- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Gujarat High Court
- /
- Gujarat High Court Annual Digest...
Gujarat High Court Annual Digest 2023 [Citations 1-204]
Bhavya Singh
4 Jan 2024 5:30 AM GMT
![Gujarat High Court Annual Digest 2023 [Citations 1-204]](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2024/01/03/750x450_513492-gujarat-high-court-annual-digest-2023.webp "Gujarat High Court Annual Digest 2023 [Citations 1-204]")
Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 1 to 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 204NOMINAL INDEXPerfect Importers and Distributors (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 1Shripal Raja Rajendrakumar Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 2Kirtilal Ravchandbhai Sanghavi & Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India & Anr. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 3Fakirmamad Hushenbhai Sumbhaniya v. State of Gujara...
Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 1 to 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 204
NOMINAL INDEX
Perfect Importers and Distributors (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 1
Shripal Raja Rajendrakumar Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 2
Kirtilal Ravchandbhai Sanghavi & Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India & Anr. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 3
Fakirmamad Hushenbhai Sumbhaniya v. State of Gujara 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 4
Saurabhbhai Kamleshkumar Shah Vs State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 5
PCIT Versus M/s. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India Ltd. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 6
Anupam Industries Ltd. versus State Level Industry Facilitation Council 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 7
PCIT Versus M/s.Neotech Education Foundation 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 8
Shahlon Silk Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 9
Dhanraj Rajendra Patel v. Union of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 10
Swati Rajiv Goswami v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 11
High Court of Gujarat v. Gujarat Information Commission and 1 other 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 12
Divyesh Govindbhai Kunvariya v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 13
Omni Lens Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 14
Bhavesh @ Pinto Janakbhai Kotak v. Commissioner of Police 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 15
Kavita Krushna Kumar v. Union of India Case 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 16
Chaudhary Chetnaben Dilipbhai v. Chaudhary Dilipbhai Lavjibhai 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 17
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 18
Aartiben Rameshshing Tomar v. Nasuruddin Chandanbhai Fakir 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 19
Dhaval Bijalji Thakore v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 20
Harisinh Abhesinh Parmar v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 21
ilanbhai Tarleshbhai Mandaliya v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 22
High Court of Gujarat v. Chandravadan Dhruv & 1 Other 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 23
Imran Karimbhai Madam v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 24
Sanjay Kalubhai Makwana v. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. & 2 Ors.2023 Livelaw (Guj) 25
Deepak Nitrate Versus DCIT 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 26
Hitesh Ishwarbhai Misareeya & 1 Other v. State of Gujarat & 1 other 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 27
Odhavjibhai Mohanbhai Gadhiya Versus State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 28
Ashaben Muljibhai Ghori v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 29
Anandbhai Bharatbhai Vaghela v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 30
Pratapbhai @ Shivbhai Hamirbhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 31
Shree Siddhi Foods Versus ACIT Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 32
Patel Ambalal Kalidas v. Patel Motibhai Kalidas 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 33
Pahal Engineers versus Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 34
Shweta Sanjay Bhatt v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 35
Farhan Tasaddukhusain Barodawala v. Onali Ezazuddin Dholkawala 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 36
Kundankumar Navalkishor Mahato v. The Maharaja Sayajirao Univeristy of Baroda 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 37
Nimish Mahendra Kapadia v. The Dy. Secretary, Gujarat Information Commission 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 38
GVV v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 39
Khojema Saifudin Dodiya v. Registrar of Birth and Death/Chief Officer, Dhoraji Nagarpalika 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 40
Purnesh Ishvarbhai Modi v. State of Guajrat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 41
Ashokbhai Narsinh Thakor/ Padhiyar v. Gujarat State Wakf Tribunal (Through Chairman) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 42
Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank) vs. Morris Samuel Christian 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 43
Rajveer Pravinchandra Upadhyay & 4 Ors. v. State of Gujarat & 3 Ors. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 44
Ravi Hareshbhai Patni v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 45
Pravinbhai Becharbhai Parmar (Thakor) v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 46
Mahavirsinh Vanrajsinh Gohil v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 47
Maunish Dinkar Shaw & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Anr. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 48
Shree Ganesh Molasses Trading Company Versus Superintendent [R/Special Civil Application No. 4026 of 2022] 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 49
State of Gujarat v. Koli Arjan Samat Vaderah & 3 other(s) [Criminal Appeal No. 506 of 2011] 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 50
A B C (Victim) v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 51
Rajnikant Motibhai Patel v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 52
Keenara Industries Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 53
Manishkumar Tulsidas Kaneriya Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central 1, Rajkot 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 54
Bhagwan Rajabhai Chaudhari v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 55
Ishrat Bhaya v. Central Pollution Control Board 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 56
State of Gujarat v. Rambhai Nathabhai Luna 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 57
Piyam Jigesh Dave v. SAL School of Architecture & Ors. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 58
Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 59
Ratilal Kalidas Varma Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 60
State of Gujarat vs. Sureshbhai Honjibhai Gamit 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 61
Shri Sundarpuri Yuvak Pragati Mandal Through its President Patel Ajabhai Gokhlabhai vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 62
Goganbhai Rambhai Shekh vs. State of Gujrat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 63
Gujarat University Vs. M Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 64
Gujarat University Vs. M Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 64
J.K. Paper Ltd. Through Santosh Wakhloo, Authorized Signatory Herein v. Competition Commissioner of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 65
Pawan Kumar Sharma vs. Anandalaya Education Society 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 66
Ramjibhai Ravjibhai Siyani v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 67
Kaushal Arvindkumar Bhatt v. The Gujarat Technological University Through The Registrar 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 68
KV Vadodaria & 3 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 69
Patel Dharmeshbhai Naranbhai vs Dharmendrabhai Pravinbhai Fofani 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 70
Patel Dharmeshbhai Naranbhai vs Dharmendrabhai Pravinbhai Fofani 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 70
Hansaben Rtubhai Prajapati vs. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 71
Karthik Deepak Sharma Versus Director General, Nirma University 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 72
Kajalben Jwalant Shingala @ Kajalben Hindustani Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 73
Govindbhai Pirabhai Ghanchi (Modi) v. State Examination Board, Gujarat State 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 74
Azajkhan Hamidkhan Pathan Vs. State Of Gujarat [Writ Petition (Pil) No. 38 Of 2023] 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 75
Bimlakumari Lajpatraj Hurra Versus Income Tax Officer 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 76
Rajendrakumar @ Raj S/O Khemabhai Makwana Versus District Magistrate, Ahmedabad 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 77
Axis Bank Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 78
Nirmal Jagmohan Sharma vs High Court Of Gujarat Livelaw (Guj) 79
Kishorbhai Khimjibhai Mundhava vs. State of Gujarat Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 80
Yashang Navinbhai Patel vs Dilipbhai Prabhubhai Patel 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 81
Rajesh Kumar Mishra v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 82
Mahendra Singh Sherawat & ors vs. State of Guj. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 83
Rajnish Kumar Rai, IPS (Retd.) vs. Union of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 84
Farhan vs. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 85
Hariom Mukeshbhai Bhatt vs. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 86
Amina Traders v. Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 87
Samirkumar Chandubhai Joshi vs. State of Gujarat & Ors 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 88
Malav Ajitbhai Mehta vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 89
Yogendrakumar Dindayal Dhoot vs Manish Kisan Binani 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 90
Raj Rameshbhai Mistry v. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 91
Manishkumar Prahladbhai Patel Vs. State Of Gujarat & Ors. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 92
Anuradha Vikramsinh Rajput Versus Gujarat Subordinate Services Selection Board (Gaun Seva Pasandgi Mandal) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 93
Munjaal Manishbhai Bhatt Versus Union Of India Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 94
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 95
XYZ Minor Victim Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 96
Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Limited Versus Morris Samuel Christian 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 97
RHC Global Exports Private Limited Versus Union Of India Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 98
Narayan @ Narayan Sai @ Mota Bhagwan S/O Asharam @ Ashumal Harpalani Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 99
Ibrahim Muhammmadamin Kharadi Versus Ministry Of Minority Affairs Haj Division Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 100
XYZ (Minor) vs. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 101
Sky Industries Ltd. Vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 102
Auriga Shipping Management Pte Ltd vs MT Syrma and Patanjali Foods Ltd vs MT Syrma 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 103
Mahebubbhai Bhachubhai Bhati Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 104
Sona Metals Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 105
Jyantilal Vadilal Shah & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 106
Manishaben Mukeshkumar Darji Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 107
Dineshkumar Chhaganbhai Nandani Versus Income Tax Officer,Ito Wd 2(1)(1), Rkt 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 108
DP Versus PN /First Appeal No. 4199 Of 2017 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 109
Teesta Atul Setalvad Vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 110
TBEA Energy v. R K Engineering 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 111
Anilaben Rohitbhai Modi Versus Income Tax Officer 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 112
Ajay Raydhanbhai Kumbharwadiya (Boricha) vs. State Of Gujarat & 6 Other(S)
2023 Livelaw (Guj) 113
RAHUL GANDHI Versus PURNESH ISHWERBHAI MODI 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 114
Nirajkumar Nareshkumar Lakhyani (Pro. Of M/S Om Multitrade) Vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 115
Rohit Dinanath Ray Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 118
Om Trading Vs State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 117
Govindbhai Velshibhai @ Virjibhai Parmar Versus State Of Gujarat
2023 Livelaw (Guj) 119
Hasan Ahmed Charkha @ Lalu Thro Afsa Hasan Lalu Versus State Of Gujarat
2023 Livelaw (Guj) 120
M Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 121
Arjunsinh Raisinh Chavda Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 122
The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmedabad Versus Axis Bank Ltd. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 123
Jivanbhai Nagjibhai Makwana Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 124
Deepakkumar Hasmukhbhai Mahida Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 125
RAJPARA SAUMIL KANUBHAI vs. STATE OF GUJARAT 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 126
Raman Pillai Bhaskaran Nair Sreekumar (R. B. Sreekumar) vs. State of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 127
Tagros Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union Of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 128
Mihir Surendrabhai Shah Versus State Of Gujarat & 2 Other(S) 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 129
M/s FTA HSRP Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs Union Of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 130
Birju Salla @ Amar Soni S/O Kishor Salla Vs. State Of Gujarat And Another 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 131
Anokhi Realty Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 132
Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation And Transfer Pricing) Versus Star Rays 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 133
Rajveer Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 134
Lilabhai Shankarbhai Sapariya (Valmiki) Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 135
Rameshbhai Danjibhai Solanki & 7 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 136
Shree Ganesh Intermediary Private Limited Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 137
Case Title: M/S Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Versus Union Of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 138
Bindu Tibrewal W/O Subhash Kedarnath Tibrewal Versus Joint Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 139
Rohit Jayantilal Patel Vs. State Of Gujarat And others 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 140
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 142
M/S. Spire Enterprise vs Government E-Marketplace SPV LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 143
Cargo Motors ( Gujarat ) Limited vs Kritikant Shivajirav Jadav 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 144
Jenil Dilipkumar Patel vs State Of Gujarat LLx Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 145
Shubhra Hiteshbhai Gupta vs State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 146
Girishbhai Ambalal Rathod Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 147
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 148
Umaben Jayantbhai Shah D/O Late Ramanlal N. Shah vs NA 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 149
XYX Vs. State Of Gujarat Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 150
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chandrakant Gokalbhai Patel 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 151
Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 152
XYZ Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 153
Mujahid Nafees Vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 154
Rajan Ankleshwaria v. Vinni Ankleshwaria 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 155
Krinaben W/O Tushar Suryakant Trivedi Versus N P Garasiya, Police Sub Inspector, Special Investigation Team 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 156
Nipun Praveen Singhvi Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 157
Kutubuddin Ansari Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 158
Bhavesh Kamleshbhai Patel Versus Commissioner, Municipality Administration 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 159
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 160
Chandanji @ Gato Chhanaji Thakor Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 161
Child In Conflict With Law Through Guardian Versus State Of Gujarat R/Criminal Revision Application No. 1024 Of 2023 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 162
Mehul Chinubhai Choksi & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 163
State Of Gujarat Versus Sonu Mangliprasad Vishwakarma 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 164
Padmaben Rajendrabhai Vyas Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 165
The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmadabad Versus Jigar Jashwantlal Shah 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 166
Mohammad Shaukatali Nausarka vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 167
InstaKart Services v. Megastone Logiparks Pvt Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 168
Suyog Dye Chemie Pvt Ltd Versus Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 169
Jahirmiya Rehamumiya Malek Vs. State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 170
M/S Rich And Royal Through Its Proprietor Mr. Ravindrabhai Rameshbhai Gamit Versus Authorised Officer , Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd. 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 171
Bank Of India Versus Bank Of India 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 172
Muhammad Tayyab Shaikh S/O Muhammad Nihal Shaikh Versus Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 173
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 Versus KGY Glass Industries (P) Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 174
Dharmesh Jivanlal Gurjar 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 175
Rajkalp Mudranalya Private Limited Thro Kalpesh Maneklal Patel Versus Superintendent 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 176
Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 177
Ajayraj @ Vijendrasinh Kirodilal Meena Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 178
NXGN Sports Interactive Private Limited Versus Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 179
Bharatkumar Pravinkumar And Co. Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 180
Arvind Kejriwal Versus Gujarat University 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 181
Harshil A Shah Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 182
AM Mining India Private Limited Versus Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 183
Ketkiben Vasudev Vyas Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 184
Bharatkumar Ramabhai Patel Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 185
Mayur Kanaiyalal Shah Versus State Of Gujarat & 2 Other(S) 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 186
Bhailal Babubhai Patel Versus The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 187
The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmadabad Versus Jigar Jashwantlal Shah) 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 188
Artiben Amishkumar Patel Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2)(1) 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 189
The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmadabad Versus Jigar Jashwantlal Shah) 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 190
Naman Gyanchand Pipara Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 191
Bhagwati Polyfill Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 192
Adf Foods Ltd. Versus Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 193
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 194
Kalpataru Projects International Limited Versus Ssa Projects Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 195
Machhi Navinbhai Motibhai Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 196
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 197
DR. Ashotosh Mishra Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 198
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 199
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 200
Jaysukhbhai Odhavjibhai Bhalodia (Patel) Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 201
State Of Gujarat Versus Prakash @ Piddu Mithubhai Mulani & 1 Other(S) 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 202
Bhagirathsinh Jayveersinh Solanki Versus State Of Gujarat 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 203
Nileshbhai Chauhan v. Registrar General 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 204
Orders/Judgments
Case Title: Perfect Importers and Distributors (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 1
The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that imports made during the intervening period between the expiry of the Notification imposing Provisional Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD) and the Notification levying final Anti-Dumping Duty, would not attract Anti-Dumping Duty.
The Court dismissed the contention made by the revenue department that since the final Anti-Dumping Duty Notification was issued with effect from the same date as the Provisional Duty Notification, levying duty at the same rate as specified in the Provisional Duty Notification, the goods imported in the interregnum period would attract duty.
Case Title: Shripal Raja Rajendrakumar Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 2
The Gujarat High Court recently observed that a husband is dutybound to provide financial support to his legally wedded wife and children and he cannot evade the responsibility to maintain them. Justice Samir J. Dave added that being a father and a husband, the man has a social and lawful duty towards providing the same standard of living to his wife and children that they enjoyed before the separation.
Case Title: Kirtilal Ravchandbhai Sanghavi & Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India & Anr.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 3
The Gujarat High Court on Monday held that writ courts exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot sit in the armchair of financial experts and decide matters of business prudence. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri added that interference in financial and banking matters would only be called for if the impugned decision is evidently perverse, illegal or contrary to the admitted facts of the case.
Case Title: Fakirmamad Hushenbhai Sumbhaniya v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 4
The Gujarat High Court has denied bail to a man accused of physically molesting his 12 year-old daughter on several occasions. The accused-father allegedly wanted to marry the victim-daughter and had even threatened to kill the entire family, should the mother of the victim reveal the incidents of molestation to anyone.
Case Title: Saurabhbhai Kamleshkumar Shah Vs State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 5
Deprecating the undue haste with which the Investigating Officer had first filed a deletion report, then C summary report and finally the chargesheet in the case relating to the deaths of seven workers at a construction site in Ahmedabad last year, the Gujarat High Court recently directed the state Home Secretary and Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad to look into the conduct of the officer.
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India Ltd.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 6
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the tribunal's order, by which it was held that the assessee was entitled to and eligible for deduction on export benefits on account of the refund of excise duty under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act.
Case Title: Anupam Industries Ltd. versus State Level Industry Facilitation Council
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 7
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that arbitral proceedings initiated under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) relating to the services provided by the claimant before its registration under the MSMED Act, are void-ab-initio.
Once Assessee Shows Genuineness Of Transactions, No Additions Can Be Made: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s.Neotech Education Foundation
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 8
The Gujarat High Court has held that the assessee has discharged the primary onus to prove the creditworthiness of the transaction. The division bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt has observed that the initial burden, even if not discharged at the level of the assessing officer, can be discharged by the production of documents before the CIT (Appeals), where two remand reports have been called for. Every transaction has been made through a banking channel, there is no reason to also question the creditworthiness.
Reopening The Assessment Based On Change Of Opinion, Not Valid: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Shahlon Silk Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 9
The Gujarat High Court has held that the Assessing Officer cannot have any jurisdiction to issue the notice for reopening the assessment when the assessment is sought to be reopened beyond a period of four years. The division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Bhargav D. Karia has observed that there was a change of opinion by the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2013-2014, more particularly when the issues raised in the reopening assessment were already considered during the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act, 1961.
Case Title: Dhanraj Rajendra Patel v. Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 10
The Gujarat High Court recently came in support of Centre's policy refusing entry in India to foreigners convicted of rape or foreigners who are found to be morally depraved.
Dismissing a US-citizen's plea, Justice Biren Vaishnav observed, "The petitioner has been convicted as a sex offender and the endorsement is so made on his passport too. In the exercise of a statutory power flowing from the provisions of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, guidelines have been issued that foreigners who are morally depraved are not permitted to enter the territorial limits of India. The country is within its rights to prescribe norms valid to prevent such people from setting foot on the Indian soil."
Case Title: Swati Rajiv Goswami v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 11
The Gujarat High Court has held that citizens have a right to know the rules and regulations under which they are denied the permission to hold peaceful protests. It added that refusal of the Police to publicize such rules amounts to "killing and smothering" the very purpose of the Right to Information Act.
Case Title: High Court of Gujarat v. Gujarat Information Commission and 1 other Case
Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 12
Allowing a petition preferred by the Gujarat High Court administration, a single bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav quashed the order of the State Information Commission requiring the administration to disclose certain third party, personal information sought by a judicial officer under Right to Information Act. The bench reiterated that information which is “personal" in nature and which does not serve any public interest cannot be provided under the Right to Information Act.
Case Title: Divyesh Govindbhai Kunvariya v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 13
In the context of departmental proceedings, the Gujarat High Court has held that a delinquent employee is entitled to engage a counsel for his defence where the inquiry officer himself is a legal expert.
Allowing the plea made by one such employee, Justice A.S. Supehia observed, "In the present case, since the Inquiry Officer himself is a City Civil Judge and expert in the legal proceedings, the assistant of a legal practitioner for defending the case of the petitioner cannot be denied...The Apex Court has emphatically held that if any person, who possesses legal acumen is appointed as an inquiry officer in an inquiry initiated against an employee, the denial of a legal practitioner for assistance in inquiry to the charged employee will be unfair."
Failure Of Taxpayer To Disclose Fully: Gujarat High Court Refuses To Quash Reassessment
Case Title: Omni Lens Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 14
The Gujarat High Court has refused to quash the reassessment because the taxpayer has not truly and fully disclosed the material. The division bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh Shastri observed that if the petitioner or assessee was not remedial and has now questioned the issuance of a notice, he is required by law to cooperate with the authority in the adjudication process. When the authority ultimately passes any adverse order, the entire remedy created under the special statute is very much available to the petitioner.
Case Title: Bhavesh @ Pinto Janakbhai Kotak v. Commissioner of Police
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 15
A division bench of the Gujarat High Court recently quashed a detention order on the ground that merely registration of FIRs without any nexus with the breach of maintenance of public order cannot bring the case of the detenue within the purview of definition under section 2(b) the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985.
Case Title: Kavita Krushna Kumar v. Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 16
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a reassessment order and final notice of assessment issued against to an assessee after she failed to produce the relevant documents, particularly Form-F prescribed under Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 amid Covid-19 lockdown.
Case Title: Chaudhary Chetnaben Dilipbhai v. Chaudhary Dilipbhai Lavjibhai
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 17
The Gujarat High Court recently reiterated that the time limit for filing an appeal challenging a judgement or order of Family Court arising out of a matrimonial dispute under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act) is 90 days.
The order addresses the confusion created by the two provisions since whereas the appeal prescribed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act is 90 days from the date of order, Section 19 of the Family Courts Act stipulates only a period of 30 days for filing an appeal.
Crowdfunding 'Misuse' Case: TMC Spokesperson Saket Gokhale Denied Bail By Gujarat High Court
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 18
The Gujarat High Court today denied bail to the Trinamool Congress spokesperson Saket Gokhale who was arrested on December 30 in a case pertaining to the alleged misuse of money collected by him through crowdfunding. The bench of Justice Samir J Dave dismissed the plea as he orally asked the Senior Counsel appearing for Gokhale to come after the filing of the chargesheet in the matter.
Case Title: Aartiben Rameshshing Tomar v. Nasuruddin Chandanbhai Fakir
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 19
The Gujarat High Court recently modified the judgment and award granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on the ground that the tribunal had not complied with the directions issued by the Supreme Court, prescribing Rs. 1 lakh compensation for a minor who sustains upto 10% permanent disability in a motor accident.
The claimant had challenged the order of the tribunal which awarded an amount of Rs.30,000/- holding the opponents therein jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.
Case Title: Dhaval Bijalji Thakore v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 20
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that though an accused under the POCSO Act has the right to cross examine the victim, the questions asked by the defence cannot be such that reveal her identity during the trial. Justice Ilesh J. Vora observed that Section 33 cast a duty upon the Court to ensure that the identity of the child is not disclosed at any time during the course of investigation or trial.
Case Title: Harisinh Abhesinh Parmar v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 21
A single judge bench of the Gujarat High Court held that the non-requirement of custodial interrogation cannot by itself be a ground to grant anticipatory bail to an accused. "Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline anticipatory bail. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail," Justice Samir J. Dave observed.
Case Title: Milanbhai Tarleshbhai Mandaliya v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 22
The Gujarat High Court recently reiterated that the court or police is not required to keep valuable articles in custody for years till the trial is over. Justice Ilesh J. Vora stated that if the proper panchnama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the Court during the trial.
Case Title: High Court of Gujarat v. Chandravadan Dhruv & 1 Other
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 23
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed and set aside State Information Commission's order directing disclosure of the salary and allowances of a former Additional Judge of the Gujarat High Court under the RTI Act. Chandravadan Dhruv had filed an application under the RTI Act on 14.06.2016 seeking certain information, one of which was to provide information regarding the Salary and allowances paid to the said judge for performing her duty as Additional Judge, Gujarat High Court.
Case Title: Imran Karimbhai Madam v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 24
A single judge bench of the Gujarat High Court has reiterated that prosecution witnesses could not be recalled for cross-examination under section 311 of the CrPC on the ground that certain important questions were not asked during the cross-examination.
While dismissing the criminal revision petition, Justice Umesh A. Trivedi observed that the petitioner has not mentioned what is left to be asked to the said witnesses and therefore has failed to show that without recalling the witnesses, court is unable to deliver the judgement.
Case Title: Sanjay Kalubhai Makwana v. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. & 2 Ors.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 25
The Gujarat High Court recently enhanced the compensation granted by the civil court to a claimant on the ground that losing of both arms 'below elbow upto lower one third of forearm' shall be construed to be 100% disability as per the guidelines for Evaluation of Permanent Physical Impairment in Amputees (the guidelines).
Sale Consideration Out Of Transfer Of Capital Asset Is Liable To Capital Gain: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Deepak Nitrate Versus DCIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 26
The Gujarat High Court has held that the detachable warrant has an existence of its own along with the debenture purchased by the assessee for a sum of Rs. 50. The realization would be a sale consideration arising out of the transfer of a capital asset and is subject to capital gain. The division bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh Shastri observed that the detachable warrant has a separate existence and that, as such, a portion of the debenture's cost is attributable to the warrant, which is interconnected.
Case Title: Hitesh Ishwarbhai Misareeya & 1 Other v. State of Gujarat & 1 other
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 27
The Gujarat High Court has held that settlement between parties in cases where an offence is committed under Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 cannot be accepted.
The application was filed before the High Court under section Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the FIR related to the offences punishable under Sections 304, 313, 314, 120(B), 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 22 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 as well as the Criminal Case pending beforeAdditional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad.
Case Title: Odhavjibhai Mohanbhai Gadhiya Versus State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 28
The Gujarat High Court has held that Sales tax or VAT dues payable cannot be claimed as priority over dues of the secured creditor. The division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Bhargav D. Karia has observed that the charge in respect of the property in question created for sales tax dues is of no avail and has no efficacy in law.
Case Title: Ashaben Muljibhai Ghori v. State of Gujarat Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 29
The Gujarat High Court, in its recent judgment in Ashaben Muljibhai Ghori v. State of Gujarat, has ruled that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for registration of an FIR. A single judge bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora disposed of a writ petition seeking the writ court's directions for the registration of an FIR.
The petitioner argued that despite her representations, she could not get the concerned authorities to register an FIR. Hence, she moved the Court under article 226 of the Constitution.
Case Title: Anandbhai Bharatbhai Vaghela v. State of Gujarat Case
Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 30
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a trial court order denying the accused opportunity to examine a police inspector in a rape case. The officer had recorded the statement of the victim in a different case.
The applicant-accused moved an application under Sec 233 of Cr.P.C. for the issuance of process upon the witness, who had recorded the statement of the victim in connection with the case registered with Naranpura Police Station for the offences under Section 307 IPC.
Case Title: Pratapbhai @ Shivbhai Hamirbhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 31
The Gujarat High Court on Monday suspended the life sentence imposed by a CBI Court on Pratap @ Shiva Solanki, nephew of former BJP MP Dinu Solanki, in connection with RTI activist Amit Jethva murder case of 2010.
The court also released Shiva on conditional bail, pending disposal of criminal appeal before the High Court. RTI Activist Amit Jethva who tried to expose illegal mining activities in the state through RTI applications was murdered outside the Gujarat High Court premises on July 20, 2010.
Case Title: Shree Siddhi Foods Versus ACIT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 32
The Gujarat High Court has held that the practice of not responding to the request for adjournment and thereafter taking the matter up at any time when the Assessing Officer deems it appropriate was not endorsable.
The division bench of Justices Sonia Gokani and Sandeep N. Bhat ruled that the order of 148A(d) and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act merited review. Both need to be quashed. The matter goes back to the stage of considering the reply filed on 25.3.2022.
Case Title: Patel Ambalal Kalidas v. Patel Motibhai Kalidas
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 33
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday dropped the contempt proceedings and accepted the unconditional apology rendered by 12 judicial officers who failed to dispose of a suit which is pending since 1977 till date, despite the direction issued by the High Court in November 2004 to dispose it of by the end of year 2005.
Case Title: Pahal Engineers versus Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 34
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that failure to abide by the procedural laws would not be fatal to the arbitral proceedings and thus, the Arbitral Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the claim petition/ statement of claims solely on the ground that it was not verified as contemplated under Order VI Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).
Case Title: Shweta Sanjay Bhatt v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 35
The Gujarat High Court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by former IPS Officer Sanjiv Bhatt's wife Shweta Sanjay Bhatt regarding disclosure of reasoning by the State Government for withdrawal of police protection of her husband.
While dismissing the petition, the single judge bench of Justice Nirzar S. Desai said the reason behind granting police protection, at the relevant point of time, was the fact that the husband of the petitioner was serving as an IPS officer, and also was a witness in a criminal trial.
Case Title: Farhan Tasaddukhusain Barodawala v. Onali Ezazuddin Dholkawala
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 36
The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed a review petition seeking recall of an order approving the sale of certain shops in a predominantly Hindu area to a Muslim man. Justice Biren Vaishnav also imposed Rs. 25,000 costs on the petitioners, stating it "is a disturbing factor that a successful purchaser of property in a disturbed area is being hounded and thwarting his attempt to enjoy the fruits of the property which he successfully purchased."
Case Title: Kundankumar Navalkishor Mahato v. The Maharaja Sayajirao Univeristy of Baroda
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 37
The Gujarat High Court quashed an order of Maharaja Sayajirao University, which permanently debarred a student of post-graduation student at its Department of Sculpture Faculty of Fine Arts for display of objectionable art work of Hindu Goddesses.
The single judge bench of Justice Bhargav D. Karia found that the impugned order was passed in breach of principles of natural justice. It remanded the matter back to the respondent-University to pass appropriate order upon the inquiry report submitted by the Fact Finding Committee and further inquiry which may be conducted after giving an opportunity of hearing to the student.
Case Title: Nimish Mahendra Kapadia v. The Dy. Secretary, Gujarat Information Commission
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 38
The Gujarat High Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by a practising advocate seeking details, under the RTI Act, of the correspondences between government advocate and various offices of the State regarding a matter in which he had appeared for the petitioning party. The advocate sought the details purportedly to ascertain the reasons on part of State in preferring an appeal.
Case Title: GVV v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 39
The Gujarat High Court on Friday permitted an alleged rape victim (minor), who insisted to terminate her pregnancy of 19 weeks and 4 days despite the risks cited by the Medical Board, to do so at her own risk.
Justice Ilesh J. Vora presiding the Court said that the doctors constituting the Medical Board will remain immune in the event of any litigation arising in this matter. It observed, "It is clarified to the learned advocate for the petitioner and the petitioner also about the risk factors involved and that petitioner shall undergo the procedure of medical termination of pregnancy at her own risk. It is further made clear that the doctors, who have put their opinion on record, shall have the immunity in the event of occurrence of any litigation arising out of the instant Petition."
Case Title: Khojema Saifudin Dodiya v. Registrar of Birth and Death/Chief Officer, Dhoraji Nagarpalika
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 40
The Gujarat High Court on Friday held that a registered deed of adoption is enough to prove the validity of adoption of a child under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and that there is no requirement to have a civil court decree asserting such deed, for change in birth records.
The court was hearing a bunch of petitions in which the question before the court was whether the competent authorities can refuse to change the birth records in the absence of a decree of a competent court.
Case Title: Purnesh Ishvarbhai Modi v. State of Guajrat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 41
The Gujarat High Court has vacated the stay on trial in criminal defamation case against Congress leader and MP Rahul Gandhi, filed by Surat West MLA Purnesh Modi for his alleged remarks “why all thieves share the Modi surname” made during a political campaign in Karol in April 2019. The single judge bench of Justice Vipul M. Pancholi vacated the stay after the petitioner submitted that sufficient evidence has come on record of the trial court and the stay order will only delay the trial.
Waqf Tribunal Cannot Insist On Deposit Of Cost For Issuing Notice: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Ashokbhai Narsinh Thakor/ Padhiyar v. Gujarat State Wakf Tribunal (Through Chairman)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 42
The Gujarat High Court has held that there is no procedure under Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1998 by which the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal can insist on deposit of cost for issuing notice on a petition filed before it.
It was the petitioner's case that the petitioner's forefathers had donated the land to the respondent No.2 for constructing 'Musafir Khana' for giving accommodation to the pilgrims.
Case Title: Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank) vs. Morris Samuel Christian
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 43
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that merely because the borrower is an MSME, it would not be governed by the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act), including the arbitral mechanism envisaged under the said Act.
The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav observed that though, as per the mechanism provided under the MSMED Act, the dispute between the supplier and the buyer of goods or services may be adjudicated through arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), however, the same does not contemplate adjudication of disputes arising from a loan transaction, which is the subject matter of a special Act such as the SARFAESI Act.
Case Title: Rajveer Pravinchandra Upadhyay & 4 Ors. v. State of Gujarat & 3 Ors.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 44
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that it cannot issue a direction simply on a plea for demolition, not describing the particular area which is allegedly under encroachment. Single bench of Justice Nirzar S. Desai dismissed a writ petition seeking demolition of alleged illegal encroachment in Gujarat Housing Board in Chandkhela area of Ahmedabad.
It observed, “Unless the petition specifies particular illegal encroachment, the Court would not be in a position to issue any direction either to Gujarat Housing Board or to Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation.”
Case Title: Ravi Hareshbhai Patni v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 45
The Gujarat High Court recently granted bail to a convict under POCSO Act on the ground that there was element of love affair and the prosecutorix had virtually resided with the convict as husband and wife, till they were apprehended.
The applicant-convict approached the High Court in appeal against the judgment and order dated December 12, 2022 by which he was convicted by the POCSO Court, Gandhi Nagar for offences punishable under Section 363 (Punishment for kidnapping), Section 366 (Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc.), Section 376 (Punishment for rape) of IPC and under Section 4 (Punishment for penetrative sexual assault) and Section 6 (Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act, 2012.
Case Title: Pravinbhai Becharbhai Parmar (Thakor) v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 46
The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed with costs, a habeas corpus petition filed by a husband for the production of his wife who was allegedly kidnapped by her relatives, on the ground that the husband has concealed the fact that he has already filed an application under section 97 (Search for persons wrongfully confined) of CrPC.
The division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Niral R. Mehta observed: “The factum of filing of proceedings of Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 02 of 2023 under section 97, CrPC was suppressed by the petitioner while filing this Habeas Corpus petition. The Court was not apprised of the proceedings under section 97 CrPC.”
Case Title: Mahavirsinh Vanrajsinh Gohil v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 47
The Gujarat High Court on Monday set aside an order of Single Judge Bench of the High Court which denied the arms licence to a business man who had requested for the same as he had to deal with cash transactions, on the ground that there were options open for him to deal through digitized payment and avoid cash transactions.
While allowing the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellant, the division bench of The Acting Chief Justice A. J. Desai and Justice Biren Vaishnav observed: “Perusal of the impugned orders before the learned Single Judge indicate that the only ground that weighed with the authorities in rejecting the request of the appellant for an arms license is that there were options open for the appellant to deal through digitized payment and avoid cash transactions and that there was no threat perception. Reading the provisions of the Arms Act, particularly sec. 14 thereof indicates that such ground as the ones advanced by the authorities are beyond the scope of section 14 of the Act.”
Case Title: Maunish Dinkar Shaw & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 48
The Gujarat High Court recently reiterated that father being a natural and lawful guardian, removal by him of his son below 5 years of age from his mother is not an offence under Section 361 (Kidnapping from lawful guardianship) of IPC.
While quashing the criminal proceedings against the applicants, the single judge bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora observed: “In order to constitute an offence under Section 361 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be a kidnapping of a person from lawful guardianship. Here the applicant is himself the lawful guardian of the minor. It cannot therefore, be said that, he committed an offence under Section 361 of the Indian Penal Code by getting the custody of his own son from his wife.”
Case Title: Shree Ganesh Molasses Trading Company Versus Superintendent [R/Special Civil Application No. 4026 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 49
The Gujarat High Court has held that the reversal of input tax credit (ITC) at midnight during search and seizure operations can't be treated as a voluntary payment. The division bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandeep S. Bhatt has directed the department to reverse the ITC to the tune of Rs. 37,68,300 along with 6% interest.
Case Title: State of Gujarat v. Koli Arjan Samat Vaderah & 3 other(s) [Criminal Appeal No. 506 of 2011]
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 50
A bench of Justice Rajendra M.Sareen of Gujarat High Court confirmed the acquittal of the accused person charged under Sections 498(A), 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
The court reiterated that when two views are possible, the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court should not be interfered with by the Appellate Court unless for the special reasons. The appeal was filed by the state under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 against the acquittal passed by the trial court.
Case Title: A B C (Victim) v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 51
The Gujarat High Court recently permitted a rape victim to medically terminate her pregnancy of 26 weeks, stating that chances of survival of the foetus are extremely low at this gestational period.
Justice Samir J. Dave observed, "according to Indian Medical Association guidelines, age of viability has been deemed to be 28 weeks of gestation or 1000 grams, both of which are not sufficed in the above mentioned case. Hence, it can be stated that chances of survival of fetus are extremely low."
Case Title: Rajnikant Motibhai Patel v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 52
The Gujarat High Court on Monday reiterated that an employee who was terminated from services on account of criminal prosecution, would not be able to claim back wages automatically on the ground that he was subsequently acquitted.
The single judge bench of Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt observed: “In view of peculiar facts of the present case, it is well settled that grant of back wages is never an automatic relief to follow, the theory of 'no work, no pay' would apply.”
Reassessment Notices Issued After Elapse Of Six Years: Gujarat High Court Quashes Assessment
Case Title: Keenara Industries Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 53
The Gujarat High Court has held that the reassessment notices were issued after the lapse of six years and are therefore time-barred. The single bench of Justice Sonia Gokani has observed that the board's circulars and instructions are binding only on the departmental authorities and not on the court or the assessee.
Case Title: Manishkumar Tulsidas Kaneriya Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central 1, Rajkot
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 54
The Gujarat High Court, while setting aside the assessment orders, held that the assessment under Section 153 read with Section 144 had been done by the assessing officer without giving the petitioner assessee an opportunity to be heard in terms of and within the meaning of Section 144 of the Act.
The division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Niral R. Mehta has observed that the petitioner did not receive any notice. It was only when the petitioner opened the portal to check the demand for the assessment year 2021–2022, that he knew about the impugned orders of reassessment and the consequential penalty orders.
Case Title: Bhagwan Rajabhai Chaudhari v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 55
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition with Rs. 5000/- cost on the petitioner who was seeking custody of his live-in partner alleging that she was in illegal custody of her husband.
The division bench of Justice Vipul M. Pancholi and Justice Hemant M. Prachchhak observed: “It is not in dispute that till today, the marriage of the petitioner is not solemnized with the respondent No.4 (corpus). At the same time, divorce has not taken place between respondent No.4 (corpus) and respondent no. 5 (husband). We are, therefore, of the view that custody of respondent No.4 with respondent No.5 cannot be termed as illegal custody as alleged by the petitioner and the petitioner has no locus to file the present petition on the basis of the so-called live-in-relationship agreement.”
Case Title: Ishrat Bhaya v. Central Pollution Control Board
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 56
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a PIL against oil refinery Nayara for allegedly emitting hazardous substances and polluting Vadinar Village in Devbhumi Dwarka.
The bench comprising Acting Chief Justice A.J. Desai and Justice Biren Vaishnav observed the prayers cannot be accepted without any cogent material produced by the petitioner or the case put forward by the Gujarat Pollution Control Board that the continuous monitoring was made through OCEMS system.
Case Title: State of Gujarat v. Rambhai Nathabhai Luna
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 57
Observing that neither the Investigating Officer nor the Office of the Public Prosecutor seriously followed State's plea challenging the grant of anticipatory bail to an accused, the Gujarat High Court recently directed the Secretary, Home Department and Secretary, Legal Department to take appropriate action
The single bench of Justice Umesh A. Trivedi observed: “From the papers, a sorry state of affairs has been projected. Since the order of anticipatory bail of the respondent– accused passed on 01.08.2019, it came to be challenged by the State, that too, at the instance of the I.O. and present application has come to be affirmed on 17.01.2020 and filed on 18.01.2020. It appears that it has not been seriously followed either by the Office of the Public Prosecutor or by the Investigating Officer himself.”
Case Title: Piyam Jigesh Dave v. SAL School of Architecture & Ors.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 58
The Gujarat High Court recently directed the SAL School of Architecture, Ahmedabad to issue NOC to one of its student of Bachelor of Architecture course who after completion of one academic year at SAL, has taken provisional admission in Nirma University.
The single judge bench of Justice Bhargav D. Karia held: “Respondent No.1 (SAL School of Architecture) cannot deny NOC when the petitioner does not want to study with the respondent No.1-Institute and more particularly, when the petitioner has studied 3rd Semester in the Nirma University and in such circumstances, in order to see that the petitioner continue the study of Bachelor of Architecture without any hindrance, respondent No.1 is hereby directed to issue NOC to the petitioner within two days from today.”
Case Title: Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 59
The Gujarat High Court recently refused to interfere with the order of trial court rejecting former IAS Officer Pradeep Sharma's application for discharge in a case under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The single judge bench of Justice Samir J. Dave observed: “While rejecting the discharge application of the applicant, learned trial court has specifically observed that on the basis of prima facie investigation made by ED, it appears that the applicant is prima facie involved in Hawala i.e., illegal transfer of money from nation to foreign countries. Prima facie there is sufficient material, which warrants this court to arrive at prima facie inferences that applicant is involved in such serious case wherein discretion is not required to be exercised.”
Case title: Ratilal Kalidas Varma Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 60
The recent ruling of the Gujarat Hight Court has made it clear that a Manager asking its employee to explain alleged irregularities in the books of accounts does not amount to abetment to commit suicide under section 306 of the IPC.
A bench of Justice Hemant M. Prachchhak observed, "If the person who is sentimental and if he takes some ultimate steps which does not amount to abetting the commission of crime in question and therefore, the ingredients of offence under Section 114 read with Section 306 of IPC is not made out."
Case Title: State of Gujarat vs. Sureshbhai Honjibhai Gamit
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 61
The Gujarat High Court has held that the inability of the prosecution to establish the identity of the dead-body on the basis of DNA reports is not a sufficient ground for acquittal of the accused, especially in a case where the accused was charged with murdering his own wife and where the remains of the dead-body were found buried in his residential premises.
Case Title: Shri Sundarpuri Yuvak Pragati Mandal Through its President Patel Ajabhai Gokhlabhai vs. State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 62
The Gujarat High Court has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking action against alleged illegal encroachment on a piece of land allotted for the graveyard in Banaskantha district of Gujarat. The division bench of Acting Chief Justice AJ Desai and Justice Biren Vaishnav took note of the submission made by Taluka Development Officer, Dhanera Taluka Panchayat, that a notice has been issued to several persons with regard to alleged encroachment.
Gujarat High Court Grants Bail To Alleged Ganja Cultivator Citing 'Intermediary Quantity' Contraband
Case Title: Goganbhai Rambhai Shekh vs. State of Gujrat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 63
The Gujarat High Court while allowing a criminal miscellaneous application, granted bail to an accused in a Ganja cultivation case, citing intermediary quantity and lack of criminal antecedents.
The court passed the above order in an application seeking grant of regular bail after the charge-sheet was filed in connection with an offence registered under Sections 8(b), 8(c), 20(b), 20(a)(i) and 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
Case Title - Gujarat University Vs. M Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 64
The Gujarat High Court today quashed and set aside the 2016 order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Gujarat University to provide “information regarding degrees in the name of Mr. Narendra Damodar Modi” to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal.
With this, the bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav allowed the appeal filed by Gujarat University challenging CIC's order on the ground that the same was passed without serving notice to it. It may be noted that the Judgment in the matter was reserved on February 9 after hearing the concerend parties extensively.
Case Title - Gujarat University Vs. M Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 64
Setting aside the 2016 order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Gujarat University to provide information regarding degrees in the name of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, the Gujarat High Court today held that the educational degrees of the PM are exempted from disclosure under the provisions of Section 8(1)(e) and (j) of the RTI Act in absence of any larger public interest.
With this, the bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav allowed the appeal filed by Gujarat University challenging CIC's order.
Cartel Amongst Paper Mills? Gujarat High Court Refuses To Interfere With CCI's Investigation Order
Case Title: J.K. Paper Ltd. Through Santosh Wakhloo, Authorized Signatory Herein v. Competition Commissioner of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 65
The Gujarat High Court on Monday dismissed a writ petition filed by J.K. Paper Ltd. challenging an investigation order under Section 26 of Competition Act, 2002 passed by the Competition Commission of India on the ground that the said order is an administrative order which only forms a prima facie opinion and it does not affect rights and liabilities of the petitioner.
Case Title: Pawan Kumar Sharma vs. Anandalaya Education Society
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 66
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a Special Civil Application filed by a principal against his termination by Anandalaya Education Society citing a clear element of loss of confidence in the petitioner by the respondent-institution. Justice Sandeep N Bhatt made it clear that the writ is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the present respondent institution.
Case Title: Ramjibhai Ravjibhai Siyani v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 67
The Gujarat High Court recently allowed a petition filed by an accused for transfer of his case from Kachchh district to Morbi on the ground that no advocate from the District Bar Association, Bhuj was willing to defend the accused as the lawyers' body had passed a resolution not to defend him.
The single judge bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora observed: “In the facts of the present case, the apprehension expressed by the applicant that, he will not get fair and impartial trial as no any advocate of the Bar is ready to defend his case. Considering the resolution of the Bar, the members were not satisfied with the conduct of the applicant herein. On earlier occasion also, he was convicted by the Court as he could not defend his case properly. Thus, the apprehension expressed by the applicant herein is reasonable and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that, the grounds mentioned in the petition are substantial to necessitate the exercise of power of transfer, mainly on the ground of depriving the facility of competent legal aid to the petitioner.”
Case Title: Kaushal Arvindkumar Bhatt v. The Gujarat Technological University Through The Registrar
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 68
The Gujarat High Court has set aside a single judge bench's decision asking a person to vacate the post of Associate Professor (Management) in Gujarat Technological University (GTU) due to his alleged ineligibility for the said post.
The division bench of Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice Bhargav D. Karia observed: “In any view, writ of quo warranto is not an appeal over an academic decision. When more particularly, the decision in the instant case treating the Ph.D. in Commerce to be in 'relevant field' for the purpose of post of Associate Professor (Management), cannot be said to be founded on any irrational consideration.”
Case Title: KV Vadodaria & 3 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 69
About 25 years after two public service aspirants challenged the eligibility criteria for recruitment as Agricultural Officers through State Public Service Commission, the Gujarat High Court opened their sealed cover results on Thursday and found them successful.
The merit was declared in December 1998 but results of the four petitioners were withheld. They had challenged the Deputy Director of Agriculture and the District Agricultural Officer Recruitment Rules of 1987, saying that the upper age criteria for the posts was inconsistent with the academic and experience criteria.
Case Title - Patel Dharmeshbhai Naranbhai vs Dharmendrabhai Pravinbhai Fofani
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 70
Holding that right to safe food is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Gujarat High Court today observed that the right to free trade in food items like meat, or any such food has to be subserving to the public health and food safety requirements.
The bench of Justice N. V Anjaria opined thus while disposing of a bunch of PIL Pleas filed by meat vendors and associations in Gujarat challenging the closing of their establishments/shops by official authorities on account of not complying with food safety laws, selling meat in unhygienic conditions or through unlicensed shops.
Case Title - Patel Dharmeshbhai Naranbhai vs Dharmendrabhai Pravinbhai Fofani
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 70
The Gujarat High Court today held that there is no unrestricted freedom available to meat vendors, sellers, and slaughterhouse owners to do business in meat or to run slaughterhouses on the ground of religious occasions when they are otherwise non-compliant with the food safety laws. The bench of Justice NV Anjaria also noted that the activity of running unlicensed slaughterhouses and selling unstamped meat could not be approved or permitted without the stakeholders complying with the applicable laws.
Case Title: Hansaben Rtubhai Prajapati vs. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 71
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the redevelopment of residential units of Surya Apartments, Sola Road, in Ahmedabad under a scheme floated by the Gujarat Housing Board (GHB). A total of 14 residents of the premises had moved the high court against the redevelopment contending that the principles of natural justice, which is a prerequisite for any redevelopment scheme, was not followed in the entire process.
Case Title: Karthik Deepak Sharma Versus Director General, Nirma University
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 72
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed an application seeking relief to appear for regular examinations filed by a law student who was found to be involved in misconduct and was caught cheating during the end semester examination.
While giving a holistic view to the regulations on unfair practices framed by the university administration, Justice Sangeeta K Vishen held, “...if the student, is found possessing any kind of electronic devices, during the examination irrespective of whether it is used or not used, the same is termed to be a misconduct and therefore, one is not to go only by the penalty imposed but the nature of the malpractices committed by the petitioner as well. It is not in dispute that the malpractice, was committed by the petitioner and to suggest that the instant misconduct would not be covered by Regulation 5(iv), such suggestion, is difficult to be accepted.”
Case Title: Kajalben Jwalant Shingala @ Kajalben Hindustani Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 73
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday disposed of, as withdrawn, right-wing activist Kajal Hindusthani's plea seeking to quash an FIR lodged against her in connection with a Speech delivered by her on the occasion of Ram Navami on March 30 which allegedly caused a communal clash in Una on April 1.
"Let the police complete the investigation", the bench of Justice Samir J. Dave remarked after hearing the arguments of the Counsel appearing for Kajal as it found no ground to quash the FIR at the initial stage.
Case Title: Govindbhai Pirabhai Ghanchi (Modi) v. State Examination Board, Gujarat State
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 74
Gujarat Government on Tuesday informed the Gujarat High Court that it has allowed the candidates with benchmark disability to appear with scribe for the TET-II exam on April 23. A petition was filed before the High Court challenging the action of the State in not providing the scribe in accordance with the guidelines of Central and State Government for conducting the written examination for the person with benchmark disabilities.
Case Title - Azajkhan Hamidkhan Pathan Vs. State Of Gujarat [Writ Petition (Pil) No. 38 Of 2023]
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 75
The Gujarat High Court on Friday expressed its satisfaction with the submission made by the Gujarat Government that it has taken sufficient steps to avoid mob lynching or any communal disturbance during the celebrations of the festivals and that its forces shall remain vigilant during such festivals.
In its affidavit submitted before the HC, the state government submitted that it has, inter alia, banned the usage of Loud Speakers, and DJs and has issued instructions to all the organisers and participants not to use objectionable content through Public Address System/DJs/Loud Speakers during processions.
Income Tax Assessment Can't Be Reopened Without Any Foundation: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Bimlakumari Lajpatraj Hurra Versus Income Tax Officer
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 76
The Gujarat High Court has held that when the foundation was missing, there could not have been the erection of ground to seek reopening of assessment. The bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Devan M. Desai has observed that neither foundational facts existed nor could any tangible material be available with the assessing officer to justify the exercise of power to reopen the assessment.
Case Title: Rajendrakumar @ Raj S/O Khemabhai Makwana Versus District Magistrate, Ahmedabad
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 77
Observing that order of detention passed by the State Government, along with the grounds, was mandatorily required to be forwarded to the Central Government within seven days, the Gujarat High Court quashed an order of detention under Prevention of Black Marketing & Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980.
The division bench of Justices AS Supehia and Divyesh A Joshi at the outset recorded that no affidavit-in-reply was filed by the Detaining Authority in the case filed by the detenu. It also noted that the impugned order of detention is premised on the basis of registration of a solitary FIR of the alleged irregularity committed by the petitioner in violation of the provisions of the Act. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been enlarged on bail in the aforesaid offence, the court said.
Case Title: Axis Bank Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 78
The Gujarat High Court has quashed the reassessment against Axis Bank and held that reopening is not permissible merely on the basis of a change of opinion.
The division bench of Justice Ashutosh Shastri and Justice J. C. Doshi has observed that the action of the department in reopening the assessment is not justified as it would be tantamount to a mere change of opinion, which is not permissible, as the conditions that have been retained under Section 147 are also not satisfied.
Case Title: Nirmal Jagmohan Sharma vs High Court Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 79
The Gujarat High Court has rejected a plea filed by a serving Civil Judge from Rajasthan for permission to participate in the recruitment for the post of Civil Judge in Gujarat.
The division bench of Justices AS Supehia and Divyesh A Joshi held: "The expression “other allied department” used in Sub- clause(b) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 of the Rules has further been clarified by the High Court and the aforesaid four categories have been included to facilitate the recruitment process. Merely because, respondent No.1 has issued instructions clarifying the categories of employees working in the “allied department” will not create class within class. The further clarificatory instructions are not in any manner infringing the statutory Rules, and cannot be set aside. The appellant, who is serving as a Civil Judge, unquestionably will not fall in any of the aforementioned categories, as she cannot call herself as an employee of a Court."
Case Title: Kishorbhai Khimjibhai Mundhava v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 80
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday issued directions in a PIL filed on behalf of the several slum-dwellers in Ahmedabad City seeking directions to the State to provide alternative accommodation under the Regulations for Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of the Slums, 2010 or under any other housing scheme framed by the government for EWS and urban poor.
Case Title: Yashang Navinbhai Patel vs Dilipbhai Prabhubhai Patel
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 81
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that once the partnership at will is dissolved, the arbitration clause contained in the partnership deed cannot be invoked to refer the dispute between the partners to arbitration.
The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav was dealing with an arbitration clause which provided for reference of the dispute between the partners with regard to the “dealing of the firm” to arbitration. The court held that the term “dealing” would mean engaging in business and thus, for the dispute to fall within the ambit of the arbitration clause, the firm must be subsisting.
Case Title: Rajesh Kumar Mishra v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 82
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday directed the Registrar General to circulate a report issued by the Child Rights Foundation in 2017, among the Judicial Officers so that while deciding child custody cases, the concerned judge can come to a right conclusion.
The direction was issued by the division bench of the Acting Chief Justice A. J. Desai and Justice Biren Vaishnav while hearing a PIL which raised certain issues with regard to those children who are facing various types of difficulties when their parents are either residing separately in the same city or in different cities pursuant to differences in their marriage.
Gujarat High Court Suspends Sentence Of Three Former Air Force Officers In 1995 Murder Case
Case Tile: Mahendra Singh Sherawat & ors v. State of Guj.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 83
Observing that the judgment of the trial court suffers from patent infirmities, the Gujarat High Court has suspended the sentence of three former Air Force officers in a 1995 murder case. The division bench of Justice S.H.Vora and Justice S.V. Pinto said that the applicants stand a fair chance of acquittal and ordered their release during the pendency of their appeal.
Case Title: Rajnish Kumar Rai, IPS (Retd.) vs. Union of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 84
The Gujarat High Court has rejected former IPS Officer Rajnish Kumar Rai's plea against Central Administrative Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench's ruling that it does not have the jurisdiction to hear his challenge against a preliminary inquiry and a show cause notice issued to him by union government in 2021.
A division bench Justice Vipul M. Pancholi and Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar said Rai was required to file his case against the issuance of show cause notice dated 28.12.2021 before CAT's Principal Bench in New Delhi.
Case Title: Farhan vs. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 85
Observing that detention orders are being passed in a casual manner, the Gujarat High Court has said the State Authorities should introspect about their actions since the court is confronted with the orders of detention, which do not stand the test of settled legal proposition of law.
The division bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice Divyesh A Joshi said simplicitor registration of FIRs by itself cannot have any nexus with the breach of maintenance of public order. The court made the observations while quashing an order of detention passed under Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985.
Case Title: Hariom Mukeshbhai Bhatt vs. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 86
While granting relief to a student who was falling short of the age criteria of six years just by one day, the Gujarat High Court has directed that the case of the student be considered for admission and not be denied solely on this ground. The student had not completed 6 years of age as on 01.06.2023.
The aforementioned ruling by Justice Sangeeta K Vishen comes on the heels of the introduction of new rules by the State which provide that no Elementary School shall admit a child in 1st standard who has not completed 6 years of age on 1st June of the academic year.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Grant Of Tender, Holds Fresh Auction In Open Court
Case Title: Amina Traders v. Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 87
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a tender granted to M.S. Traders on the ground that the portal through which the auction was to be finalized did not work on the last date of the auction.
The plea before the court sought re-auction for the tender published by Gujarat Secondary & Higher Secondary Education Board (GSHSEB), The division bench of the Acting Chief Justice A. J. Desai and Justice Biren Vaishnav conducted the re-auction in the courtroom itself after the parties agreed to it.
Court Can Allow Evidence On Affidavit In DV Act Case: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Samirkumar Chandubhai Joshi vs. State of Gujarat & Ors
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 88
The Gujarat High Court recently held that a court can deviate from procedure mentioned under Section 28 (1) read with Rule 6(5) of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and devise its own procedure which would include permitting evidence by way of an affidavit.
The single judge bench comprising Justice Samir J. Dave noted: “….Court can allow evidence on affidavit in its discretion and while considering the aims and objects of the D.V. Act including the scope of Section 28(2), court can deviate from procedure mentioned under Sub Section (1) of Section 28 read with Rule 6(5) and devise its own procedure which would include permitting evidence by way of an affidavit.”
Case Title: Malav Ajitbhai Mehta vs State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 89
The Gujarat High Court has upheld an order remanding a co-accused in a bribery case against IRS Officer Santosh Karnani, to police remand even after grant of anticipatory bail. Karnani was Additional Income-Tax Commissioner, Ahmedabad. Malav Ajitbhai Mehta had challenged the order passed by the Special Judge – CBI, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad sending him to police remand for a period of two days.
Case Title: Yogendrakumar Dindayal Dhoot vs Manish Kisan Binani
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 90
While allowing a leave to appeal against acquittal in a criminal case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, the Gujarat High Court said the Magistrate's approach in shifting the burden upon the complainant to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt was not proper “when the accused has chosen not to question the financial capacity of complainant at very first instance by not replying to the statutory notice.”
Case Title: Raj Rameshbhai Mistry v. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 91
The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a father who sought the custody of his children from his wife who is living separately, on the ground that the petitioner-father has not adopted alternative remedies available to him.
The division bench of Justice Umesh A. Trivedi and Justice M. K. Thakker observed: “It is only because he is facing FIR for the offences and may face other case because of marital discord, this petition under the guise of habeas corpus, for the custody of children is filed, and therefore, it cannot be entertained for the simple reason that there are several other remedies, which could have been availed earlier at the first available opportunity, which is never availed and straightway the petitioner has filed this petition in this Court, and therefore, this petition cannot be entertained.”
Case Title: Manishkumar Prahladbhai Patel Vs. State Of Gujarat & Ors.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 92
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a batch of appeals seeking 'equal pay for equal work' for drawing teachers with diploma qualification, at par with other secondary teachers who possess degree qualification in the subject.
“Law is categorically settled that the classification based on educational qualification is a reasonable and acceptable classification, when the different pay-scales are prescribed on the basis of such classification, it can be said to have rational nexus with the objects as sought to be achieved,” the division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Niral R. Mehta said.
Case Title: Anuradha Vikramsinh Rajput Versus Gujarat Subordinate Services Selection Board (Gaun Seva Pasandgi Mandal) Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 93
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a woman's petition seeking relaxation in the age criteria for the post of Gujarati Stenographer. "Since in the present case, the petitioner failed to establish that she is possessing the prescribed age limit on the date of the advertisement or is there any relaxation rule which permit her to participate in the selection process and further to participate in the examination, the petitioner cannot enforce such kind of relief by way of this petition," Justice J C Doshi said.
GST Payable Only On The Cost of Construction and Not On The Cost Of Land: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Munjaal Manishbhai Bhatt Versus Union Of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 94
The Gujarat High Court, while giving major relief to the buyers, has held that GST is payable only on the cost of construction and not on the cost of land. The bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Nisha M. Thakore has observed that in the sale of a flat, villa, or commercial property, the actual land value or undivided share is not at all subject to GST. The value of the land or undivided share of land used to construct the flat is not subject to GST; only the construction costs are.
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 95
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday denied bail to a Congress Leader Afzal Lakhani who has been accused of making 'Anti-Indian', and 'Pro-Pakistani' Facebook Posts and posting derogatory remarks about the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi and his late mother Hiraba.
Denying him bail, the bench of Justice Nirzar S. Desai observed thus: "People who stay in India must be faithful to India...On perusal of the material, the applicant has made certain comments which may hurt the sentiments of a particular community and there are certain posts which are abusive in nature. There are other materials which are of such nature which may have a larger impact on the society."
Gujarat High Court Allows Termination Of 20 Week-Old Pregnancy Of Minor Rape Victim
Case Title: XYZ Minor Victim Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 96
The Gujarat High Court has allowed the termination of over 20 weeks-old pregnancy of a minor rape victim and said the medical procedure be undertaken at the earliest possible time considering the mental and physical health of the 17 years and 2 months old victim girl.
The victim, through her father, had filed a petition seeking the termination of the pregnancy. In connection with the rape, an FIR stands registered with Anjar Police Station, District Kutch, for the offence under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. She also prayed for DNA sample preservation in the case.
Case Title: Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Limited Versus Morris Samuel Christian
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 97
The Gujarat High Court recently allowed the writ petition filed by Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Limited praying for quashing and setting aside the mandate, constitution and authority of Morris Samuel Christian (respondent no.1) in relation to an Arbitration Case, with a further request to quash and set aside the 'Final Awarding' passed by the respondent.
Case Title: RHC Global Exports Private Limited Versus Union Of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 98
The Gujarat High Court has held that the state GST department can initiate proceedings against the unit situated in the Special Economic Zone (SEZ). The bench of Justice Ashutosh Shastri and Justice J. C. Doshi has observed that respondent departments are empowered to carry out proceedings in SEZ.
Their jurisdiction is unquestionable, as the Central Government has already authorized those officers by virtue of a notification dated August 5, 2016. Section 6(2) of the GGST Act indicates that where any proper officer issues an order, he is also issuing an order under the CGST Act as authorized by the Act or under intimation to a jurisdictional officer of the Central Government, and as such, it appears that respondents are empowered to carry out search proceedings in SEZ.
Case Title: Narayan @ Narayan Sai @ Mota Bhagwan S/O Asharam @ Ashumal Harpalani Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 99
The Gujarat High Court has rejected Narayan Sai's application seeking furlough. Sai, a convict in a rape case, has undergone a sentence of over nine years.
“If one who has been found guilty of such an offence is released on furlough, there is no guarantee that he will not indulge in similar activity as soon as he is enlarged. None of the twin objects of punishment of imprisonment would then be served. Neither would he be reformed nor would the society remain immunised from his criminal activity. It would be dangerous to the society to release him on furlough merely out of considerations of penal reform and humane treatment,” Justice Nisha Thakore observed.
Case Title: Ibrahim Muhammmadamin Kharadi Versus Ministry Of Minority Affairs Haj Division
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 100
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State Haj Committee to take a decision on a request made by a Haj pilgrim to allow him to board the flight to Jeddah from Mumbai instead of Ahmedabad. Online Haj application forms were invited by the Haj Committee of India and Gujarat State Haj Committee on 10.02.2023. The petitioner completed the online application, and during the draw to select haj pilgrims, his cover number was provisionally chosen.
Case Title – XYZ (Minor) vs. State of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 101
The Gujarat High Court today refused to allow the termination of over 31-week pregnancy of a minor rape survivor (aged around 17 years) in view of the MTP Board's opinion that that termination of pregnancy is not advisable. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave, however, did direct the state government to take necessary steps to extend all the facilities available as per the policies of the State of Gujarat to the girl till she delivers the child.
Benefit Under Amnesty Scheme Cannot Be Denied Merely Because The Petitioner Inadvertently Paid Rs. 2000/- Less Towards Principal Outstanding Amount Of Tax: Gujarat HC
Case Title: Sky Industries Ltd. Vs. State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 102
In a recent decision, the Gujarat High Court has ruled that benefits under the "Vera Samadhan Yojna, 2019" Amnesty Scheme cannot be denied solely based on the petitioner inadvertently paying Rs. 2,000/- less towards the principal outstanding tax amount. The court's decision came in response to a petition filed by Sky Industries, a registered business engaged in the manufacturing and selling of knitted, woven, and braided elastics.
Case Title: Auriga Shipping Management Pte Ltd vs MT Syrma and Patanjali Foods Ltd vs MT Syrma
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 103
The Gujarat High Court has ordered the Port Officer And Customs Authorities At Deendayal Port, Kandla to arrest the merchant ship MT Syrma along with its hull, engines, gears, tackles, bunkers, machinery, apparel, plant, furniture and equipment and all appurtenances. The direction has been issued by the bench of Justice Nikhil S Kariel in response to separate suits filed by Patanjali Foods and Auriga Shipping Management.
Case Title: Mahebubbhai Bhachubhai Bhati Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 104
The Gujarat High Court has said the Inspector General of Police (IGP) himself is required to take a decision on the applications for furlough leave and Prison Rules do not envisage exercise of such power on basis of file notings by the Administrative Officer in the IGP's office.
The ruling came in a case where an applicant challenged the rejection of their furlough leave application by the Administrative Officer (Jails), Gujarat State, on the apparent orders of the Additional Director General of Police/Inspector General of Police. The rejection was based on negative opinion from police officials in the area where the offense had occurred and the applicant's conviction under Section 125(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case Title: Sona Metals Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 105
The Gujarat High Court has quashed an order cancelling the Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration of Sona Metals, citing a lack of detailed reasons for the cancellation. The petitioner, registered under the Gujarat Goods & Service Tax Act, challenged the cancellation order on the grounds that the show cause notice issued by the respondent was vague and did not provide sufficient information.
Case Title: Jyantilal Vadilal Shah & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 106
Observing that there is a rampant misuse of Section 498A of IPC by complainants to harass family members of the husband, the Gujarat High Court has quashed an FIR against an octogenarian woman.
Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt said the FIR will cause greater hardships to the 86-year-old and no fruitful purpose would be served if such further proceedings are allowed to be continued. The court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with ulterior motive to pressurise accused or to settle the score, the bench added.
Case Title: Manishaben Mukeshkumar Darji Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 107
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a habeas corpus plea of a woman seeking custody of her adult daughter, who is said to have willingly entered into a marriage with a Muslim man. The man is also stated to have embraced Hindu religion. The division bench of Justice Umesh A. Trivedi and Justice M. K. Thakker said it is clear that the daughter of the petitioner is major and she has entered into a marriage with a person of different faith.
Case Title: Dineshkumar Chhaganbhai Nandani Versus Income Tax Officer,Ito Wd 2(1)(1), Rkt
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 108
The Gujarat High Court quashed an assessment order made by the income tax authorities without granting the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. The court found that the show cause notice cum draft assessment order was issued with an extremely short deadline, leaving the petitioner less than 12 hours to respond.
Case Title: DP Versus PN /First Appeal No. 4199 Of 2017
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 109
Dismissing a woman's appeal against the judgment granting divorce in her husband's favour on grounds of cruelty and desertion, the Gujarat High Court ordered him to pay Rs 15 Lakh to her as permanent alimony. The court also said the money is for well being of their child, who is living with the mother. The division bench of Justice Ashutosh Shastri and Justice Divyesh A Joshi said both the parties are residing separately since last more than eight years and they have crossed the point of 'no return'.
Case Title - Teesta Atul Setalvad Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 110
The Gujarat High Court today rejected the regular bail plea filed by social activist Teesta Setalvad in connection with State Police FIR lodged against her for allegedly fabricating documents so as to implicate high government functionaries in relation to the 2002 Gujarat riots.
Pronouncing the order today, the Bench of Justice Nirzar S. Desai directed her to surrender immediately. Till now, she was protected against coercive actions due to the operation of the Supreme Court's interim bail order of September 2022.
Case Details: TBEA Energy v. R K Engineering
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 111
The High Court of Gujarat has reiterated that the petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act for the appointment of the arbitrator by the Court would not be maintainable if the dispute is covered under the MSMED Act, 2006 and the provisions of the act are invoked.
The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav followed a line of earlier precents wherein the High Court has held that the provisions of MSMED Act prevail over the A&C Act and the resolution of dispute covered under the MSMED Act has to be in terms of Section 18 of the Act only and the procedure for the appointment of arbitrator under the A&C Act would have to give way to the special mechanism provided under the MSMED Act.
Case Title: Anilaben Rohitbhai Modi Versus Income Tax Officer
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 112
The Gujarat High Court while quashing the reopening of an assessment order and notice issued to the petitioner in a land acquisition case, has ruled that compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land is not taxable as capital gains. While passing the above ruling, the division bench of Justices Ashutosh Shastri and C. Doshi underscored that the authorities' action was based on a mere change of opinion and lacked justification.
Case Title: Ajay Raydhanbhai Kumbharwadiya (Boricha) vs. State Of Gujarat & 6 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 113
The Gujarat High Court has framed contempt of court charges against five policemen, accused of beating a man in custody and parading him in public in Rajkot in 2016.
"You see, he may be a hardened terrorist, but it does not give you the authority to act against the law," the division bench of Justices A S Supehia and M R Mengdey remarked, during the hearing on July 05.
The court said that B.T.Gohil, M. J. Dhandhal, Shri V.S. Lamba, Jayubha Parmar and Pradumansinh Zala by such acts have violated the law enunciated by the Supreme Court in Aarnesh Kumar and D. K. Basu judgments
Case Title - RAHUL GANDHI Versus PURNESH ISHWERBHAI MODI
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 114
The Gujarat High Court today dismissed Congress leader and Former MP Rahul Gandhi's revision plea to stay the conviction in the criminal defamation case in the 'Modi Thieves' remark case.
"(Gandhi) is seeking a stay on conviction on absolutely non-existent grounds. Stay on conviction is not a rule. As many as 10 cases are pending against (Gandhi). It is needed to have purity in politics...A complaint has been filed against (Gandhi) by the grandson of Veer Savarkar in Pune Court after Gandhi used terms against Veer Savarkar at Cambridge...Refusal to stay conviction would not in any way result in injustice to the applicant. There are no reasonable grounds to stay conviction. The conviction is just, proper and legal," the bench of Justice Hemant Prachchhak observed as he pronounced the order today.
Case Title - RAHUL GANDHI Versus PURNESH ISHWERBHAI MODI
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 114
Dismissing Congress leader and Former MP Rahul Gandhi's revision plea to stay the conviction in the criminal defamation case over his 'Modi Thieves' remark, the Gujarat High Court today observed that the case against Gandhi concerns a large identifiable class (Modi Community) and not just an individual.
The Court added that being a senior leader of the oldest political party in India and a "prominent figure in the realm of the Indian political landscape", Gandhi is vested with a duty to ensure that the dignity and reputation of a large number of persons or any identifiable class is not "jeopardised" due to his political activities or utterances.
Case Title - RAHUL GANDHI Versus PURNESH ISHWERBHAI MODI
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 114
While dismissing Congress leader and Former MP Rahul Gandhi's revision plea to stay the conviction in the criminal defamation case in the 'Modi Thieves' remark case, the Gujarat High Court today said that Gandhi, in his speech, made a false statement to affect the poll results and further suggested Prime Minister Narendra Modi's name, only to add sensation to it.
Perusing the content of Gandhi's speech, which is at the centre of the controversy ["Why do all thieves have Modi in their names..."], the bench of Justice Hemant Prachchhak also said that Gandhi's act would also amount to an offence punishable under Section 171G of the IPC [False statement in connection with an election].
Case Title: Nirajkumar Nareshkumar Lakhyani (Pro. Of M/S Om Multitrade) Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 115
The Gujarat High Court has overturned the decision of the Adjudicating Authority and granted permission to an assessee to fulfill their tax liability through installment payments, consequently lifting the provisional attachment of the assessee's bank account. The above order delivered by Justice NV Anjaria and Devan M Desai, came in response to a Special Civil Application, whereby the petitioner prayed before the court seeking permission to make payment towards the outstanding tax amount to the tune of Rs. 2,13,04,290/- in twelve equal installments.
The Gujarat High Court today accepted the unconditional apology tendered by Senior Counsel Percy V. Kavina in the suo moto contempt case initiated against him on July 10 for his 'disparaging' remark made against a sitting judge on July 7.
The bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice MR Mengedey, however, asked him to be mindful of the responsibility bestowed upon him as a Senior Counsel.
"Respondent (Senior Counsel Kavina) has been conferred with honour and privilege by the Chief Justice and other judges of the High Court after finding him worthy, but it appears that down the line after he has been conferred with such privilege he has turned ignorant to the responsibility and duties attached to the honour. In today's era, the contemptuous act does not remain within the precincts of the court but can travel beyond and could be noticed at any place and has a wide anc deep-rooted impact on the institution. Thus, the responsibility of a lawyer to act in a dignified manner by safeguarding the high moral which the noble profession demands becomes more austere," the Court remarked.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Non-Speaking Cryptic Order Of GST Registration Cancellation
Case Title: Om Trading Vs State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 117
The Gujarat High Court has clarified that an order for the cancellation of registration passed without providing any reasons is a non-speaking order and therefore is liable to be set aside.
The above ruling delivered by the division bench of Justices Vipul M Pancholi and Devan M Desai, came in response to a petition filed by Om Trading, a registered business under the Goods and Services Tax Act, challenging the cancellation of their registration certificate by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Ghatak 92.
'Not A Case Of False Promise Of Marriage': Gujarat High Court Quashes Second Rape Case Against Man
Case Title: Rohit Dinanath Ray Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 118
The Gujarat High Court recently quashed a rape case against a man, observing that the case is of consensual sex.
The court said that the complainant was well aware of the pros and cons of the relationship and that no false promise of marriage was given at the early stage.
Justice Gita Gopi said, “At the inception of relation, there would not have been any promise to marry, for the complainant to give consent for physical relation on the basis of promise. It is not the case that, but for the false promise by the accused to marry, the complainant had given the consent to have physical relation.”
Case Title: Govindbhai Velshibhai @ Virjibhai Parmar Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 119
The Gujarat High Court has instructed the State government to establish a committee to identify cases, particularly rape cases, where convicts have been wrongly sentenced due to improper evaluation of evidence or doubtful evidence, resulting in prolonged incarceration.
"Such cases as the present one which are pending before the High Court need to be identified so that the conviction can be set aside at the earliest even if the sentence of the convicts is suspended. We request the State Government to do the needful in this regard by forming a Committee," the division bench of Justices AS Supehia and MR Mengdey ordered.
Gujarat High Court Grants 15 Days Parole To Life Convict In 2002 Godhra Train Burning Case
Case Title: Hasan Ahmed Charkha @ Lalu Thro Afsa Hasan Lalu Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 120
The Gujarat High Court on Friday granted 15-days parole to a convict serving life sentence for burning the Sabarmati Express which led to post-Godhra riots in 2002.
Justice Nisha M Thakore held that grant of parole does not equate to suspension of sentence, but is rather counted as part of sentence, and does not interfere with pending appeal proceedings before the Supreme Court. The Gujarat government had opposed the parole citing judicial precedents.
Case Title: M Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 121
Upholding the acquittal of an accused in a rape case, the Gujarat High Court said there was a major discrepancy with regard to the time of the incident.
“If at all offence is committed at a particular time, there cannot be inconsistent time of offence in between the deposition and the contemporaneous record like First Information Report registered by the first-informant herself,” said the division bench of Justice Umesh A Trivedi and Justice MK Thakker.
Case Title: Arjunsinh Raisinh Chavda Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 122
The Gujarat High Court has directed the District Legal Services Authority to proactively guide a convict, set to be released after serving 13 years in prison, in identifying benevolent schemes offered by the government for income generation and rehabilitation in society.
The division bench of Justices AY Kogje and MR Mengdey converted the conviction from Section-302 of the Indian Penal Code to conviction under Section- 304, Part-I of IPC and ordered the release of the appellant.
Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmedabad Versus Axis Bank Ltd.
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 123
The Gujarat High Court has held that the department has failed to establish that there was concealment of particulars of the income of the assessee, Axis Bank. The department has also failed to establish that the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of its income.
The bench of Justice Vipul M. Pancholi and Justice D. M. Desai has upheld the ruling of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), in which it was held that the addition made on account of excess depreciation claimed had been surrendered by the assessee itself without any prior detection by the Revenue and the excess claim had been demonstrated to have been made for bona fide reasons.
Case Title: Jivanbhai Nagjibhai Makwana Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 124
The Gujarat High Court, while expressing distress over the misuse of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act), quashed a complaint filed by a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) member against another BJP leader who held the position of President of Chotila Nagarpalika.
Justice Sandeep Bhatt expressing concern, said, "While the Act is essentially meant for protecting the members of a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe from atrocity or oppression, at the same time, it cannot be allowed to be misused. It is a greater responsibility on the investigating officer to investigate such offence wisely and/or very sharply and in a fair manner."
Case Title: Deepakkumar Hasmukhbhai Mahida Versus State Of Gujarat
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 125
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a plea seeking directions for implementation of a District Education Officer's order for refund of the fees additionally charged from the students by a school.
Justice Nikhil S. Kariel said though the order may have been passed upon a complaint filed by the petitioner but he is is not a person who could be stated to be aggrieved on account of non compliance of the order. It would appear that he has no lis in the matter as he is neither a parent of any child studying in the school nor it is his case that he is in any other manner connected with the activities of the school, the bench said.
Case title - RAJPARA SAUMIL KANUBHAI vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 126
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking the live-streaming of proceedings at the Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) observing that "everything can't be live streamed, it can't be mandated by the court as it about the infrastructure"
"Every tribunal and every forum cannot be expected to live-stream the proceedings. They will do it in phases. There is no occasion to issue a mandate at this moment." Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal remarked as the bench, also including Justice NV Anjaria, dismissed the PIL plea.
Case title - Raman Pillai Bhaskaran Nair Sreekumar (R. B. Sreekumar) vs. State of Gujarat [CR.MA/21621/2022]
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 127
The Gujarat High Court on Friday granted bail to former Gujarat Director General of Police Raman Pillai Bhaskaran Nair Sreekumar (RB Sreekumar), who was arrested last year by state police on the allegations of fabricating documents so as to implicate high government functionaries including the then CM Narendra Modi in relation to the 2002 Gujarat riots.
Gujarat High Court Orders Refund Of IGST With Interest In An Inadvertent Tax Payment Case
Case Title: Tagros Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union Of India
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 128
The Gujarat High Court has directed the refund of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) amount, along with applicable interest, to a petitioner who inadvertently paid IGST at a higher rate than the concessional rate applicable.
The petitioner, Tagros Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd., had been registered under GST since its introduction, and the case pertained to a purchase order received from Quality Biz Chem India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, for the supply of goods intended for export.
Case Title: Mihir Surendrabhai Shah Versus State Of Gujarat & 2 Other(S)
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 129
While quashing an FIR and the subsequent charge sheet filed against a businessman accused of selling duplicate spare parts of Hyundai Motor Company, the Gujarat High Court said that in the absence of the Registrar's opinion on trademark infringement, the FIR cannot be sustained, and no search or seizure can be made.
Justice JC Dosh said, “Provisio to section 115(4) of the Act is clear and unambiguous. Undeniably, the police officer who on the complaint has searched that accused is applying trade mark and trade description of complaint or falsifying and falsely apply trade mark of the complaint is required to take opinion of the Registrar for infringement of Trade Mark prior to search and seizure. Rule 110 also spells the same. In the present case, FIR does not disclose obtaining opinion of the Registrar.”
Case Title: M/s FTA HSRP Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs Union Of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 130
The Gujarat High Court has rendered a verdict in favor of M/S Fta Hsrp Solutions Pvt, setting aside the rejection of their declaration filed under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS). The court has directed the designated committee, Sabka Vishwas Dispute Resolution Scheme, to accept the petitioner's declaration and bring closure to the tax dispute.
Case title - Birju Salla @ Amar Soni S/O Kishor Salla Vs. State Of Gujarat And Another
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 131
The Gujarat High Court today acquitted Mumbai-based businessman Birju Kishor Salla, who was convicted by the NIA Court in 2019 under the amended Anti-Hijacking Act 2016 and was sentenced to life imprisonment for the remainder of his life.
Significantly, the bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice MR Mengedey quashed the NIA court's June 2019 verdict wherein the trial court had also imposed a fine of Rs. 5 Crores. The division bench directed that the fine, if paid, be refunded to the appellant.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Income Tax Reassessment Notices Against Non-Existent Entity
Case Title: Anokhi Realty Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 132
The Gujarat High Court has quashed the income tax reassessment notice against a non-existent entity. The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Devan M. Desai has observed that the erstwhile company Satyasarthi Estate Organisers Private Limited amalgamated with the petitioner Anokhi Reality Private Limited.
The jurisdictional officer was informed of the amalgamation. The assessment proceedings were continued in the name of a non-existent entity, and the final assessment order, which was also issued in the name of a non-existent entity, would be invalid.
Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation And Transfer Pricing) Versus Star Rays
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 133
The Gujarat High Court has held that mere rendering of services cannot be roped into fees for technical service (FTS) unless the person utilising the services is able to make use of the technical knowledge, etc.
The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Devan M. Desai has observed that services were rendered by GIA US, and by considering the make available clause as per the India-US DTAA, the simple rendering of services is not sufficient to qualify as FIS or FTS.
Case Title: Rajveer Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 134
The Gujarat High Court has refused to issue a direction to the State for enacting a law preventing any individual, entity, candidate, or political party from conducting public meetings on public roads, while holding that no such writ can be issued in absence of any documentary evidence to that effect.
“Merely praying for such a direction would not entitle a person for grant of such writ, in absence of any documentary evidence produced on record, for this Court to take cognizance. The petitioner herein has preferred representation before the authorities, which are pending, before the authorities, the same be considered in accordance with law", the Court held.
Case Title: Lilabhai Shankarbhai Sapariya (Valmiki) Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 135
While rejecting a habeas corpus petition filed by a father praying to produce his major daughter who went missing in 2020, the Gujarat High Court emphasized that a habeas corpus inquiry is essential to determine whether an individual's liberty is being unlawfully restrained by any individual or entity, and the fundamental purpose of the writ of habeas corpus is to safeguard personal freedom and reinstate the rights of an individual held against their volition in someone else's custody
Case Title: Rameshbhai Danjibhai Solanki & 7 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 136
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that accusations related to the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) can be pursued by a woman, provided she claims instances of harassment and cruelty that occurred while her marriage was still in effect.
Justice Jitendra Doshi held, “... allegations of the offence u/s 498A of the IPC even can be maintained at the instance of the divorcee wife, provided that she alleges the incident of harassment and cruelty which could have been meted out while marriage was subsisting.”
Gujarat High Court Quashes Faceless Assessment Order For Lack Of Proper Opportunity Of Hearing
Case Title: Shree Ganesh Intermediary Private Limited Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 137
The Gujarat High Court has quashed the faceless assessment on the grounds that there is only a day for the assessee to respond so as to save the limitation period.
The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Devan M. Desai has observed that the order under Section 263 of the Act was passed by the PCIT-4 on March 16, 2020. No action was taken thereafter for over 17 months. At the far end of the schedule, when the time limit to complete the assessment was to come to an end, the department on September 8, 2021, and September 21, 2021, issued the first and second notices, respectively, which were issued to the petitioner on the old consultant's email id. A show-cause notice was issued, asking the petitioner to submit a response on the very next date. Without considering the submissions, an order was passed on September 30, 2021.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Order Rejecting Refund Claim By Vodafone-Idea
Case Title: M/S Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Versus Union Of India
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 138
The Gujarat High Court has ruled in favor of M/S Vodafone Mobile Services Limited, a prominent telecommunications provider, in a case challenging the rejection of their claim for a tax refund under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime.
The petitioner, M/S Vodafone Mobile Services Limited, had undergone a merger with Idea Cellular Limited on August 30, 2018, following an order issued by the National Company Law Tribunal. Subsequently, the merged entity migrated to the GST regime, registering under the provisions of the CGST / GGST Act, 2017.
Gujarat High Court Quashes Look Out Circular Issued Prior To Declaring Borrower As Wilful Defaulter
Case Title: Bindu Tibrewal W/O Subhash Kedarnath Tibrewal Versus Joint Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 139
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a Look Out Circular issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs against a Borrower even prior to declaring her as a wilful defaulter. The Borrower (Petitioner) had filed a writ petition challenging the Look Out Circular since she was prevented from travelling abroad in view of the same.
The Bench comprising Justice Nikhil S. Kariel observed, “In the considered opinion of this Court, the observation that the Bank, without declaring the petitioner therein as willful defaulter and without assigning any reasons as to how the petitioner travelling abroad will be detrimental to the economic interest of the country and the fact that though the petitioner therein as well as the petitioner herein were declared as willful defaulter after issuance of the LOC, and whereas the order of declaring willful defaulters dated 6.6.2020, having been quashed by this Court vide order dated 21.9.2020, it would appear that no proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner also.”
Case Title: ROHIT JAYANTILAL PATEL vs. STATE OF GUJARAT and others
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 140
The Gujarat High Court has DISMISSED as 'misconceived' a PIL plea seeking a direction to the state govt to implement the (then) Governor's 2012 decision authorizing the use of the Gujarati Language in addition to English in the court proceedings before the HC. The PIL plea, which also challenged the October 2012 decision (taken on the administrative side) of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court rejecting the proposal to permit the use of the Gujarati Language, was moved last year by a Social Worker Rohit Jayantilal Patel through Senior Advocate Asim Pandya.
1996 Drugs -Planting Case| Gujarat High Court Rejects Ex-IPS Officer Sanjiv Bhatt's Transfer Plea
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 141
The Gujarat High Court today rejected a plea filed by jailed former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt demanding a transfer of his trial in the 1996 drug-planting case to a court in Banaskantha district.
The HC also dismissed a connected plea challenging three orders passed by the trial court on his pleas praying that the proceedings against him should be recorded in audio and video, at his own cost. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave passed this order after reserving the verdict in the matter on July 14. A detailed order is awaited.
Gujarat High Court Allows Termination Of 22-Year-Old Rape Survivor's Over 26-Week Pregnancy
Case Title:
Case Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 142
The Gujarat High Court today allowed a 22-year-old rape victim to undergo medical termination of over 26 weeks of pregnancy after the medical board gave its recommendation for the abortion with some riders. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave passed this order on the plea moved by the girl seeking termination of the pregnancy on the grounds that it would have a potential impact on her physical and mental health.
Case Title: Cargo Motors ( Gujarat ) Limited vs Kritikant Shivajirav Jadav
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 144
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that when it comes to employment termination cases, the award of backwages is not automatic alongside reinstatement. However, the High Court emphasized that if the employer is found at fault, then full 100% wages can be granted.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal And Justice N.V. Anjaria observed, “It is settled law that in a case of termination of employment, though award of backwages is not automatic with the award of reinstatement, but in case the fault is found on the part of the employer, 100% wages can be provided. The fundamental principle is that no one can take benefit of its own wrong.”
Gujarat High Court Upholds Fairness Of 'Random Algorithm' Method In Tender Selection Process
Case Title: M/S. Spire Enterprise vs Government E-Marketplace SPV
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 143
In a recent judgment, the Gujarat High Court has reaffirmed the fairness and transparency of a selection process involving the use of a random algorithm for awarding a tender to outsource manpower services.
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee, the use of a random algorithm in the selection process for outsourcing manpower services is the most transparent and fair approach. The Court's decision came in response to a challenge to the selection process for outsourcing manpower services.
Case Title: Jenil Dilipkumar Patel vs State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 145
While observing that it is the prerogative of the State government to determine the number of seats available for MBBS courses under the State quota, the Gujarat High Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking a direction upon the authorities to augment the number of seats in Gujarat. The petition sought to compensate for the reduction in seats for the open category due to the amalgamation of a 10% Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota into the open category.
Case Title: Shubhra Hiteshbhai Gupta vs State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 146
The Gujarat High Court last month dismissed multiple petitions challenging the State government's decision to implement a minimum age limit of six years for admission to Class 1 from the current academic year. While doing so, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice NV Anjaria further added that forcing children to go to a pre-school below the age of 3 years is an 'illegal act' on the part of the parents.
Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR Against Former SBI Deputy Manager In Currency Deficit Case From 2006
Case Title: Girishbhai Ambalal Rathod Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 147
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a FIR filed against a former Deputy Manager (Accounts) of the State Bank of India (SBI) in connection with a currency deficit incident dating back to 2006 while observing that the departmental inquiry findings, which resulted in exoneration for the petitioner, established that the essential element of the offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code was lacking.
Justice JC Doshi observed, “The finding in the departmental proceeding indicates that the petitioner was not entrusted the property. Thus, the basic ingredients of offence punishable under Section 409 of the IPC is lacking. In addition thereof, there is ten years of yawning and unexplained gap for registration of the FIR.”
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 148
The Gujarat High Court today allowed a plea filed by a 12-year-old, who was allegedly raped by her father, to abort her nearly 27-week pregnancy. The Court also granted her a compensation of Rs. 2.5 lakhs. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave passed this order after perusing the medical report of the victim which was prepared by Sir Sayajirao Gayakwad General Hospital in Vadodara pursuant to the Court's September 4 order.
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 148
Allowing a plea filed by a 12-year-old, who was allegedly raped by her father, to abort her nearly 27-week pregnancy, the Gujarat High Court today observed that there is no higher insult to a woman than trying to touch her dignity.
Calling the case as shocking and painful, the bench of Justice Samir J. Dave, quoting from 'Durga Saptashati', observed thus: "स्त्रिया: समस्ता: सकला जगत्सु [जगत की समस्त स्त्रियां तुम्हारा ही स्वरूप हैं] अर्थात हे देवी जगदम्बे, जगत में जितनी भी स्त्रिया हैं वह सब तुम्हारी ही मुर्तिया हैं । इसलिए अगर स्त्री चाहे तो वह सब कर सकती हैं जो वह करना चाहती हैं, यह ताकत सिर्फ़ उसीमे हैं जो बड़े बड़े संकटों का नाश कर, श्रेष्ट से श्रेष्ट और कठिनतम कार्य भी पूर्ण कर सकती हैं । जरुरत हैं तो सर्वशक्तिमान नारी को स्वयं को पहचानने को ।"
Case Title: Umaben Jayantbhai Shah D/O Late Ramanlal N. Shah vs NA
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 149
The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that even though Section 371 of the Indian Succession Act stipulates two modes of determining territorial jurisdiction of courts for grant of succession certificate, the second mode is only an alternative which can be invoked if the petitioner demonstrates that the deceased had no permanent place of residence.
Section 371 prescribes that the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of his death, or, at that time had no fixed place of residence, the District Judge within whose jurisdiction any part of the property of the deceased may be found, may grant a certificate.
Case Title - XYX Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 150
The Gujarat High Court today allowed a 17-year-old girl to terminate her pregnancy of around 17 weeks. The Court, however, in an oral remark said that the father of the girl should not pressurize her daughter to terminate her pregnancy. The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave made this remark as it took note of the medical report of the girl and her statements recorded before the police and the magistrate.
Case Title: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chandrakant Gokalbhai Patel
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 151
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that signing settlement claims in Lok Adalat does not amount to misconduct, emphasizing that even if an employee's actions appear to be an error in judgment or negligence in performing their duties, such actions do not qualify as misconduct unless the company can demonstrate that they have caused irreparable harm, thus highlighting the need to establish the severity of negligence in such cases.
Case Title: Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 152
While handing down a verdict in favor of Planet Automotive Pvt. Ltd., which had sought relief under the "Vera Samadhan Yojana-2019," a tax amnesty scheme introduced by the State of Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court, has affirmed that a minor error in the intimation should not prevent the petitioner from availing the benefits of the scheme, especially when they have met the essential criteria for eligibility.
Case Title - XYZ Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 153
The Gujarat High Court today allowed the medical termination of a minor rape survivor's 19-week pregnancy while noting that a victim can not be allowed to continue with her pregnancy if she is unwilling.
The bench of Justice Samir J. Dave observed thus while dealing with the plea moved by the elder sister of the 16-year-old rape victim seeking to terminate her over 17-week pregnancy. Hearing the plea on September 9, the Court formed a medical panel of the Doctors of GEMRS Medical College & General Hospital Vadnagar to examine the girl and submit a report to the Court.
Case Citation: Mujahid Nafees Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 154
The Gujarat High Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking to provide fitting places for burial to different religious communities in the state as it noted that earlier, for the same relief, a PIL had been moved by the petitioner and the same was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the petitioner.
"This is a wholly misconceived second PIL filed by the petitioner for the same relief for which, earlier a PIL had been filed, and the same was dismissed as withdrawn and no liberty was granted to the petitioner to file another PIL," a bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee observed as it dismissed the PIL plea.
Case Title: Rajan Ankleshwaria v. Vinni Ankleshwaria
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 155
The Gujarat High Court recently held that in a dispute over the custody of a minor child, an order that does not finalise the question of custody qualifies as an interlocutory order and not an interim order, and clarified that an appeal against an interlocutory order is not permissible as per Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Shastri and Divyesh A. Joshi highlighted that an interlocutory order does not terminate the proceedings or finally decide the rights of the parties and concluded that the rights regarding the return of the child's custody were not finally decided by the impugned order.
Case Title: Krinaben W/O Tushar Suryakant Trivedi Versus N P Garasiya, Police Sub Inspector, Special Investigation Team
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 156
n a recent ruling by the Gujarat High Court, it was held that contempt of court proceedings cannot be initiated against a police officer for arresting an accused without a warrant, without prior notice under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), if the officer provides a valid explanation before the magistrate.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Shashtri and Divyesh A. Joshi observed, “Here in this case on hand, the concerned police officer has narrated the grounds expressly in a clear terms in the check-list at the time of production of the accused and copy of the check-list was given to the concerned court at the time of production of the documents and presentation of the accused, therefore, conscious of the Investigating Officer is satisfied at the time of arrest. The ground mentioned in Section 41A and Section 41(1)(ii)(a) of the CrPC provides “to prevent such person from committing any further offence”.”
Case Title: Nipun Praveen Singhvi Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 157
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State government to ensure that in future, appointments of the Chairperson and Technical Members of the Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, under Section 43 of the Gujarat Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, are not delayed.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee was hearing a PIL filed by Nipun Praveen Singhvi, a practicing advocate and RTI activist. Singhvi sought directions to challenge the composition of the Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal and demanded the appointment of a Chairperson and Technical Member. He also requested the creation of a website and the transfer of administration from the Urban Development Ministry to the Department of Law and Justice.
Case Title: Kutubuddin Ansari Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 158
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the dismissal of a defamation case filed by the 'Face' of 2002 Gujarat Riots, Kutubuddin Ansari, a victim of the riots, against the makers of the 2013 film 'Rajdhani Express.'
The case revolved around the unauthorized use of Ansari's image in the movie, which he claimed had damaged his reputation and personal safety.
Justice Sandeep N Bhatt observed, “It is rightly found by the Courts below that the complainant has not produced any evidence before the lower Court that the accused have used the photograph of the complainant with the intention of damaging the personal reputation of the complainant. Even the lower court has recorded in its order that no evidence has been produced that the complainant has suffered any loss due to such act of the accused.”
Case Title: Bhavesh Kamleshbhai Patel Versus Commissioner, Municipality Administration
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 159
While observing that elected officials must ensure that their public duties do not conflict with their electoral interests and should refrain from actions that could tarnish the credibility of the institution they represent, the Gujarat High Court upheld the removal of a Municipal Councillor for misconduct during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal And Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee observed, “It is expected from the elected members that they must ensure that no conflict arises between the public duties and their electoral interest. Moreover, they must not ask the officials to act in any way which would create a conflict between their duties and responsibilities. It is further expected that the elected member should not do anything that brings disrepute to the institution to which he is elected or affect its credibility.”
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 160
The Gujarat High Court recently denied bail to a woman advocate facing conspiracy and abetment charges related to the alleged repeated sexual assault, rape of a minor girl.
The bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar noted that prima facie the accused-woman advocate played an active role in the commission of the crime and screened the offender and derailed the investigation and hence, her custodial investigation was necessary.
Case Title: Chandanji @ Gato Chhanaji Thakor Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 161
The Gujarat High Court has directed the State to compensate a man who was unjustly incarcerated for nearly three years despite a court order suspending his sentence and granting him bail back in September 2020.
The court ordered the State to grant Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation to the applicant and urged District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) to identify similar cases of delayed release.
Referring to the present case is 'an eye opener', Justices A. S. Supehia And M. R. Mengdey observed, “Considering the plight of the applicant, who has remained in jail despite the order of this Court due to the negligence on the part of the jail authorities, though he has already released yesterday, we are inclined to grant compensation for his illegal incarceration in the jail for almost three years.”
Case Title: Child In Conflict With Law Through Guardian Versus State Of Gujarat R/Criminal Revision Application No. 1024 Of 2023
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 162
The Gujarat High Court recently invalidated the decision of a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) in Vadodara directing a child in conflict with law, booked under various provisions of the IPC and the Arms Act, to be tried as an adult.
In a 131-page judgment, Justice Gita Gopi reiterated the procedures to be followed while assessing such a child under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act 2015.
According to the FIR, the accused had allegedly entered the complainant's house, committed dacoity, and threatened the complainant with dire consequences after looting gold and silver jewellery, along with cash amounting to approximately Rs 16.90 lakh.
Case Title: Mehul Chinubhai Choksi & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 163
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a petition by fugitive businessman Mehul Chinubhai Choksi, former chairman and managing director of Gitanjali Gems, seeking to quash a First Information Report (FIR) against him. The FIR alleged Choksi's involvement in duping a woman through a franchisee of his firm Gitanjali Jewellery.
Justice Sandeep N Bhatt observed, “Due to such fraudulent act and closure of the showrooms, money invested by the investors is not refunded and it can be said that a huge scam is committed. Therefore, the ultimate liability can be fastened on the shoulders of the persons responsible for the affairs of Gitanjali Gems and present petitioners being the Directors and actively involved in the management of the company cannot shirk their responsibility.”
S.14A SC/ST Act Overrides General Provisions Of Appeal Under CrPC: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: State Of Gujarat Versus Sonu Mangliprasad Vishwakarma
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 164
The Gujarat High Court has held that the provision of appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (the Atrocities Act) overrides appeal preferred by original complainant/victim under Section 372 CrPC or by the State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code.
It held that appeals against any judgement, sentence or order arising out of the said Act could only be maintained under Section 14A, primarily because the non-obstante clause contained in Sub-section 1 of Section 14A of the Atrocities Act holds precedence and takes precedence over the general provisions related to appeals outlined in the CrPC.
Case Title: Padmaben Rajendrabhai Vyas Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 165
The Gujarat High Court, in a significant dissenting opinion from a previous order issued by the Coordinate Bench, has ruled that individuals under a Habeas Corpus petition cannot be compelled to undergo medical tests to determine their mental stability. The Division Bench comprising Justice A. I. Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi held, “In our considered opinion, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 cannot be forcefully subjected to medical test in order to ascertain their mental stability (ability) that too in habeas corpus petition on vague allegations that they are practicing black magic.”
Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmadabad Versus Jigar Jashwantlal Shah
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 166
The Gujarat High Court has held that the shares that have been allotted to the assessee were not “received from any person,” which is the fundamental requirement for invoking Section 56(2)(vii)(c). The property must pre-exist for application of Section 56(2)(vii)(c), which is clear from the intention of the legislature”.
The division bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Bhargav D. Karia has observed that the words “allotment of shares” indicate the creation of shares by appropriation out of the unappropriated share capital to a particular person who has the right to choose allotment. In the case of 'transfer of the shares, the shares pre-existed prior to the issuance of shares by the Company as there is a vital difference between “creation” and “transfer of shares”.
Case title - Mohammad Shaukatali Nausarka vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 167
The Gujarat High Court last week refused to quash an FIR lodged against one Mohammad Nausarka, Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), for allegedly posting a WhatsApp message on a group with the intention to trigger enmity between two different religious groups (Hindus and Muslims).
The bench of Justice JC Doshi whether the petitioner had the intention to cause disharmony or hatred between two groups can be established only during the trial and at the stage of plea seeking quashing of the FIR, it cannot be said that no offence is made out.
Case Title: InstaKart Services v. Megastone Logiparks Pvt Ltd
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 168
The High Court of Gujarat has held that the place of arbitration is the venue and not the seat of arbitration when there is a contradictory exclusive jurisdiction clause. The bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal held that the place where the arbitration is stated to be conducted would be the venue of arbitration when the agreement contains an exclusive jurisdiction clause that confers exclusive jurisdiction on a court in a different place. It held that the presence of such an exclusive jurisdiction clause would be a contrary indicator which prevents the venue of being the seat of arbitration.
Case Title: InstaKart Services v. Megastone Logiparks Pvt Ltd
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 168
The High Court of Gujarat has held that when two agreements are co-terminus and their performance is interdependent, the arbitration clause in one agreement can be invoked for the other as well. The bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal held that when two agreements are integrally related to each other and the performance of one is dependent on the other, then the absence of an arbitration clause in one of such agreements would not be material as the arbitration clause contained in the other would govern both the agreements.
Case Title: Suyog Dye Chemie Pvt Ltd Versus Union Of India
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 169
The Gujarat High Court stayed the proceedings in respect of the issue related to the imposition of GST on the transfer of leasehold rights to Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) land and issued the notice to the department. The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Mauna M. Bhatt passed this order while presiding over a petition in respect of several notices that had been issued by the state GST offices across Gujarat in the controversial matter of imposing GST on the transfer of leasehold rights of GIDC land by private parties.
Case Title - Jahirmiya Rehamumiya Malek Vs. State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 170
Finding 4 Gujarat Police officers GUILTY of committing Contempt of Court (for violating Apex Court's DK Basu Guidelines) and sentencing them to undergo simple imprisonment of 14 days for publicly flogging Muslim men in the Kheda district last year, the Gujarat High Court on Thursday observed that the custodians of law and order should not become depredators of civil liberties.
In its 39-page order, a bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice Gita Gopi stressed that the police officers should have the greatest regard for the personal liberty of citizens as they are the custodians of law and order and, hence, they should not flout the law by stooping to bizarre acts of lawlessness.
Gujarat High Court Invalidates Arbitral Awards Due To Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment By NBFCs
Case Title: M/S Rich And Royal Through Its Proprietor Mr. Ravindrabhai Rameshbhai Gamit Versus Authorised Officer , Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd.
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 171
In a pivotal ruling, the Gujarat High Court has quashed and nullified three arbitral awards where non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) unilaterally appointed sole arbitrators. The court's decision was in line with the Apex Court's stance on Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Bhargav D Karia observed,
“Thus, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that a person having an interest in a dispute or in the outcome thereof is ineligible not only to act as an arbitrator but is also rendered ineligible to appoint anyone else as an arbitrator. It is an admitted position in each of the petition that the arbitration clause gave power and authority to the respondent NBFC unilaterally to appoint the sole arbitrator and accordingly the Sole Arbitrator was appointed unilaterally which is contrary to the decision of the Apex Court in the context of Section 12(5) of the Act read with Seventh Schedule thereof.”
Case Title: The Reserve Bank Of India Versus Bank Of India
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 172
The Gujarat High Court has set aside an order issued by the Commercial Court, emphasizing that the Commercial Court cannot direct the personal presence of a Regional Director of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on the vast ground of larger public interest.
The Court expressed perplexity over the basis on which such an order was passed and asserted that it was beyond the Commercial Court's purview to summon the Regional Director of RBI.
Case Title: Muhammad Tayyab Shaikh S/O Muhammad Nihal Shaikh Versus Union Of India
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 173
While denying bail to an accused under the NDPS Act, the Gujarat High Court has clarified that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) does not qualify as a police station, and thus an accused cannot seek bail on the basis that the agency failed to document confidential information in the general diary. Justice Umesh A Trivedi observed, “Narcotics Control Bureau is not a police station so as to have those diaries for recording thereof, and therefore, information relating to cognizable offence to be recorded in the police station will not be of any use in support of the application for bail.”
Case Title: Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 Versus KGY Glass Industries (P) Ltd
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 174
The Gujarat High Court has allowed the benefit of concessional tax under Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act, as Form No.10-IC could not be uploaded on the Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) portal due to technical problems. The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Mauna M. Bhatt has observed that Form 10-IC was furnished by the assessee on January 29, 2022. Since the assessee could not upload Form No.10-IC on the ITBA portal on account of a technical error, there being no fault of the assessee, it could not be deprived of benefit, particularly since this is the first year for availing of such benefits.
Case Title: Dharmesh Jivanlal Gurjar Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 175
The Gujarat High Court has taken a stern view of the 'mischief' played upon it by tampering its records in a case relating to alleged corruption within Debt Recovery Tribunal at Ahmedabad. The bench of Justice Sandeep N Bhatt was seized with a case alleging corruption on part of a lawyer, who was appointed as a Court Commissioner in the proceedings of DRT.
During the course of hearing, the judge had taken note of the "deteriorating" situation of the institution, "with a majority of individuals, including bank officers, the Registry staff, and many advocates and the officers of the Registry up to the Registrar, allegedly involved in a vicious circle that affects the recovery of huge public funds."
GST Appellate Tribunal Constituted But Not Functional: Gujarat High Court Stays Recovery Of Dues
Case Title: Rajkalp Mudranalya Private Limited Thro Kalpesh Maneklal Patel Versus Superintendent
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 176
The Gujarat High Court has stayed the order for recovery of dues on the grounds that, though the GST Appellate Tribunal was constituted, it was not functional. The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Mauna M. Bhatt has observed that though the Tribunal is constituted, it is still not functioning, and the competent authorities think it fit to issue orders of recovery, asking the assessees for information on whether an appeal has been filed at all. This apparently is a contradistinction between the authorities in question.
Gujarat High Court Refuses To Discharge Former IAS Officer Pradeep Sharma In Land Allotment Case
Case Title: Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 177
The Gujarat High Court refused to exonerate former IAS officer Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma in a land allotment case, asserting that a prima facie offence existed against him, the trial was in progress with the presentation of evidence, and therefore, it was not appropriate to intervene in the lower courts' orders.
Justice Sandeep N Bhatt observed, “Under the circumstances, since there is prima facie offence made out against the applicant vis-a-vis the concurrent findings given by both the learned Courts below and considering the fact that the trial is already commenced and it is at the stage of evidence, this Court finds that this is not a fit case to interfere in the impugned orders passed by the learned Courts below. The learned Courts below have not committed any error while appreciating the documents available with them and it is rightly justified.”
Case title - Ajayraj @ Vijendrasinh Kirodilal Meena Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 178
The Gujarat High Court has said that in the competitive examination, many candidates burn the midnight oil to secure a government job and therefore, any misconduct, misbehaviour, malpractices and cheating in such exams has to be dealt with strictly. A bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar observed thus while denying anticipatory bail to one Ajayraj Meena who has been accused of appearing in the competitive examination for the post of Clerk on behalf of the co-accused (Udayraj Brijlal Meena) by creating forged documents.
Case Title: NXGN Sports Interactive Private Limited Versus Union Of India LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 179
The Gujarat High Court will decide on the issue of whether fantasy gaming falls within an actionable claim amounting to betting and gambling or based on skills. The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Mauna M. Bhatt has issued notice to the GST department and restrained the GST department from taking any further steps on the adjudication of the show cause notice. The petitioner/assessee, NXGN Sports Interactive, submitted that the activity of the online claim that the petitioners undertake would be an actionable claim other than lottery, betting, and gambling.
Case Title: Bharatkumar Pravinkumar And Co. Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 180
The Gujarat High Court has recently delivered a verdict on the issue of the seizure of cash under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, clarifying that cash does not qualify as "goods" for the purpose of seizure proceedings.
The judgment delivered by the division bench of Justices Biren Vaishnav and Mauna M. Bhatt, emphasized that retaining seized cash for more than six months without issuing a Show Cause Notice (SCN) is not justified.
Case Title: Arvind Kejriwal Versus Gujarat University
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 181
The Gujarat High Court has observed that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's persistence in challenging Prime Minister Narendra Modi's qualifications despite an undisputable record produced by the Gujarat University is not in good taste.
While dismissing Kejriwal's review petition against its order setting aside CIC's direction to disclose information on degrees held by the Prime Minister, Justice Biren Vaishnav said, “This court, without getting into the intentions of the applicant in filing the review application would tend of agree with the submission of Mr. Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India that though there is a contemporaneous record in the form of the Office Register undisputably showing the qualification of the Prime Minister, the review applicant having lost in his legal remedy as the petition was allowed, continues to harp upon his pursuit in following a cause by proceeding in this review application in a manner which does not reflect good taste in public life.”
Case Title: Harshil A Shah Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 182
The Gujarat High Court has rejected a petition filed under Disturbed Areas Act opposing the transfer of a property in Vadodara from a Hindu woman to a Muslim couple. The petition, filed by five neighbors of the property holder, aimed to annul the deputy collector's decision allowing the registration of a sale deed under the Disturbed Areas Act.
Justice Vaibhavi Nanavati said, “Once the sale is held to be bonafide, no interference is called for to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article -226 of the Constitution of India. Sections 4 and 5 of the Act provide that when the question of either giving post-facto sanction to such sale or a permission to sale is concerned, the Collector is required to consider whether the sale is for a fair consideration and with pre-consent.”
Case Title: AM Mining India Private Limited vs Union of India
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 183
The Gujarat High Court has held that the protection granted under Section32A(2) and Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) would override the power of Enforcement Directorate to attach the properties under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”).
A single bench of Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati said that the Enforcement Directorate has proceeded to confirm the order of provisional attachment passed under Section 5(1) of PMLA without any application of mind.
Case Title: Ketkiben Vasudev Vyas Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 184
The Gujarat High Court has granted bail to a female Resident Additional Collector who was implicated in a case involving the installation of spy cameras in the office chamber of the District Collector, Anand. The court ruled that Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to voyeurism, is not applicable to women.
According to the established facts of the case, the current petitioner, who was employed as the Resident Additional Collector at the Collector's office in District Anand, orchestrated the installation of spy cameras in the office chamber of the former District Collector. Subsequently, a woman was directed to frequent the District Collector's office with the purpose of cultivating a close relationship with the then District Collector, with the promise of financial compensation.
Case Title: Bharatkumar Ramabhai Patel Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 185
In a recent ruling, the Gujarat High Court denied bail to an accused individual facing charges related to the creation of forged passports and fraudulent visa stickers for various foreign countries, emphasizing the possibility that if released on bail, the accused might leverage these connections to evade legal consequences.
Justice Nirzar S Desai observed, “Considering the fact that the allegations against the present applicant are about creating forged passports and fabricated forged visa stickers of various foreign countries as well as it is coming out from the statement of various witnesses, prima facie, it seems that the present applicant is having contacts all over the world and therefore, looking to the nature of the allegations leveled against him about illegally sending the people to foreign countries and successfully allowing them to cross the border, there are all the chances that if the present applicant is enlarged on bail, he may utilize his international contacts all over the world for himself and may fly away.”
Case Title: Mayur Kanaiyalal Shah Versus State Of Gujarat & 2 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 186
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that duplicate spare parts of computer hardware are not literary, musical or artistic works and therefore an FIR cannot be lodged for violation of the Copyright Act, 1957 for their sale.
Justice Sandeep Bhatt while quashing the FIR observed, “Apart from that, even if, the FIR is taken at its face value, it refers to items, which do not fall within the artistic work as defined under Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957. It cannot be said that the spare-part is literal work or musical work. It is not disclosed that the spare part is an artistic work or any other such work that the provisions of Copyright Act, 1957 would apply.”
Income Tax Act | Valid Show-Cause Notice Crucial For Recovery Under Section 179: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Bhailal Babubhai Patel Versus The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 187
In a recent ruling, the Gujarat High Court has set aside an Income Tax Liability Order, highlighting the crucial requirement of a valid show-cause notice for recovery under Section 179 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The above ruling came in a petition challenging the order dated 27.03.2019 under Section 179 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the petitioner holding him in his capacity as a Director responsible for the outstanding demand against the company – Banyan & Berry Alloys Limited.
Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmadabad Versus Jigar Jashwantlal Shah)
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 188
The Gujarat High Court recently delivered a crucial ruling on the interpretation of Section 56(2)(viic) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, stating that the provision does not apply to fresh issuances or allotments of shares by a company.
According to section 56(2)(viib), if a company receives, in any previous year, any consideration for the issue of shares that exceeds the face value of such shares from any person who is a resident, the aggregate consideration received for shares that exceed the fair market value of the shares shall be deemed to be the income of the concerned company chargeable to tax under the head Income from other Sources for the relevant financial year.
Reassessment On Suspicion To Enquire Further Is Unsustainable: Gujarat High Court
Case Title: Artiben Amishkumar Patel Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2)(1)
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 189
The Gujarat High Court has delivered a significant ruling, asserting that reassessment on suspicion for making further inquiry is unsustainable under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
The division bench of Justices Biren Vaishnav and Bhargav D Karia observed, “The reassessment was also therefore based on suspicion. As pointed out by learned Senior Counsel Mr.Hemani, that factors that indicate that income has escaped assessment consists of facts which if established will have a cause and effect relationship, whereas factors which indicate a suspicion about income escaping assessment which would warrant a further inquiry. This is not what is contemplated under section 148 of the Act. The jurisdiction cannot be used to carry out a roving inquiry.”
Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Ahmadabad Versus Jigar Jashwantlal Shah)
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 190
In a recent ruling by the Gujarat High Court, it has been held that the deduction under Section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely due to the failure of the authority to send intimation. The decision came in response to an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Ahmedabad, pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17.
As per Section 35(2AB) of the Income-tax Act, where a company is engaged in the business of bio-technology or in any business of manufacture or production of any article or thing', incurs any expenditure on scientific research (not being expenditure in the nature of cost of any land or building) on in-house research and development (R&D) facility as approved by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR), then, a sum equal to two times of the expenditure so incurred shall be allowed as weighted deduction.
Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR Against Chartered Accountant Firm In GSLDC Scam
Case Title: Naman Gyanchand Pipara Versus State Of Gujarat & Ors.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 191
The Gujarat High Court has quashed the First Information Report (FIR) against a Chartered Accountant firm in connection with the Gujarat State Land Development Corporation Limited (GSLDC) Scam. The court emphasized that the firm's role was confined to auditing vouchers and records, and it was not directly implicated in the misconduct associated with the Khet Talavadi project, the focal point of the accusations.
Case Title: Bhagwati Polyfill Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 192
The Gujarat High Court in a recent ruling underscored the importance of tangible evidence and a valid reason to believe that income has escaped assessment in a significant decision regarding the validity of reopening assessments based on reasons lacking a direct connection between the taxpayer and the disputed transaction.
Justice Biren Vaishnav and Bhargav D Karia observed, “Perusal of the reasons would indicate that except making a statement that the petitioner had an access with Shri Kamal Zaveri and that the tainted concerns, namely, Jay Traders and Shubham Enterprise were conduits for securing unsecured loans. No material came forth in terms of any statement or details to pin-point a live link or a nexus of the petitioner with the transaction in question.”
Case Title: Adf Foods Ltd. Versus Union Of India
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 193
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that the surplus drawback resulting from the utilization of the Cenvat Credit facility was repaid along with interest, and thus, the refund of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) paid on goods and services for exported goods, classified as zero-rated supplies, is deemed eligible.
The petitioner, ADF Foods Ltd., challenged the inaction on the part of the respondents not to sanction the refund claims of integrated goods and service tax paid on exported goods i.e. “Zero Rated Supplies” through Mundra Customs Port.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 194
The Gujarat High Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which sought a ban on the use of loudspeakers in mosques for azaan, terming it a "wholly misconceived PIL." The petitioner had requested a ban on the use of loudspeakers during various times of the day for the Islamic call to prayer. Chief Justice Sunita Aggarwal questioned the petitioner's claim of disturbance due to noise pollution, enquiring if other religious practices, such as playing music during puja or bhajan in temples, did not cause similar public disturbance.
Case Title: Kalpataru Projects International Limited Versus Ssa Projects Pvt. Ltd
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 195
The Gujarat High Court has issued a significant ruling, asserting that the obligatory 120-day period for submitting a Written Statement in Commercial Cases should be reassessed. In overturning a decision by the Commercial Court disallowing the petitioner to file their written statement, the Bench emphasized that in the present case, the unavailability of the court itself due to a change in forum would leave the petitioner in a vulnerable position. In such instances, the court declared that the timeframe would be deemed to have been "frozen."
Case Title: Machhi Navinbhai Motibhai Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 196
The Gujarat High Court has imposed an exemplary cost of Rs. 35,000 on a man, who happens to be the uncle of a consenting adult woman, as she had chosen to elope for marriage. The uncle had filed a Habeas Corpus petition, which the court deemed as an abuse of the legal process, resulting in unwarranted harassment of the individuals involved.
A division bench of Justices AS Supehia and Vimal K Vyas held, "Thus, the present writ petition appears to be a sheer abuse of process of law to harass the corpus and the respondent No.3. Hence, we are imposing an exemplary costs of Rs.35,000/- on the petitioner."
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 197
On Thursday, during a hearing, the Gujarat High Court conveyed dissatisfaction with the State for casually filing intra-court appeals emphasizing the importance of obtaining the proper opinion of Government counsels on the merits of the case.
The matter was being heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P Mayee.
The Court observed that the intra-court appeal was filed with an unreasonable delay of 481 days to contest the single judge's order, explicitly stating that there was no dispute about the conversion of the land from new tenure to old tenure in 2005.
Case Title: DR. Ashotosh Mishra Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 198
The Gujarat High Court has issued a notice to the Institute of Infrastructure Technology Research and Management (IITRAM) following a petition filed by Dr. Ashutosh Mishra against the appointment of Dr. Bhrigu Nath Singh as the Director General (Vice Chancellor) of the institute.
The petitioner alleged that the appointment was illegal and in violation of the guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Justice Nikhil Kariel, while hearing the petition, noted that the UGC guidelines specify that the search committee for the selection of a Vice Chancellor should not include anyone remotely connected with the university or its affiliated colleges.
'Training Makes A Lot Of Difference': Gujarat High Court Directs Advocate General To Establish Judicial Academy For Aspiring Lawyers LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 199
The Gujarat High Court has directed the Advocate General of the State to devise a plan for the establishment of a judicial academy aimed at training aspiring lawyers.
This directive comes in response to two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) addressing various issues related to the conduct and training of lawyers within the court.
The matter was being heard by a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 200
While a series of petitions seeking to criminalise marital rape is presently pending before the Supreme Court, the Gujarat High Court, in an important observation, recently said that rape is a rape, be it performed by a man the 'husband' against his own 'wife'.
Disagreeing with the marital rape exception as provided under Section 375 of IPC (Exception 2), which exempts a husband from punishment if he commits sexual acts against the consent of his wife (being 18 or above in age), the Court noted that marital rape is illegal in 50 American States, 3 Australian States and many other countries.
Morbi Bridge Collapse | Gujarat High Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Oreva Group's Managing Director
Case Title: Jaysukhbhai Odhavjibhai Bhalodia (Patel) Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 201
The Gujarat High Court has denied the regular bail plea of Jaysukhbhai Odhavjibhai Bhalodia (Patel), the Managing Director of Oreva Group, who was the main accused in the Morbi suspension bridge collapse last year.
Justice Divyesh A Joshi observed, “In is found out from the record that, prima facie, the applicant accused was having knowledge that this kind of unfortunate incident might have occurred for want of proper maintenance of the suspension bridge and even after having sufficient knowledge of the condition of the bridge, despite that, he has given permission to open the bridge for public.”
Case Title: State Of Gujarat Versus Prakash @ Piddu Mithubhai Mulani & 1 Other(S)
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 202
The Gujarat High Court has recently observed that a single injury resulting in death can be categorized as 'murder' under Clause 3 of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). With this, the Court, upon convicting the accused, emphasized that he took advantage of the victim's vulnerability and displayed calculated cruelty in delivering a fatal blow.
The Court's decision came in response to an appeal filed by the State challenging the acquittal of the accused. The State had argued that the Trial Court had overlooked crucial pieces of evidence, such as the dying declarations, the accused's surrender with the weapon, and forensic reports confirming the presence of the deceased's blood on the knife.
Case Title: Bhagirathsinh Jayveersinh Solanki Versus State Of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 203
The Gujarat High Court recently refused a Public interest litigation (PIL) petition, citing the petitioner's involvement in six first information reports (FIRs) as a basis for declining to entertain the plea.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P Mayee held, “Having noted that six First Information Reports had been lodged against the petitioner on the allegation of cheating and fraud, as also under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, we are not convinced with the credential of the writ petitioner to maintain the instant Public Interest Litigation agitating the issue of corruption in MNREGA.”
Case Title: Nileshbhai Chauhan v. Registrar General
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Guj) 204
The Gujarat High Court last week upheld the dismissal of a magistrate who refused to return to work and subsequently went on unauthorized leave after a letter using “intemperate” language to an administrative judge of the High Court and the Principal District Judge of Vadodara in June 2013
A division bench of Justices Biren Vaishnav and Nisha Thakore held, “Viewing the unauthorized absence of an ordinary employee, may perceive a different perception. Similar standards cannot and should not be applied in case of a Judicial Officer who abandons his service in defiance by addressing a letter to his Principal District Judge that unless a particular issue is not resolved he shall not report for duty.”
