Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 301Nominal IndexAmratlal Narendrabhai Vizoda v/s State of Gujarat & Anr, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268Heenaben & Ors. v/s Sarosh Jahangirji Dumasiya & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 269Sumersing Bharatlal Meena v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 270Pravinsinh Vajesing Parmar v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj)...
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 301
Nominal Index
Amratlal Narendrabhai Vizoda v/s State of Gujarat & Anr, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268
Heenaben & Ors. v/s Sarosh Jahangirji Dumasiya & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 269
Sumersing Bharatlal Meena v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 270
Pravinsinh Vajesing Parmar v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 271
Vinodchandra Chandrakant Thaker & Anr. v/s Kiritkumar Parshottam Dhokai, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 272
Suman Bishnoi v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 273
State of Gujarat v/s Hemitben Ishwarji Thakor & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 274
Bharatbhai Hirjibhai Shankar v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 275
Paragji Bharatji Detroja v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 276
X v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 277
Asha Harishchandra Dave v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 278
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v/s Pankajkumar Mahednrasinh Beravat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 279
Rajeshbhai @ Valku Devchandbhai Jiyani & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 280
Molana Mohammad Ramzan Janmohammad v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 281
Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 282
Vishabhai @ Toofan Rameshbhai Thakor v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 283
Mohammad Yusuf Mohammad Punjani v/s Gujarat State Waqf Board & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 284
Mehul Mansukhbhai Boghara v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 285
Suo Motu v/s Deepak Khosla & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 286
United India Insurance Company Limited v/s Chandrakant Vishandas Harwani & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 287
Case Title : XYZ Victim v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 288
Yogendra Vijay Bahadur Singh v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 289
Hansaben W/O Natwarlal Chauhan v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 290
X v/s Y, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 291
State of Gujarat v/s Sayabhai Sartanbhai Bariya & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 292
Jyotiben Gorshanbhau Dabhi & Ors. v/s Nilesh Gopal Parmar & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 293
SBI General Insurance Company Ltd v/s Radhaben Govabhai Desai (Rabar) (Deleted) & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 294
X v/s State of Gujarat & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 295
Bhimbhai Virabhai Dhangri v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 296
Dipikaben Rohitkumar Chauhan v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 297
Yogendrakumar Ramkumar Maurya v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 298
Vinubhai Vallabhai Dhorajiya President of Gayatri Nagar Society v/s State of Gujarat & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 299
T v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 300
Milan Ramjibhai Pumbhadiya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 301
Judgments/Orders
Case Title : Amratlal Narendrabhai Vizoda v/s State of Gujarat & Anr
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5211 of 2017
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268
Case Title : Amratlal Narendrabhai Vizoda v/s State of Gujarat & Anr
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5211 of 2017
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268
The Gujarat High Court has held that a judicial officer found assoicating/communicating with a practicing advocate, accepting a phone from the latter and using the same would amount to improper conduct. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 268]
In doing so the court upheld the removal of a judicial officer over various charges including the charge that he was in touch with a practicing advocate and communicating with her.
Case Title : Heenaben & Ors. v/s Sarosh Jahangirji Dumasiya & Anr.
Case Number : R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 537 of 2016
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 269
The Gujarat High Court has said that there is no hard and fast rule that posthumously filed income tax returns cannot be taken into consideration while calculating income of the deceased for determining accident compensation. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 269]
In doing so the court enhanced the accident compensation by Rs. 6,16,342 to be given to the family of the deceased.
The court was hearing the claimants appeal against an order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal which had granted compensation of Rs.6,01,400 with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.
Case Title : Sumersing Bharatlal Meena v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 21167 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 270
The Gujarat High Court has granted bail to a man accused of advertising access to Re-NEET Exam papers on Telegram channels, after observing that the prosecution had failed to point out the circumstances to continue or prolong the accused's detention. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 270]
Justice Hasmukh D Suthar in his order noted that the allegation against the applicant is that he had hatched a conspiracy with co-accused to leak the Re-NEET Examination.
Case Title : Pravinsinh Vajesing Parmar v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 164 of 2013 With R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1080 of 2013
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 271
The Gujarat High Court acquitted two men who were convicted in 2012 by a trial court for murder, observing that this was a case of sudden fight and no pre-meditation on behalf of the accused had been proved by the prosecution. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 271]
The two men were accused of assaulting the deceased, the complainant's younger brother, after a verbal argument erupted between women family members of the accused and complainant. The deceased succumbed to his injuries by the accused who were allegedly weilding a sickle, sword and an iron strip.
Non-Consensus Between Parties Can't Justify 7-Year Delay In Filing Appeal: Gujarat High Court
Case Title : Vinodchandra Chandrakant Thaker & Anr. v/s Kiritkumar Parshottam Dhokai
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14619 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 272
The Gujarat High Court refused to condone delay of over 7 years in filing an appeal against a trial court order concerning a civil suit, observing that non-consensus between petitioners over filing of appeal as well as Covid-19 pandemic were not sufficient causes to condone delay. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 272]
The court was hearing a plea challenging an appellate court order which had dismissed the petitioners appeal noting that it had been filed with an inordinate delay of over seven years.
Case Title : Suman Bishnoi v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 9593 of 2024
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 273
The Gujarat High Court has directed registration of an FIR "against an unknown person" and investigation by Deputy Inspector General of Police, CID Crime, into the alleged custodial death of Indian Trade Service officer who allegedly died in CBI custody in connection with an illegal gratification case. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 273]
The deceased's wife had approached the high court claiming that despite disclosure of cognizable offence the police was not registering an FIR and were treating the case as an accidental death. The petitioner claimed that her husband Jawri Mal Bishnoi, Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, was an officer serving in the Indian Trade Service and had died in the custody of the CBI officers in connection with a corruption case.
Case Title : State of Gujarat v/s Hemitben Ishwarji Thakor & Ors.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1958 of 2012
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 274
The Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal of three persons accused of using caste-based slurs and assaulting the complainant, observing that the eyewitness did not support the prosecution case in proving that the alleged derogatory words were used with an intent to insult in public. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 274]
It was alleged that the accused persons knew that the complainant belonged to the Scheduled Caste–Chamar Community and thus knowingly used caste-based slur against the complainant in public thereby committing offence punishable under Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It was also alleged that the accused had assaulted the complainant with sticks. The trial court had acquitted the accused persons, against which State moved the high court.
Case Title : Bharatbhai Hirjibhai Shankar v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 854 of 2018
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 275
The Gujarat High Court has held that mere printing or selling of saree, textile materials containing artistic depictions of a deity or revered icon, even if appearing on lower border/Pallu of the garment, cannot automatically be presumed to be an act driven by deliberate malice or calculated to disrupt public order and outrage religious feelings. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 275]
The court was hearing a saree trader's plea booked under Sections 295A (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) r/w. 114 IPC, for allegedly outraging religious sentiments by selling Sarees, garments having printed impressions of Lord Gautam Buddha situated at the lower portion/pallu of the Saree, garment.
Case Title : Paragji Bharatji Detroja v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 23843 of 2017
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 276
The Gujarat High Court quashed a kidnapping and POCSO case against a man after noting that this was a case of "adolescent love" wherein the girl was in relationship with the accused and had voluntarily left her parents home as her father was pressuring her to marry someone else. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 276]
The court was hearing a man's plea seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 363 (Punishment for Kidnapping) and 366 (Compelling Marriage or Illicit Intercourse) of the IPC and Section 18(Punishment for Attempt to Commit an Offence) POCSO Act.
Case Title : X v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 14275 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 277
The Gujarat High Court has refused to permit a man to examine his minor son in order prove his wife's alleged adultery, observing that the child cannot be used as a pawn to show that the mother was living in adultery as it is always open for the husband to prove it through other evidence.
The court was hearing the father's plea who had sought summoning of his minor son as a witness to testify in his case and prove the adultery of the petitioner's wife. The father claimed that his son was the eyewitness to the illicit relation between the petitioner's wife and the minor's mother with another man.
Case Title : Asha Harishchandra Dave v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16429 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 278
The Gujarat High Court has held that a judicial officer cannot call upon the Chief Justice to transfer a sitting high court judge or threaten Principal District Judge to sleep on the pavement if a suitable accommodation was not provided, and that such conduct amounts to misconduct liable for dismissal from service.
In doing so the court upheld a 2023 decision terminating a judicial officer from service pursuant to recommendation of the Standing Committee which was placed before the Full Court of the High Court which had on 21.12.2023, resolved to accept the recommendation and decided to impose the punishment of Standing Committee and place the matter before the Government.
Case Title : United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v/s Pankajkumar Mahednrasinh Beravat & Anr.
Case Number : R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2637 of 2025 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2637 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 279
The Gujarat High Court observed that the statutory right of appeal, though valuable, cannot be used to re-agitate issues already settled by binding precedents and in a manner that results in abuse of the process of law and aggravates victim's hardship.
While dismissing an insurance company's appeal against a motor accident award, the High Court further held that Income Tax Returns (ITRs), being statutory documents, constitute an important reference point for assessing the income of the victim to calculate the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the same cannot be lightly brushed aside as “fabricated” in absence of any cogent evidence.
Gujarat High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Woman Accused Of Facilitating, Recording Rape
Case Title : Rajeshbhai @ Valku Devchandbhai Jiyani & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 4350 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 280
The Gujarat High Court denied anticipatory bail to three including a woman over allegations of rape, molestation, physical assault as well as recording the alleged incident on a mobile phone and threatening the victim with the same. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 280]
Accused no. 1 was accused of rape, molestation and physical assault; accused No.2, a woman was accused of restraining the victim, recording the incident and threatening her thereafter; accused no. 3 was accused of demanding physical relations from the victim and threatening her after she refused the same.
Case Title : Molana Mohammad Ramzan Janmohammad v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 20655 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 281
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a Muslim cleric who was accused of religious conversion and solemnizing a minor's marriage without verifying proof of age. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 281]
The accused was booked under Sections 64(2)(i), 64(2)(m), 137(2), 87, 115(2), 351(3) of BNS; Sections 4, 6, 17, 18 of the POCSO Act, Sections 9 & 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and Section 4A of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act.
Case Title : Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 8681 of 2016
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 282
The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR against a man accused of outraging a woman's modesty after observing that FIR was premised on a "staged confrontation" wherein the husband had found the accused with his wife after an "unexpected encounter" which lacked judicial creditworthiness.[2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 282]
The court thus said that pushing the accused through the "rigmarole of a full trial would be abuse of process of law".
Gujarat High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Attempting To Break Open ATM Machine
Case Title : Vishabhai @ Toofan Rameshbhai Thakor v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 22874 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 283
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a man accused of trying to break open an ATM machine along with co-accused, with the intention of committing theft. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 283]
The petitioner had sought bail for FIR lodged under Sections 331(4)(Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night), 305(a)(Theft in a dwelling house), 324(4)(Mischief causing property damage), 54(Abettor present when the offence is committed), 61(2)(a)(criminal conspiracy), 238(c)(Causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information) BNS.
Waqf Tribunal Can't Exercise Supervisory Powers Over Waqf Board: Gujarat High Court
Case Title : Mohammad Yusuf Mohammad Punjani v/s Gujarat State Waqf Board & Ors.
Case Number : R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3494 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 284
The Gujarat High Court has held that State Waqf Tribunal's powers are adjudicatory in nature and thus it cannot exercise supervisory powers over the State Waqf Board concerning the management of a Waqf trust. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 284]
The court was hearing the Muttawali (manager) of Junagadh Suryawad Memon Jamat, a Trust, who had challenged an order of the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal issuing directions for taking possession of the books of accounts, records, movable and immovable properties of the Waqf.
Case Title : Mehul Mansukhbhai Boghara v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 15570 of 2022
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 285
The Gujarat High Court quashed an extortion FIR against a lawyer after noting that it was impossible to believe that the petitioner who was live-streaming on Facebook at the time of the alleged incident would also simultaneously extort money from traffic personnel at the exact moment. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 285]
The court said that the FIR against the petitioner was "counter blast" to the attempt to murder FIR lodged by the petitioner against the traffic personnel for assaulting the lawyer when confronted with allegations of corruption.
Case Title : Suo Motu v/s Deepak Khosla & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT) NO. 2911 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 286
The Gujarat High Court closed a suo-motu criminal contempt case against a lawyer who had made assertions against two sitting high court judges, after taking note of his unconditional apology. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 286]
The lawyer had made certain assertions in his application that he had filed for initiation of contempt in another matter. The assertions were directed against two Sitting Judges of the High Court.
Case Title : United India Insurance Company Limited v/s Chandrakant Vishandas Harwani & Ors.
Case Number : R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 602 of 2013 With R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 85 of 2013 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 602 of 2013
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 287
The Gujarat High Court has held that an insurer is liable to compensate the owner of goods travelling in goods carriage for injuries caused due to accident, as statutory rules permit the owner or hirer of goods to travel in a goods vehicle free of charge and such an individual does not qualify as a “gratuitous passenger.” [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 287]
A Division Bench of Justice N.S. Sanjay Gowda and Justice J.L. Odedra dismissed the appeal filed by United India Insurance Company Limited, and partly allowed the claimant's cross-objection. The Bench enhanced the compensation granted to the claimant from Rs. 13,06,000 to Rs. 18,80,400.
Case Title : XYZ Victim v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 2273 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 288
The Gujarat High Court has observed that when two adults live together under a mutually consented written agreement and thereafter end their arrangement also via a written agreement then the complainant's claim of rape on false promise of marriage becomes difficult to sustain. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 288]
The court said that the long drawn relationship of the appellant with the respondent, including the circumstances of their living together and cohabiting with each other, that too in separate rented accommodation with the knowledge of the parents of the prosecutrix, would give rise to a presumption that their relationship was based on valid consent
Case Title : Yogendra Vijay Bahadur Singh v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 21778 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 289
The Gujarat High Court has observed that misuse of authority by banking officials who are charged with guarding customers' money strikes at the very foundation on which financial institutions function. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 289]
In doing so the court rejected a man's anticipatory bail plea after noting that a specific role was attributed to him–as an official in a bank accused of defrauding a widow customer of money received under a government scheme, and the material collected during the investigation "prima facie" connected him with the alleged transaction
Case Title : Hansaben W/O Natwarlal Chauhan v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 2785 of 2018
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 290
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a cruelty FIR against a mother-in-law, holding that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) could not be invoked as the complainant's earlier marriage was still subsisting when she married the applicant's son. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 290]
The complainant had alleged that the applicant, her mother-in-law, abetted her husband in subjecting her to cruelty.
Justice PM Raval noted that the complainant was previously married to another man before marrying the accused husband on February 1, 2007. The earlier marriage was dissolved only on November 20, 2007.
Case Title : X v/s Y
Case Number : R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR TRANSFER) NO. 1673 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 291
The Gujarat High Court has held that proceedings seeking custody of a child under Guardians and Wards Act must be heard by the family court in whose jurisdiction the child resides. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 291]
The court was hearing an estranged wife's plea to transfer the husband's matrimonial suit from Family Court, Himmatnagar to Family Court, Rajkot where she is residing with her parents.
She said that she is an illiterate lady who is residing far away from her children and to get custody of her children who are currently possessed by the opponent/husband – father, she has instituted proceedings under the Guardians and Wards Act at Family Court, Himmatnagar. The wife had lodged proceedings seeking appointment of guardianship and seeking custody/return of the minor child.
Case Title : State of Gujarat v/s Sayabhai Sartanbhai Bariya & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 2381 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 292
The Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal of two persons booked for culpable homicide over the electrocution of a minor boy in an agricultural field lined with an electric fence, finding that the foundational fact that the plot was in fact owned by the accused persons could not be established by the prosecution. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 292]
The court was hearing State's appeal against sessions court's order acquitting two who were accused of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Case Title : Jyotiben Gorshanbhau Dabhi & Ors. v/s Nilesh Gopal Parmar & Anr.
Case Number : R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4447 of 2009
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 293
The Gujarat High Court upheld the dismissal of a claim petition filed by heirs of an auto-driver who died after being hit by a train while trying to cross unmanned railway crossing in the vehicle, observing that the accident was caused due to the driver's own negligence. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 293]
Justice J.C. Doshi observed that a joint reading of Section 161 (Punishment for negligently crossing unmanned level crossing) of the Railways Act and Section 131 (Duty of the driver to take certain precautions at unguarded railway level crossing) of the Motor Vehicles Act fastens a liability on the driver to take precaution at an unguarded railway crossing.
Insurer Denying Issuance Of Motor Accident Policy Not Automatic Proof Of Forgery: Gujarat High Court
Case Title : SBI General Insurance Company Ltd v/s Radhaben Govabhai Desai (Rabar) (Deleted) & Ors.
Case Number : CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ORDERS) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5650 of 2019
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 294
The Gujarat High Court has held that an insurance company cannot avoid liability to indemnify third-party claimants under a motor accident claim on a mere assertion that the insurance policy produced before the Tribunal was forged or fabricated, in the absence of adequate evidentiary proof. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 294]
Consequently, Justice J.C. Doshi dismissed an appeal filed by SBI General Insurance Company challenging the order passed by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) granting compensation of Rs 37,00,420 with a 9% interest.
Case Title : X v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO. 14283 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 295
The Gujarat High Court recently refused to interfere with a mother's custody over her minor daughter, who had alleged that her husband's extensive reliance on ChatGPT had contributed to their marital discord. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 295]
The court passed the order in the father's habeas corpus plea seeking production of his minor daughter claiming that the child had been illegally detained by her mother.
Case Title : Bhimbhai Virabhai Dhangri v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 3123 of 2025
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 296
The Gujarat High Court has upheld a rape acquittal under the POCSO Act observing that the prosecution failed to prove that on the date of alleged incident the girl was a minor, as they could not prove the source of the alleged victim's date of birth recorded in the birth register. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 296]
In doing so the court reiterated that merely producing birth register is not enough to prove the date of birth of the alleged victim. Substantive evidence has to be lead by those persons who can vouch for the date of birth, i.e., the source of date of birth recorded in birth register must be proved.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Corruption FIR Against Govt Officer Over ₹45K Cash Recovered From Purse
Case Title : Dipikaben Rohitkumar Chauhan v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 19978 of 2014
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 297
The Gujarat High Court quashed a corruption case against a public servant after a raid was conducted and Rs. 45,420 was found from her purse, observing that merely because she was unable to give a satisfactory explanation would not amount to an offence under Prevention of Corruption Act in absence of evidence. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 297]
It was alleged that Rs. 45,420/- was found from the purse of the applicant, a public servant, during a raid conducted by the Anti Corruption Bureau.
Case Title : Yogendrakumar Ramkumar Maurya v/s State of Gujarat
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 25177 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 298
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a man who was accused of changing his name, religion to Islam without informing the authorities and committing passport fraud, after prima facie noting that he had not committed any offence after changing his name. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 298]
The man was seeking bail in an FIR lodged under Sections 336(2)(Forgery), 336(3)(Forgery for the Purpose of Cheating), 338(2)(Forgery of Valuable Security, Will, etc.) and 340(2) (Using a Forged Document as Genuine) BNS and Section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act.
Case Title : Vinubhai Vallabhai Dhorajiya President of Gayatri Nagar Society v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 13529 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 299
The Gujarat High Court has reaffirmed that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the registration of a FIR is premature and not maintainable when an efficacious alternative statutory remedy is already available under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 299]
Consequently, Justice J.C. Doshi dismissed the petition seeking directions to the police to register a case against a former president of Gayatri Nagar Society over alleged illegal possession of a common plot allegedly belonging to the society
Case Title : T v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 13493 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 300
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that merely because an alleged victim turned 18-years-old at the time of commencement of POCSO trial, would not mean that provisions of POCSO Act which provide for in-camera deposition of the victim would not apply. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 300]
The court was hearing a plea claiming that the victim had attained age of majority and thus the petitioner must get an effective opportunity to cross examine the prosecutrix as per law.
Case Title : Milan Ramjibhai Pumbhadiya v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number : R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 17710 of 2017
CITATION : 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 301
The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR against two doctors booked for abetting the suicide of a 24-year-old first-year Master of Surgery resident, observing that there was no deliberate or positive act intended to drive the deceased to commit the act which was established. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 301]
In doing so the court said that in the present case, "routine departmental instructions, academic reprimands, or allocation of ward work" during an initial orientation period cannot be legally elevated to the status of 'instigation' under Section 107 (abetment) IPC.