Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 153 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 182NOMINAL INDEXHardik Bharatbhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 153Mancha Masjid Through Trustee/Mutawalli v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 154Jayeshkumar Krishnakant Acharya v/s Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj)155Mahadev Enterprise Through Pruthvi Sanjaybhai Solanki & Anr....
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 153 to 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 182
NOMINAL INDEX
Hardik Bharatbhai Patel v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 153
Mancha Masjid Through Trustee/Mutawalli v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 154
Jayeshkumar Krishnakant Acharya v/s Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj)155
Mahadev Enterprise Through Pruthvi Sanjaybhai Solanki & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj)156
Shah Enterprise v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj)157
Deep Rajendrakumar Shah v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj)158
Mahendrasinh Balusinh Raol v/s State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 159
M/S Honey Fun N Thrills Co. Through Its Proprietor v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 160
GHK Hospitality and Infrastructure Ltd. v/s PSP Projects Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 161
Superintendent (AE) THRO Arihant Kumar Jain v/s Virbhadrasinh Pratapsinh Chauhan & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 162
Vadodara Municipal Corporation v/s Ranjit Buildcon Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 163
X v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. and Batch 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 164
Mahatma Gandhi Charitable Trust v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj)165
Rathod Gaffarmiya Allauddin & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 166
Tejal Mayur Rao v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 167
Income Tax Bar Association & Anr. v/s Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 168
M S Shaikh v/s High Court of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 169
Girish Harsukhray Vasavada & Anr. v/s Shankarlal Govindji Joshi & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 170
Vineet Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 171
Fivebro Water Services Pvt Ltd & Anr. v/s Bijay Murmuria & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 172
Tithi Chandrajit Shah v/s Rajendrabhai Alias Samirbhai Natvarlal Shah & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 173
Arcelormittal Nippon Steel India Limted v/s NCLT 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 174
Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation v/s M/s The Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd. Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 175
M/s Techtix Engineers v/s Megastone Logipark Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 176
Chirala Sesha Srinivas, Inspector of Central Excise & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 177
State of Gujarat v/s Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 178
Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 179
Shweta Sanjiv Bhat v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 180
Vithlani Exports v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 181
X & Ors. v/s Regional Passport Office Ahmedabad & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 182
Judgments/Orders
Case title: HARDIK BHARATBHAI PATEL v/s STATE OF GUJARAT
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19917 of 2025
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.
R/LPA/1130/2025 IN R/SCA/12923/2025
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 Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: C/SCA/18521/2017
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 vs. 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.
R/SCA/9998/2025
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.
R/FA/1338/2025
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
R/CA/4626/2025 IN F/FA/21909/2025
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
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO.309 of 2022
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.
R/SCA/6403/2023
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.
R/SCA/14056/2025
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.
Case Number: R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7839 of 2025
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.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13533 of 2025
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: M S SHAIKH v/s HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT & ANR.
R/SCA 14654 of 2008 and SCA 3875 of 2010
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 SHANKARLAL GOVINDJI JOSHI & ANR.
R/CRA(AGAINST CONVICTION) 1856 of 2025 and related petitions
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.
Case Number: R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17720 of 2024
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 SERVICES PVT LTD & ANR. Versus BIJAY MURMURIA & ORS
Case No.: R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9402 of 2024
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 Versus RAJENDRABHAI ALIAS SAMIRBHAI NATVARLAL SHAH & ORS
Case Number: C/FA/1903/2022
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 NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11679 of 202
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 Versus M/S THE INDIAN HUME PIPE COMPANY LTD & ANR.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12057 of 2025 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10602 of 2023
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 Versus MEGASTONE LOGIPARK PVT. LTD. & ORS.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6878 of 2023
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 CETRAL EXCISE, & ANR. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 5364 of 2014
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.
R/TAX APPEAL NO. 2177 of 2010
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
Case Number: R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1417 of 2008
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
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2024 In R/SCA NO. 4191 of 2024
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.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9536 of 2025
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
R/SCA NO. 14738 of 2025
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.