Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 436 to 2026 LiveLaw 448

Nominal Index

Vaibhav Mahendrasingh Raghuwanshi vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 436

Siddharth Agro vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 437

Rahul Gandhi vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 438

Yash Pramod Gaikwad vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 439

Snehal Anandrao Bhosale vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 440

Farida Mustak Mulla vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 441

Savita Arun Zambre vs Manjari Projects Private Limited, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 442

KAG vs AAG, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 443

Chandan Sharad Pawar vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 444

Hotel Alankar vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 445

Lakhan Lalchand Dhamwani vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 446

Yogesh Gangaram Sanap vs Anil Mahadev Raghav, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 447

Nilesh Dahanukar vs State of Maharashtra, 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 448

Judgments & Final Orders

'Violation Of Fundamental Rights': Bombay High Court Directs ₹2 Lakh Compensation To Man Detained Without Notice, Grounds Of Arrest

Case Title: Vaibhav Mahendrasingh Raghuwanshi vs State of Maharashtra 

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 436

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra government to pay Rs. 2 Lakh as compensation to a 26-year-old man who was arrested without being informed of the grounds of arrest or being issued a proper notice. A division bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Justice Raj Wakode reiterated the well-settled principle that High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution have jurisdiction to grant monetary compensation to a victim whose fundamental rights under Article 21 have been violated by State officials.

Suspension Of Food Business Licence Must End On Rectifying Deficiencies, Can't Force Them Into Litigation: High Court To Maharashtra FDA

Case Title: Siddharth Agro vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 437

After noting a pattern of the Maharashtra Food & Drugs Administration (FDA) in dealing with cases of licence suspensions of establishments, the Bombay High Court recently made it clear that once an establishment, whose licence has been suspended by the authority, rectifies the deficiencies and an autogenerated report indicates compliance, the authority must revoke the suspension.

Bombay High Court Refuses To Quash Criminal Defamation Case Against Rahul Gandhi Over 'Chowkidar Chor' Comment

Case Title: Rahul Gandhi vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 438

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (September 8) refused to quash the criminal defamation case against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over his alleged remarks describing Prime Minister Narendra Modi as “Choro Ke Sardar” and “Commander-in-Thief”. Gandhi had challenged Magistrate court summons in the case and argued that the complaint filed by a BJP worker was not maintainabile. He claiming that he had not named the party and that no “identifiable or definite class” had been targeted, in the absence of which there is no clearly aggrieved person or group having locus standi to prosecute the case.

False Academic Credentials: Bombay High Court Upholds Cancellation Of Admission Despite Students Reaching Final Semester, Securing Placements

Case Title: Yash Pramod Gaikwad vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 439

The Bombay High Court has upheld the cancellation of admissions of three students to the two-year full-time MMS Course at Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies (JBIMS), after finding that they had secured admission on the basis of materially inflated academic credentials. The Court held that the fact that the students had reached the final semester, appeared for examinations or secured placements could not outweigh the requirement of fair admissions.

'Non-Inclusion Prima Facie Discriminatory': Bombay High Court Extends 3-Month Caste Validity Deadline Benefit To ST Student

Case Title: Snehal Anandrao Bhosale vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 440

The Bombay High Court has held that the exclusion of Scheduled Tribe students from a Government Circular extending the time for submitting caste validity certificates to other reserved categories is prima facie discriminatory. The Court held that the benefit of the three-month extension under the Circular dated 4 September 2026 should also be extended to Scheduled Tribe students whose caste validity certificates were pending.

Bombay High Court Quashes Govt Resolution Reducing Age Limit For Anganwadi Sevikas' Promotion To Supervisor; Restores 55-Yr Limit

Case Title: Farida Mustak Mulla vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 441

The Bombay High Court has quashed a Government Resolution reducing the maximum permissible age for promotion of Anganwadi Sevikas to Supervisor from 55 years to 50 years. The Court held that legitimate expectation arose from the Government Resolution dated 17 November 2001 and corrigendum dated 7 December 2001, under which Anganwadi Sevikas up to 55 years were eligible for promotion.

Assignee Under Deed Executed Prior To Filing Of Suit Cannot Be Impleaded As Co-Plaintiff Under Order I Rule 10 CPC: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Savita Arun Zambre vs Manjari Projects Private Limited

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 442

The Bombay High Court has held that an assignee under a deed of assignment executed before the filing of a suit cannot be added as a co-plaintiff under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) merely on the ground that the original plaintiff's rights have been assigned. The Court observed that there was no bona fide mistake involved for which adding a third party as a co-plaintiff could be allowed.

Bombay High Court Criticises Family Court's 'Regressive' Remarks On 'Pious Duties' Of Wife

Case Title: KAG vs AAG

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 443

The Bombay High Court recently expressed displeasure with a Pune Family Court for sermonising and setting out the so-called 'pious' duties of a wife towards her husband and handing over a minor boy's custody to his father. The High Court held that Judges must be 'mindful' while making observations and avoid making any 'unwarranted' or 'unconnected' remarks.

'Law Does Not Permit Discrimination': Bombay High Court To BMC Over 18-Year Delay In Housing Policy For Sanitation Workers

Case Title: Chandan Sharad Pawar vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 444

The Bombay High Court has observed that the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai cannot discriminate against sanitary workers merely because they belong to the lowest rung in the hierarchy of municipal employees. The Court noted that the State Government had formulated a policy in 2008 requiring the Municipal Corporation to provide housing to sanitary workers on ownership basis, but the policy has not been implemented for almost 18 years.

FSSAI License Suspension Is To Protect Public Health, Cannot Continue Once Establishment Achieves Compliance: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Hotel Alankar vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 445

The Bombay High Court has held that suspension of a food licence for non-compliances having the propensity to harm public health cannot be continued indefinitely once the deficiencies have been rectified and the establishment achieves “exemplar” compliance on re-inspection. The Court observed that the consequence of compliance of the deficiencies should result in revocation of the suspension, with continued monitoring as mandated by law.

Loud Shouting Between Two Persons On Street Doesn't Make Out Cognizable Offence: Bombay High Court Quashes FIR

Case Title: Lakhan Lalchand Dhamwani vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 446

The Bombay High Court has held that merely shouting loudly at each other on a public street, without any other specific allegation, does not make out a cognizable offence under Section 85(1) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. The Court observed that apart from the allegation that the accused were shouting at each other loudly, there was no allegation of obscenity, depravity or moral offensiveness.

Bombay High Court Denies Custody To Biological Parents Of 11-Yr-Old Living With Neigbours Since Infancy, Says Child Showed 'Indifference'

Case Title: Yogesh Gangaram Sanap vs Anil Mahadev Raghav

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 447

The Bombay High Court has refused to transfer the interim custody of an 11-year-old girl, who has been living with her neighbours since infancy, to her biological parents. The Court observed that the child had shown “complete indifference” towards her biological parents and had explicitly expressed her preference to remain with the neighbours, and such preference could not be completely disregarded.

'Can't Stop People From Protesting, We're A Democracy': Bombay High Court In Plea Against Maratha Leader Manoj Jarange's 'March To Mumbai'

Case Title: Nilesh Dahanukar vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 448

The Bombay High Court on Friday questioned how it could restrain Maratha reservation activist Manoj Jarange-Patil from protesting, observing that India is a democracy and “right to agitate is a fundamental right”. A division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna was hearing a petition seeking directions in connection with the “March to Mumbai” call given by Patil, who recently ended his 12-day hunger strike demanding reservation for the Maratha community.

Other Developments 

Old Monk Can't Be Sold As 'Rum', It Is 'Rum-Flavoured Spirit' : FSSAI Tells Bombay High Court

The Food Safety & Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) earlier this week, told the Bombay High Court that it cannot permit the manufacturers of the brand Old Monk, to sell its product as "Rum" as it used "additional flavours." A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad was informed that the Old Monk brand cannot be sold as a Rum as it does not uses the natural form of a rum.

Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi Sworn-In As Chief Justice Of Bombay High Court

Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi on Wednesday (September 9) took oath of the office of Chief Justice of Bombay High Court. Justice Tripathi, the senior-most judge of the Allahabad High Court was recommended for the post of Bombay High Court's Chief Justice, by the Supreme Court collegium, last month

Bombay High Court Asks Maharashtra DGP Why Deputy CM's Son Not Named In Govt Land Deal Case Despite Alleged Involvement

In what could spell troubles for Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Sunetra Pawar's son and Rajya Sabha MP Parth Pawar, the Bombay High Court has sought to know from the State Police as to why he has not been named as an accused in the Mundhwa land deal case.

Bombay High Court Seeks Centre's Stand On Whether OCI Cardholders Can Play In BCCI Tournaments, Says Decision May Have 'Wide Ramifications'

The Bombay High Court on Thursday (September 10) directed 12 Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card holding budding cricketers, challenging the decision of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) which has made 'Indian Passport' mandatory for players to play in any of its tournaments, to make Central Government a party to their petitions.

Bombay High Court Deprecates Maharashtra's 12-Day 'Blanket Ban' On Alcohol During Ganesh Chaturthi, Calls It Irrational

The Bombay High Court on Friday deprecated the decision of the Maharashtra Government to impose a blanket ban on the sale of alcohol, particularly in the Pune, during the 12 days of Ganesh Chaturthi festival. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna said that if alcohol is banned for so many days, hospitals will get "flooded" as regular and habitual drinkers may suffer serious health issues.

After Bombay High Court Rap, Pune Collector Withdraws 12-Day Ban On Alcohol Sale

After being pulled up by the Bombay High Court earlier today, Pune Collector has withdrawn its 12 day ban on alcohol sale and consumption in the district. A fresh order will now be issued wherein only September 14 (First day of Ganesh Festival) & September 25 (Immersion Day) will be dry days

Bombay High Court Adjourns Sine Die Petition Filed By Kunal Kamra Against IT Rules, SAHYOG Portal

The Bombay High Court on Friday (September 11) adjourned sine die the petitions filed by Comedian Kunal Kamra and Senior Advocate Haresh Jagtiani challenging the constitutional validity of the 'Sahyog Portal' and the 2025 amendment to Rule 3(1)(d) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

Maharashtra's Anti-Conversion Law Challenged In Bombay High Court, Plea Alleges Violation Of Religious Freedom, Privacy

A petition has been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion (MFR) Act 2026, arguing that the law, which is claimed to be an 'anti-conversion' legislation, violates fundamental rights of citizens.

PIL Moved In Bombay High Court Challenging Constitutional Validity Of Bombay Prevention Of Begging Act

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1960 contenting that it criminalise persons living in conditions of poverty, homelessness and destitution.