central Excise & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 177
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash forgery, cheating and corruption charges against two former Kandla Special Economic Zone (KASEZ) officials accused of filing a false inspection report in respect of an entity importing metal scrap by allegedly fraudulently diverting duty-free imported materials into open market.
Case Title: State of Gujarat v. Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 178
The Gujarat High Court, while quashing the penalty of Rs. 25.53 Cr. on Hindustan Coca-Cola, stated that the amount of tax could not have been bifurcated by the revenue simply because the sales had been inclusive of tax.
The bench found that there is no evidence on record to show that the assessee had collected any amount by way of tax from its distributors, retailers or customers, as the sales invoice shows the 'Nil' tax in the sales tax column along with the fact that there was an endorsement on the sales invoice that the sales taxes are exempted from payment of tax.
Case Title: Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 179
The Gujarat High Court stated that the customs commissioner cannot reassess duty on warehoused imports cleared from refineries beyond his jurisdiction.
Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi agreed with the Tribunal that a proper officer having the administrative jurisdiction over the respective refineries where the goods were removed under section 67 of the Customs Act, 1962, only could have assumed the jurisdiction for reassessment and not the Commissioner, Jamnagar, who can only be considered as proper officer till the goods were permitted to be warehoused on provisional assessment.
Case title: Shweta Sanjiv Bhatt v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 180
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a plea filed by former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt's wife seeking that her husband not be transferred or dislodged from Palanpur jail to any other jail observing that Bhatt has no absolute right to seek jail transfer.
Bhatt was sentenced to life imprisonment by a Jamnagar Sessions Court in connection with an alleged custodial death case on 20.06.2019 and he was lodged at Jamnagar jail. Meanwhile during this time, in an NDPS trial, the Banaskantha Sessions Court on 27.03.2024 convicted the former IPS officer for the respective offences.
Case title: Vithlani Exports v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 181
The Gujarat High Court remanded back a matter to the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal on assessment of tax, after noting that the tribunal did not consider the grounds raised by the petitioner proprietor before passing orders.
A division bench of Justice Bhargav Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi noted that the tribunal did not deal with the grounds raised by the petitioner in its second appeal.
Case title: X & Ors. v/s Regional Passport Office Ahmedabad & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 182
The Gujarat High Court allowed a plea moved by a divorced woman seeking renewal of passport of her minor children which was denied by the passport authority on the ground that the father's no-objection certificate was absent.
Justice LS Pirzada noted that it was not in dispute that decree of divorce had already been obtained by the mother and father; they subsequently got divorced and Memorandum of Understanding was executed between them as per which custody of the minor children was to be with the mother.
Gujarat High Court Grants 6-Month Suspension Of Sentence To Asaram In 2013 Rape Case
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 183
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (November 6) granted six-month suspension of sentence to Asaram who is convicted in a 2013 rape case by a sessions court in Gandhinagar and is serving a life sentence.
The high court suspended the sentence and directed that Asaram be released on interim bail on medical grounds, after noting that last month the Rajasthan High Court had suspended Asaram's sentence in view of his medical condition.
Case title: State of Gujarat v/s Vipulbhai Bharatbhai Bin Chhappanbhai Patni
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 184
The Gujarat High Court set aside the death penalty of a man convicted and sentenced by the trial court for the alleged honour killing of his own brother and sister-in-law, noting that the prosecution could not prove the case satisfactorily and the investigation was done in a "slipshod" manner.
Case Name: Adani Enterprise Ltd. v. M/s SMS Carbon And Minerals Pvt Ltd.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 185
The Gujarat High Court recently held that various agreements entered into between the parties forming part of the same commercial project can be referred to Arbitration, and one arbitrator can be appointed to adjudicate all the disputes arising from the various agreements.
The Bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, while hearing a petition u/s 11 of the A&C Act, moved by Adani Enterprise Ltd. (“Petitioner”) held that the General Condition of Contracts (“GCC”) and the General Terms and Conditions (“GTC”) are an integral part of the five coal sale and purchase agreements, and five service agreements respectively. The ten contracts entered into between the parties are governed by these two contracts dated 0404.2022.
Case Title: Cardiogy Ltd. & Anr. v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 186
The Gujarat High Court has held that the supply of medicines and implants by private hospitals to in-patients amounts to 'deemed sale' and is liable to VAT (Value Added Tax).
The issue before the bench was whether the supply of medicines, stents, implants, consumables, etc., during the course of treatment of patients amounts to 'sale' as defined in section 2(23) of the VAT Act.
Case Name: Kamnath Private Limited vs. State Tax Officer
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 187
The Gujarat High Court has extended benefit of Amnesty Scheme under the Gujarat Value Added Tax (GVAT) Act, 2003 to dealer who was precluded from making full payment under the Scheme on account of 'automatic' re-adjustment of instalment amount.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi set aside rejection of application under the Scheme noting that non-payment of differential amount was only due to technical glitches of the online portal. The High Court emphasized on 'clear and unequivocal intent' to avail the Scheme and observed that “The delay of 2 days in making the payment in the aforesaid Scheme is condoned.”
Case Title: Patel Stuti Vishal Kumar v Union
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 188
The Gujarat High Court has allowed the petition of a meritorious student, whose admission in MBBS course was cancelled because she failed to follow the required procedure, subject to the condition that she would serve an additional 6 months in a rural area after completing her course.
In doing so, the bench of Justice Nirzar S Desai observed that the 18-year-old student had a brilliant academic career and had not focused on other aspects of life, leading to her missing out on the procedure. However, such action should not prove costly to a meritorious student.
Case title: Sushilaben Jayantibhai Patel v/s The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vadodara & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 189
The Gujarat High Court recently granted relief to a senior citizen woman who had failed to file income tax return for Assessment Year 2017-18, taking note of her age as well as the fact that she was suffering from various ailments including Alzheimer disease along with hyper tension and diabetes.
The court observed that the tax authority had while exercising revisional powers under Section 264 Income Tax had simply rejected the woman's revision plea who had submitted that she could not file the return due to default by her accountant and manager. The court said that instead the authority should have positively considered the woman's case without rejecting her plea on technical grounds.
Case title: Parag Rameshbhai Gathani v/s Income Tax Officer & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 190
The Gujarat High Court quashed a notice under Section 153C Income Tax Act issued to a person other than the searched person for assessment of income, noting that the proceedings were initiated nearly 4 years after search was conducted observing that there was an "inordinate delay" by the authorities in recording the satisfaction note.
Case Name: VVF India Ltd. vs. Union Of India
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 191
The Gujarat High Court in a writ petition has quashed a show cause notice creating duty demand of about Rs. 464 crores on import of Crude Palm Kernel Oil (Edible Grade).
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi ruled on whether Oil even if of edible grade but required refining before human consumption qualified for customs duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2022-Customs r/w Notification No. 21/2002-Customs (Exemption Notification). The High Court rejected the interpretation that crude palm kernel oil imported of edible grade is not eligible for exemption on account of the 'end-use condition' specified in the Exemption Notification.
Case title: M/s DG Nakrani v/s Smimer Hospital & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 192
The Gujarat High Court quashed Surat Municipal Corporation's order debarring a firm for two years for allegedly filing a false affidavit in the tender process, noting that the firm not disclosing cases filed against it under Minimum Wages Act would not amount to a "police case".
The Corporation had argued that several criminal complaints were filed against the petitioner firm under Section 22 Minimum Wages Act; hence the petitioner was supposed to disclose it.
Case title: Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 193
The Gujarat High Court recently re-affirmed that the state government's 2019 circular granted benefits and consolidated fixed pay of Rs. 14,800 to those part-time employees who had worked for four hours a day.
In doing so the court said that the expression used in the state government's 2019 Circular granting such benefits stating that, “part-time employees who are working upto four hours”, has to be construed in a manner that the employees in order to claim the pay of Rs.14,800 have to "actually work minimum for four hours and not less than four hours".
Case title: Mahernagar Co-op. Housing Service Society Ltd. v/s Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 194
The Gujarat High Court quashed an order passed by tax department refusing to condone delay of 29 days by a Co-operative Housing Society in filing income tax return for Assessment Year 2018-19, after noting that the audit report was belatedly filed as the auditor was not appointed within time.
In doing so the court said that the filing of the audit report in 2019 belatedly by the Sub-auditor can termed as a "genuine predicament".
Case title: Council of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v/s S.N. Valera, FCA M/s SN Valera & Co.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 195
The Gujarat High Court rejected a 20-year-old recommendation made by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India's Council to remove a chartered account from membership for 5 years, who was appointed as central registrar of a cooperative bank and was accused of misconduct in connection with the 2001 alleged MMCB scam.
The court was hearing a 2005 reference by the Council of the ICAI which had recommended the removal of one SN Valera for five years.
Case title: Mohasin Sabbir Ahmed Surati v/s Union of India & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 196
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (November 25) granted relief to an Indian man working in Kuwait, whose application for renewal of passport was put on hold in view of an FIR registered against him for rash and negligent driving at Lunawada police station.
The court asked the authorities to process the petitioner's passport renewal plea within 4 weeks after noting that the petitioner is working in Kuwait and would face serious consequences in case renewal is not considered.
Case Detail: Shah Paper Plast Industries Limited & Anr. vs. UOI & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 197
The Gujarat High Court has recently held that the Petitioners—100% EOUs exporting goods without payment of tax—were entitled to refund of unutilised ITC under Section 54(3) read with Rule 89(4), and that their exports did not fall within the category of “deemed exports.”
The Court ruled that Circular No. 172/04/2022-GST and Rule 89(4A) were inapplicable, quashed the withdrawal and recovery of refunds issued under Section 73, rejected the retrospective reclassification of zero-rated supplies as deemed exports, and directed restoration of refunds within 12 weeks while leaving broader questions of law on refund scrutiny and recovery open.
Case title: Saberabibi Mohammad Aiyub Ansari v/s Surat Municipal Corporation & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 198
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (November 27) rejected a plea challenging a notice issued by the Surat Municipal Corporation asking the owner/occupier of a property to audit the property and produce the structure stability report of the building as the same was in a dilapidated condition requiring urgent repairs.
The court noted that since the notice was not issued to the petitioner–who claimed to be an interested party–but to another party, no cause of action had arisen against the petitioner.
Case title: M/s Tapi Ready Plast v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 199
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday (November 27) upheld order of the appellate authority under the GST Act which had dismissed a partnership firm's appeal on the ground that it was filed beyond the limitation period prescribed under the statute.
The court held that the Act prescribes a maximum limitation period of 120 days which can be condoned by the appellate authority in entertaining the appeal. It further said that it was not inclined to quash the order as the petitioner had given "lame excuses" seeking condonation of delay such as illness of accountant and closure of business.
Case title: Ashokbhai Kanjibhai Chavda & Ors. v/s Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Ors. and another petition
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 200
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (November 28) dismissed pleas by 77 individuals challenging notices to vacate possession of a premises stated to be water body in Ahmedabad, observing that the construction was unauthorized, done without any permission and the occupants lacked ownership.
Justice Mauna M Bhatt in her order noted that the pleas were filed challenging notices dated 6-11-2025 where petitioners are directed to give peaceful vacant possession within 21 days.
Case title: Rene Joshilda Goldwin Joseph v/s State of Gujarat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 201
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a woman accused of sending hoax bomb threat mails to several organizations subject after noting that it appeared that she was disturbed.
The court granted bail subject to her executing a bond of Rs.10,000 with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to certain conditions.
Case title: State of Gujarat v/s Rajeshbhai Pitamberbhai Parmar & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 202
Upholding the acquittal of in-laws in a case of dowry death and cruelty, the Gujarat High Court observed that the refusal to permit daughter-in-law to accompany her in-laws to the temple would not amount to an offence under explanation (a) of Section 498A IPC and would also not amount to harassment for property under explanation (b).
In the present case, the daughter-in-law had insisted on accompany her in-laws but was refused, pursuant to which she allegedly committed suicide.
Case title: Ronil Umeshkumar Modi v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 203
The Gujarat High Court granted relief to an MBBS student permitting him to participate in the NEET-PG exam, declared ineligible earlier as he had inadvertently filled up the incorrect average MBBS marks.
The petitioner had scored 68.30% marks, which is the average of the three years of the MBBS course. However, while filling up the form for admission to NEET-PG, he had inadvertently mentioned his average MBBS marks as 67.63%. In view of the above discrepancy, and in view Clause 2.2 and Clause 10.2 of the NEET-PG 2023 Information Bulletin— the petitioner's candidature was cancelled.
Case title: Jigishaben Maheshbhai Patel v/s Sipi Mohammadkhan Rasulkhan & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 204
The Gujarat High Court recently awarded Rs. 3 Lakh to a woman for loss of matrimonial prospects, after a bus accident which resulted in the amputation of her left leg.
The woman had moved the high court challenging a 2019 award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), seeking enhancement of compensation. The appellant was travelling in an AMTS bus on 05.01.2011, from Lal Darwaja to her home and at Malav Talav. When she was getting off the bus from the front door, the driver of the bus drove in a rash and negligent manner, due to which, the appellant fell and the frontvwheel of the bus ran over her left leg.
Case title: State of Gujarat v/s Ishwarji Sursanji Thakor
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 205
The Gujarat High Court set aside a 2002 trial court order convicting a man for culpable homicide not amounting to murder (IPC Section 304 part 1) in a case concerning the death of his wife.
The high court instead convicted the accused for murder of his wife, observing that the trial court's reasoning on evidence–the involvement of accused, the nature of injuries inflicted and the consequent death of the deceased amounting offence of Section 300 (murder) was palatable however its reasoning invoking offence under Section 304 part 1 was not acceptable.
Case title: Ashumal @ Asharam Thaumal Sindhi (Harpalani) v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 206
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (December 01) orally said that it "will modify" the condition of the presence of three police officials in Asaram's vicinity, during the 6-month period wherein his life sentence has been suspended in a rape case.
The court in its order said:
"We have carefully examined the past conduct of the applicant herein and order passed by the Jodhpur Bench of Rajasthan High Court, while releasing the convict on temporary bail. In such circumstances, we deem it fit to delete the condition of round the clock presence of the security personnel and, therefore, condition no.(i) is required to be modified to the extent of directing presence of police officials in the vicinity of the applicant stood deleted. In other words, except presence of police personnel other conditions imposed by this Court while granting temporary bail in Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2025 inCriminal Appeal No.607 of 2023 remain unaltered and required to be followed scrupulously by the convict".
Case title: Abdul Vahab Mohamed Shabbir Sopariwala v/s State of Gujarat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 207
The Gujarat High Court on Monday rejected an appeal filed against a single bench order dismissing challenge to a committee formed by the State to consider necessity of Uniform Civil Code.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice DN Ray said that scope of judicial review does not permit the court to enter into the prohibited arena of executive functions.
For context, the single judge had in July rejected the plea challenging the committee formed to consider necessity of UCC for the State. It had stated that the panel was constituted by an executive order and in absence of any statutory provision, the selection of the members is in the absolute domain of the State.
Case title: Navneetlal Vanmalidas Khakhkhar (Thakkar) v/s Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 208
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (December 2) dismissed an appeal challenging a single judge's order which had rejection a plea against eviction notices issued to certain residents asking them to vacate a property over encroachment of Isanpur lake in Ahmedabad.
The court noted that the notice issued by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) categorically recorded that the appellants (petitioners before single judge) had encroached upon a land, which is a water body. The notice asked the appellants to give peaceful vacant possession within 21 days on the ground that their construction is on a water body on which no construction is permissible.
Case title: Sandhya Maulik Patel v/s Asst Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 209
The Gujarat High Court has observed that information available in public domain or any unrelated information seized from the searched person without a connection to the assessee is not enough to be the basis of issuing a show cause notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
The court was hearing a plea challenging notice dated 13.10.2021 by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the Assessment Years (AY) 2014-15 to 2020-21 issued to the petitioner.
Case title: Apcotex Industries Ltd. Union of India & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 210
The Gujarat High Court has held that Acrylonitrile when used for non-insecticide purpose, such as manufacture of synthetic rubber, would be exempted from the mandate of import permits in view of the exemptions under Section 38 of the Insecticides Act.
Section 38 of the Act carries a non-obstante clause which states that nothing in the act shall apply to the use of any insecticide by any person for his own household purposes or for kitchen garden or in respect of any land under his cultivation.
Case title: M/s Mitesh Impex & Ors. v/s Union of India & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 211
The Gujarat High Court has said that under Section 138B Customs Act, statements of witnesses given before a concerned officer, who are unavailable for cross-examination by the assessee, can be considered relevant only when the circumstances of unavailability are established, and a finding is given on the impossibility to secure their presence.
Case title: Gateway Exim v/s State of Gujarat Through Commissioner of State Tax & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 212
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (December 3) quashed order issued to entity for failing to intimate about personal hearing, which had claimed that after notice of GST DRC-01 was issued to it, the authority did not intimate the date and time of personal hearing which was against principles of natural justice.
In doing so the court said while issuing DRC-01 it would not be mandatory to incorporate the date and time of personal hearing; however once subsequent proceedings progress, but before the final order is passed, the assessee must be intimated the date and time of personal hearing.
Case title: Rao Tradelink Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 213
The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that reopening of income tax assessment under Section 148 of Income Tax Act based on mere change of opinion without concrete material is not justified, when the return has been threadbare examined during initial assessment and approved without failure of disclosure.
It noted that as per the AO's own findings he was unsure about the actual escaped income which he had said will be finalized only on completion of proceedings, which the court termed as "vague observations".
Case Detail: PFIZER Limited vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 214
The Gujarat High Court has allowed writ petition by Pfizer, a pharmaceutical major against the Value Added Tax (VAT) Tribunal order that expressly barred the consideration of any additional Form-F.
In a judgment dated November 20, 2025, the Division Bench comprising of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi noted the 11-year pendency in litigation in relation to production of Form-F under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. In this vein, the High Court deliberated on piecemeal production of Form-F for interstate branch transfers. It held the additional Form-F valued at ₹16 crores in terms of VAT Tribunal order as maintainable since Petitioner stated that future claims would be waived by it.
Case title: Tathya Pragneshbhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 215
The Gujarat High Court refused to discharge Tathya Patel for culpable homicide not amounting to murder (IPC Section 304 part 2) accused in the 2023 Iskcon Bridge hit and run case which claimed nine lives in Ahmedabad, observing that there was a strong prima facie case against him.
The court said that this was not a simple case of rash and negligent driving, wherein the applicant was under the belief that he had taken sufficient precaution to prevent the accident and this imputability arose from him "persisting in excessive speed despite being asked to drive slowly".
Case title: Navdeep Mathur & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 216
The Gujarat High Court has directed the state authorities to widely publicize prohibitory orders under Section 163 BNSS (earlier Section 144 CrPC)–prohibiting assembly of four or more persons in a specific area to prevent urgent nuisance or on apprehending danger–on "social media" to generate public awareness about the same.
In doing so the court observed that mere publication of such orders in the official gazette is not enough as the public at large has no access; whereas today in the era of social media platforms it would incumbent on the authorities to publish such orders by using these modes.
Case title: Mahendrasinh Mahobatsinh Jadeja & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 217
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (December 9) directed the state authorities to grant personal hearing to a man who had challenged a notice asking him to vacate a property, given to him on lease after 2001 earthquake, used by him to run an electronic repair shop.
In doing so the court also restrained the authorities from taking any coercive action until a decision is taken by them in the matter.
Case title: Infodesk India Pvt. Ltd. v/s Union of India
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 218
The Gujarat High Court has held that rendering software consultancy services including editorial and content creation activities as well as customer support services to Infodesk Inc., Parent Company in the United States is 'export of service' and not 'intermediary service'.
In a judgment dated November 27, 2025 the Bench comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi quashed the refund rejection order as in passing the same lower authorities erred in holding that Petitioner was providing 'Intermediary Service'. The Gujarat High Court clarified that Content integration by adding insight (smart data which is run through AI techniques and human curation) that helps resolve challenges in business did not constitute as an 'Intermediary Service'.
Case title: M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v/s The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 219
After almost 20 year litigation, the Gujarat High Court permitted a public sector energy enterprise to claim branch transfer exemption of over Rs 6 crore under the Central Sales Tax Act, which was denied earlier on non-production of the original Form-F.
Form F is a document used for branch transfer of goods in the course of inter-state trade, which permits claiming of exemption from Central Sales Tax (CST) on such transactions.
Case title: Rajgreen Infralink LLP v/s The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Surat
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 220
The Gujarat High Court quashed an order of the tax authorities rejecting a partnership firm's application seeking condonation of 13 day delay in filing income tax return on account of Covid pandemic, observing that authority "did not apply its mind" to the reasons given by the firm.
The petitioner partnership firm engaged in real estate development business had challenged a 27.10.2023 rejecting its application for condonation of delay in filing income tax return for Assessment Year 2021-22 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
Gujarat High Court Upholds Couple's Divorce Allegedly Triggered By Wife's No Onion-Garlic Diet
Case title: X v/s Y
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 221
The Gujarat High Court recently upheld a family court order dissolving the marriage of a couple which the husband claimed was triggered by differences caused due to the wife following a diet of consuming no onion and garlic.
A division bench of Justice Sangeeta Vishen and Justice Nisha M Thakore were hearing two cross appeals wherein the wife had challenged the family court's order granting divorce on the husband's plea.
Case title: Firoz Ibrahim Poshti & Ors. v/s Collector and District Magistrate & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 222
The Gujarat High Court in an interim order on Friday (December 12) directed the Godhara Nagar Palika not to take any coercive action against residents who had challenged a notice asking them to remove alleged unauthorized construction, whose plea for regularization was pending before the Collector.
The court was hearing a petition by residents challenging notice dated 12-11-2025 issued by Godhara Nagar palika whereby petitioner has been directed to remove unauthorized construction on the subject land.
Case title: Abhilasha Ashok Kumar v/s IIM & Ors and Batch
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 223
The Gujarat High Court recently set aside an order passed by IIM-Ahmedabad expelling three students enrolled in Doctoral of Programme in Management course, holding that the action of the institution was not in consonance with the procedure prescribed in the programme manual.
The petitioners, who were selected for Doctoral of Programme in Management (DPM) at IIM Ahmedabad, had challenged a June 7 decision which held that they had not fulfilled the conditions for promotion from first year to the second year of 'Coursework' stage. Hence their candidature in the said course was withdrawn and the petitioners were expelled from the programme.
Case title: Ranjana Mulchandbhai Shitlani v/s Gujarat Housing Board & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 224
The Gujarat High Court recently directed a power of attorney holder to remove encroachment over a public footpath observing that long possession will not create any ownership right adding that the party had failed to prove that they were owner of the property in question.
The court was hearing a woman's plea challenging notice dated 20.11.2025 directing her to remove encroachment done on a public footpath within 15 days.
Case Title: M/S Panchhi Traders Through its Authorized Signatory Narendra Danabhai Daki Vs State of Gujarat Through Deputy Commissioner (Enforcement) & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 225
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the power of GST authorities to confiscate goods and conveyances during transit where there is a clear intent to evade tax, and has clarified the scope and interplay of Sections 129 and 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.
A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi, while deciding a large batch of writ petitions, held that Sections 129 (detention and seizure of goods in transit) and 130 (confiscation of goods and conveyances) operate independently and are not inter-dependent, even after the amendments.
Case Detail: NBCC (India) Limited vs. Additional Commissioner CGST Delhi South
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 226
The Gujarat High Court has held that reliance on statements of witnesses without allowing the manufacturer opportunity to cross‑examine, while ignoring those statements that testified in favour of the manufacturer, violates principles of natural justice.
In a judgment delivered on November 25, 2025 Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi quashed the penalty order and culled-out 8 quintessential features of Section 138B of the Customs Act, 1962, particularly, clauses (a ) and (b) that introduces the element of cross-examination of the witness who has given the statement before a Customs Officer. The Gujarat High Court observed that Section 138B requires cross‑examination for admissibility. It was clarified that a Customs Officer cannot rely on bare statement of witnesses recorded during inquiry or proceedings cannot be used against an assessee unless an opportunity to rebut the same had been given to assessee.
Case title: State of Gujarat v/s Jayantbhai @ Langho Chimanbhai Solanki
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 227
The Gujarat High Court recently commuted the death sentence of a man to life imprisonment who was convicted by the trial court for raping a minor girl.
In doing so the court said that the trial court while sentencing the convict to death, did not give a finding on the aspect of the convict's reformation and the possibility that he will become a useful member to the society if is given a chance to do so.
Case title: Mohamed Asifbhai Seliya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 228
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (December 16) allowed a restaurant, which had been sealed on allegations of causing nuisance by selling non-vegetarian food in violation of the lease agreement, to submit an undertaking to the Anand Municipal Corporation for de-sealing, directing that the same be considered in accordance with law.
The court was hearing a petition challenging a notice dated 2-12-2025 under which the petitioner was directed to vacate the premises (shop in question) within 10 days failing which action of sealing under Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations (GPMC) Act has been indicated. The court was told the premises had been sealed. The petitioner was given the premises on lease by the corporation wherein he was running a restaurant.
Case title: Shahi Masjid and Sarkhej Mansuri Jamat Kabrastan v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 229
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (December 16) refused to entertain a plea filed by a mosque in Ahmedabad claiming apprehension of action against it by the authorities, observing that no cause of action had arisen as plea was filed on an apprehension and the court cannot entertain an anticipatory petition.
Case title: Legal Heirs and Dependants of Decd. Mayurbhai Jesingbhai Dhuda Minaben Jesingbhai Dhuda & Anr. v/s Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 230
Modifying an order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the Gujarat High Court observed that merely triple riding on a two-wheeler, in absence of any evidence or a casual connection between the violation and the accident, would not amount to contributory negligence.
Case title: Sunni Muslim Idgah Masjid Trust v/s Hardik Sitaram Patel & Anr. and Batch
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 231
The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday (December 17) dismissed a batch of petitions moved by various waqf institutions challenging orders passed by Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal rejecting applications under the Waqf Act over disputes pertaining to waqf properties, citing insufficient court fee.
In doing so the court held that there was "no blanket exemption" or waiver granted to waqf institutions from paying court fees for filing applications under Section 83(3) of Waqf Act in the State.
Case Name: Rajhans Metals Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 232
The Gujarat High Court has allowed CENVAT credit of service tax paid on input used in setting up of a Windmill, away from factory premises, on the strength of nexus of the inputs with output activity, electricity generation.
A Division Bench comprising, Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi in twin writ petitions has set aside order of CESTAT Ahmedabad that disallowed CENVAT credit on the ground that credit of inputs and input services utilized away from the factory site for setting-up Windmill could not be availed. In turn, the Gujarat High Court emphasized on 'nexus with manufacturing activity' noting that installation, erection and commissioning were 'exclusively' used in the manufacturing activity viz. electricity generated at Windmill. Therefore, the aforesaid services
Institute For Plasma Research Is 'State' Under Article 12 Of Constitution: Gujarat High Court
Case title: Dr. Indranil Bandopadhyay v/s Institute for Plasma Research & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 233
The Gujarat High Court has held that Institute for Plasma Research is 'State' under Article 12 of Constitution of India as it is an entity created under a statute having roots in the Atomic Energy Act, is 100% funded by the Government and serves the public by engaging in research and development for societal benefit.
A full bench of Justice AS Supehia, Justice Aniruddha P Mayee and Justice Pranav Trivedi was hearing a reference made by a division bench on the question of law whether Institute for Plasma Research (IPR) can be termed as 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
Case title: Noya Infrastructure LLP v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 234
The Gujarat High Court recently directed release of imported distillate oil which was earlier seized on the ground that it did not meet the parameters of distillate oil, holding that the test report did not definitively conclude that the Distillate Oil was Diesel, to an extent that it would change the nature of classification from Distillate Oil to Diesel.
Case Name: Durga Gopal Shinde Sole Proprietorship vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 235
The Gujarat High Court has restored GST registration subject to compliance with filing of pending returns and payment of outstanding tax with interest, late fee and penalty.
A Division Bench comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi permitted filing of GST returns for past period after noting copy of GST Returns for the period from April 2022 to December 2024, self-ascertained tax liability discharged through Electronic Cash Ledger.
Case title: M/s Arihant Agro Distillation and Liquid Terminals Limited v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 236
The Gujarat High Court recently directed the release of imported Distillate Fuel Oil seized by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, observing that the samples that were collected and sent for testing of parameters was neither collected in the presence of the proper officer or of the owner/importer of the goods.
Case title: Aparajita Energy Private Limited v/s Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 237
The Gujarat High Court recently directed release of imported Distillate Fuel Oil which was seized by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for not meeting the cloud point parameters, observing that respondent authorities had no definite opinions and the opinions vary so far as the parameter of Cloud Point is concerned.
Case title: Rajmohini @ Rajmohunaben Kidiyabhai Damor v/s Shayam Harishbhai Dhokhai & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 238
The Gujarat High Court has held that not all injuries result in loss of earning capacity and thus it is necessary to assess the functional disability while considering grant of compensation to a road-accident victim.
In doing so, the court noted that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had "mechanically" accepted "disability certificate" of a cashier–who was hit by a four wheeler, at 47% without assigning any reasons. This, the court noted, was in contrast to the report of the court appointed four member medical board which had opined the disability to be 27%.
Case title: Rakshit Ravish Chorasiya v/s State of Gujarat
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 239
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (December 22) granted regular bail to a 23-year-old student accused of rash and dangerous driving in the Vadodara car crash case earlier this year which had resulted in the death of one person and injured nine others.
The court directed the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 1 Lakh with one surety of the like amount subject to certain conditions.
Case title: JB Trivedi Hospitality Ltd. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 240
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (December 23) has directed the Vadodara Municipal Corporation to de-seal four flats belonging to an entity after the owner submitted that an undertaking shall be filed with the corporation that the flats will not be used for "hospitality purpose" without prior permission from the corporation.