Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 03 – February 09, 2025

2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 44 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 50Nominal Index:Tejas Shinde vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 44Harshi Ramjiyani vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 45Case Title: Shoaib Richie Sequeira vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 46Dnyaneshwar Katkar vs The Director General & Inspector General of Police, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 47Musin Thengade vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 48City Corporation Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 49Yogesh Mangilal Mundhara vs. State Of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 50Judgments/Final Orders:Prima Facie Grave Provocation: Bombay HC Grants Bail To Youngster Booked For Killing Bed-Ridden Father, Orders Him To Continue EducationCase Title: Tejas Shinde vs State of Maharashtra Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 44The Bombay High Court on Monday while granting bail to a 22-year-old boy booked for killing his own 69-year-old 'bed-ridden' father, observed that the applicant was prima facie gravely 'provoked' by the deceased by abusing him and his mother, repeatedly, which could not be handled by the applicant's 'adolescent' mind.Single-judge Justice Milind Jadhav noted that the applicant - Tejas Shinde, was 'provoked' by his bed-ridden father, who kept abusing him and his mother, who works as a house help, and also the fact that the applicant was a student studying in a reputed college in Dombivli (near Thane) and was pursuing his Second Year in Bachelor of Management Studies (BMS).Can't Direct University To Lower Cut-Off Standard: Bombay HC Refuses To Quash Mumbai Varsity Decision Cancelling Admission After 4 SemestersCase title: Harshi Ramjiyani vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 45While refusing to interfere with Mumbai University's decision to cancel the admission of a student after completion of four semesters due to insufficient marks in the International Baccalaureate (IB) programme, the Bombay High Court observed that if the student did not secure the predicted grades, the Court cannot direct the university to lower the cut-off standard.A division bench of A.S. Chandurkar and M.M. Sathaye considered the petitioner's challenge to Mumbai University's decision, which held the petitioner ineligible for the B.Voc (Interior Design) degree course.Bombay HC 'Disappointed' With CBI & Mumbai Police Showing Reluctance To Probe Multi-Crore Money Laundering Case; Orders Formation Of SITCase Title: Shoaib Richie Sequeira vs State of Maharashtra Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 46The Bombay High Court recently expressed 'disappointment' over the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and also the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Mumbai Police, both showing 'reluctance' to investigate into the complaints of multi-crore fraud by a company both in India and also several foraging countries.A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan noted that both the EOW as well as the CBI, for the reasons best known to these Agencies, were reluctant to inquire/investigate into the complaints made by one Shoaib Sequeira accusing one Anand Jain, promoter of Jai Corporation Ltd. and its subsidiaries of misappropriating public funds and laundering the same outside India.Requests Made By Govt Employees To Change Birthdate In Service Records Beyond Reasonable Time Should Not Be Entertained: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Dnyaneshwar Katkar vs The Director General & Inspector General of Police Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 47The Bombay High Court recently while refusing to grant any relief to a Pune-based Police Inspector said any request from a public servant to change in date of birth in service records, beyond reasonable time, should not be permitted.A division bench of Justices Atul Chandurkar and Milind Sathaye said that in such cases, mostly government employees seek such changes only after spending 'considerable time' in service or when they near retirement.Limitation For Prosecuting One Under Section 498A IPC Will Commence From Last Incident Of Cruelty: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Musin Thengade vs State of MaharashtraCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 48The Bombay High Court recently held that that the point of limitation under section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for an offence under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) shall commence from the last act of cruelty.A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Rohit Joshi said that limitation for prosecution under section 498A will not continue for an indefinite period.Notice Issued To Non-Existing Entity Post-Merger Is Substantive Illegality, Dept Cannot Cite Technical Glitch: Bombay High CourtCase Title: City Corporation Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CircleCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 49The Bombay High Court stated that notice issued to a non-existing entity post-merger is a substantive illegality and not some procedural violation.“we cannot condone the fundamental error in issuing the...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 03 – February 09, 2025

Sanjana Dadmi

Tags