Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 132 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 142Nominal IndexPravinbanu Ibrahim Sultan Mamrej Kureshi v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 132Dilipsinh @ Dako Kishorsinh Rathod & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 133Vasantbhai Premjibhai Vekariya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 134Seventh Day Adventist Higher Secondary School & Ors. State...
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 132 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 142
Nominal Index
Pravinbanu Ibrahim Sultan Mamrej Kureshi v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 132
Dilipsinh @ Dako Kishorsinh Rathod & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 133
Vasantbhai Premjibhai Vekariya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 134
Seventh Day Adventist Higher Secondary School & Ors. State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 135
X & Anr v/s NA, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 136
Union of India v/s Mandabai w/o Sukhdev Chavan (Mother of Decd), 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 137
Manojbhai Kachrabhai Vasoya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 138
Union of India & Ors. v/s Lilavantiben B Sonegra, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 139
Mahil Infra A Partnership Firm v/s Airport Authority of India & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 140
State of Gujarat v/s Fillupbhai Magalbhai Mistry & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 141
Champaklal Naranji Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 142
Judgments/Orders
Gujarat High Court Grants Bail To NDPS Accused In Custody Along With Her Child
Case title: Pravinbanu Ibrahim Sultan Mamrej Kureshi v/s State of Gujarat
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 8187 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 132
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to an NDPS accused who was found in possession of a contraband, after noting that she had three minor children wherein one of them was presently with her in judicial custody.
Though the court "prima facie" noted that the offence was serious and her as the person in conscious possession of the contraband cannot be ignored, the court noted that she had no criminal antecedents, is a woman accused and the twin conditions for grant of bail under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) NDPS Act were fulfilled.
Case title: Dilipsinh @ Dako Kishorsinh Rathod & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 135 of 2019
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 133
The Gujarat High Court has held that merely firing in air during a wedding function without any intention to cause injury to anyone is not enough to constitute charge of attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC.
In doing so the court quashed charge of attempt to murder against six persons who were booked for firing in the air during a wedding function, noting that there was no intention on the part of the accused to cause any injury to anyone and the surrounding circumstances in the case did not infer such intention.
Case title: Vasantbhai Premjibhai Vekariya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 175 of 2022
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 134
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a man's appeal challenging family court order directing him to pay maintenance to his wife–under treatment for cancer, noting that closure of the husband's business or recession, in absence of any material, was not a ground to deny maintenance specially in view of the able-bodied principle.
In doing so, the court, referring to various judgments underscored that the law was clear wherein it was the duty of the husband to maintain his wife.
Case title: Seventh Day Adventist Higher Secondary School & Ors. State of Gujarat & Anr.
R/LPA/296/2026 IN R/SCA/836/2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 135
The Gujarat government told the High Court on Tuesday (April 28) that it will withdraw its December 15, 2025 order taking over the management of a private school in Ahmedabad following the stabbing of a Class 10 student by another in August last year, and take a fresh decision.
The court was hearing the school's appeal challenging a single judge's order which had refused to grant ad-interim relief to permit admission of new students in the school's writ petition.
Case title: X & Anr v/s NA
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5760 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 136
The Gujarat High Court permitted a husband to appear before the family court via video conference in proceedings for divorce by mutual, observing that the family court had adopted a hyper-technical approach over use of VC by the husband to appear in the matrimonial proceedings.
The court noted that the family court had issued 15 directions including appointment of a Court Commissioner to record assent of husband which was unknown procedure, adding that technology should serve as handmaiden to justice not a hurdle in the path and must be accessible to litigants.
Case title: Union of India v/s Mandabai w/o Sukhdev Chavan (Mother of Decd)
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 213 of 2024
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 137
The Gujarat High Court dismissed Railways appeal against an order awarding compensation to the mother of a deceased passenger who fell after receiving a jolt and lost his life, rejecting the Railways claim that the deceased might have committed suicide or fallen down due to his own negligence.
In doing so the court remarked that no sane person would attempt to de-board or alight from a running train.
The court was hearing Railways appeal challenging Railway Claims Tribunal's order awarding compensation of Rs.8 Lakhs with 9% interest to the kin of the deceased from the date of incident i.e. 17.04.2017 till date of realization.
Case title: Manojbhai Kachrabhai Vasoya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 10969 of 2021
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 138
The Gujarat High Court quashed a rape FIR against a man, after noting that it was a case of 'honey trap' wherein the complainant had consensual relations with the accused and subsequently tried to extort money from him.
The FIR was registered under IPC Sections 376(1)(rape), 114(Abettor present when offence is committed), 506(1)(2) (criminal intimidation) IPC making accusations against four persons, wherein petitioner is named as accused no.1. Against the FIR the petitioner had approached the high court.
Case title: Union of India & Ors. v/s Lilavantiben B Sonegra
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10722 of 2024
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 139
The Gujarat High Court rejected Railways challenge to Central Administrative Tribunal's order directing payment of family pension to deceased employee's daughter— whose marriage was dissolved via customary divorce.
The father of the respondent daughter was an employee of the Railways, who retired on 05.10.1971 on attaining the age of superannuation. The daughter marriage ended in a "customary divorce" entered into between her and her husband on 12.10.1978. Thus during the father's lifetime the daughter's marriage stood dissolved by virtue of the customary divorce.
Case title: Mahil Infra A Partnership Firm v/s Airport Authority of India & Ors.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3549 of 2024 and connected petitions
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 140
The Gujarat High Court has directed an aeronautical survey of real-estate properties located near Ahmedabad International Airport which are alleged to be in violation of the prescribed elevation level, quashing notices which directed removal of construction prior to conduct of such survey.
The court was hearing a batch of petitions seeking directions to the Airport Authority of India to get an aeronautical study by International Civil Aviation Organization at the expense of the petitioner, as prescribed in the Ministry of Civil Aviation (Height Restrictions for Safeguarding of Aircraft Operations) Rules, 2015, and thereafter take decision on demolition of construction as may be found infringing the safety standards for aircraft operations.
Case title: State of Gujarat v/s Fillupbhai Magalbhai Mistry & Ors.
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 697 of 2003
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 141
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the acquittal of five persons in a post 2002 Godhra train burning-riots case, who were accused of throwing the deceased alive into a fire, observing that the witnesses could not identify that the accused were the rioters who had committed the alleged act.
The court noted that witnesses had categorically stated that they did not know the identity of the persons who committed the offence as the incident was carried out by a large mob of approx 500 people and also the eyewitness's deposition was silent on any "specific overt act or participation of the accused".
Case title: Champaklal Naranji Patel v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15368 of 2010
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 142
The Gujarat High Court has held that state enactment Gujarat Water & Gas Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act 2000 is not repugnant to the central enactment Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 finding that the provisions of the two laws are pari-materia.
The court was considering whether 2000 Act is within the legislative competence of the State legislature and if its competence can be traced to Entry 42 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.