Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 19 To June 25, 2023

Nominal Index [Citation 283 - 296]Dattaram Govind Naik v. State of Goa 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 283Ranjana Pagar-Gawande v. Nivrutti Kashinath Deshmukh and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 284JIV Maitri Trust v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 285Darshan Subhash Nandagawali v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 286S S Hemani v. Reserve Bank of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 287I Am The Ocean, LLC v. Registrar Of Trade Marks 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 288Prakash B. Kamat v. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 289Vijay Arvind Pore v. Rupali Ramdas Deshmukh and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 290Eknath Shankar Kamble v. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Sangli and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 291Ramhari Dagadu Shinde and Ors v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 292GET and D India Ltd Versus Union of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 293ABC v. XYZ 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 294Regional Manager, Union Bank of India and Anr. v. M/s Punya Coal Road Lines and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 295Brihanmumbai Police Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 296Reports/JudgmentsExcise Commissioner Is Duty Bound To Cancel Liquor Licence On The Application Of Legal Heirs Of The Deceased: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Dattaram Govind Naik v. State of GoaCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 283The Bombay High Court, Goa Bench held that when the legal heirs of the deceased license holder applied for cancellation, the excise commissioner was duty-bound to cancel it.The bench of Justice Bharat P. Deshpande observed that the transfer of liquor licenses is at the discretion of the concerned authority.Bombay High Court Restores Case Against Marathi Preacher Who Advised Couples To Have Sex On Even Dates To Conceive Male ChildCase Title: Ranjana Pagar-Gawande v. Nivrutti Kashinath Deshmukh and Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 284Religious discourse on techniques to conceive and identify a male foetus prima facie is an offence under the anti-sex determination PCPNDT Act, the Bombay High Court has held while refusing to quash a case against Marathi preacher (kirtankar) Nivrutti Kashinath Deshmukh (Indorikar). Deshmukh allegedly asked couples to perform sexual intercourse on even days for a male child.Justice Kishore Sant observed that ‘advertisement’ under Sections 6 and 22 (1) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act (PCPNDT Act) cannot be restricted to diagnostics centres and must be given a wider meaning.It would include anyone propagating techniques for foetus’s sex selection, the court said.Bombay High Court Directs State To Allow E-Complaints For Illegal Animal SlaughterCase Title: JIV Maitri Trust v. Union of India & Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 285 The Bombay High Court directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation to prominently display its policy regarding animal sacrifice during religious ceremonies, as well as the e-mail address and toll-free numbers for complaints on its website, at least during festivals where such animals’ sacrifice/slaughtering takes place.The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Sandeep Marne also directed BMC to make the grievance redressal forum regarding animal slaughters available to the citizens by way of email.Bombay High Court Grants Bail To MCOCA Accused; Says No Independent Reasons By Prosecutor To Extend Custody, 'Word By Word' Copied From IOCase Title: Darshan Subhash Nandagawali v. State of MaharashtraCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 286The Bombay High Court pulled up a prosecutor attached to a Special MCOCA Court for copying the investigating officer's (IO) request for extension of time to file charge sheet in a case word-for-word in his own application for extension filed before the court.A division bench of Justice Bharat Deshpande and Justice Vinay Joshi sitting at Nagpur while granting bail to a twenty-year-old organised crime accused held that the public prosecutor completely failed in his duty as he did not record independent reasons for supporting the IO’s request for extension.Bombay High Court Stays Bank Action After SC Rules Opportunity Of Hearing To Borrowers Before Classifying Their Accounts As 'Fraud' MandatoryCase Title: S S Hemani v. Reserve Bank of India & OrsCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 287Granting relief to certain borrowers in a batch of petitions, the Bombay High Court stayed till September 11 the action taken by various banks after declaring their accounts as “fraudulent accounts” without prior notice and a hearing.A division bench of Justice GS Patel and Neela Gokhale relied on the Supreme Court’s order in State Bank of India & Ors v. Rajesh Agarwal & Ors. that read the principles of natural justice into the RBI’s master directions on fraud. This meant accounts couldn’t be declared as fraudulent accounts sans a hearing and notice.The bench clarified that the banks were at liberty to rescind, withdraw or cancel any orders already passed under the Master ...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 19 To June 25, 2023

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags