Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 09 - March 15, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 79 to 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 87Nominal IndexMayurbhai Badvantbhai Dave v. State of Gujarat & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 79Kartikbhai Jashubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 80X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 81Rajeshbhai Maheshbhai Jani & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 82Rajesh Nathabhai Ahmeda & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 83Janaksinh Khushalsinh Parmar v/s Ministry of Culture, Govt of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 84Palakben Ravi Luni & Anr. v/s None 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 85Paschim Gujarat Vij Co Ltd v/s Hasam Mamad Sama & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 86Umeshwar Akshaywar Dubey v/s Shree Sainath Sarvajanik Seva Mandal Trust & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 87Judgments/OrdersMaintenance Should Not Be Excessive To Encourage Idleness: Gujarat High Court Reduces Enhanced AmountCase Title: Mayurbhai Badvantbhai Dave v. State of Gujarat & Ors.Case No.: R/Criminal Revision Application No. 181 of 2025Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 79The Gujarat High Court recently observed that while maintenance may be enhanced due to inflation and changed circumstances, the amount fixed must not be excessive in a manner that encourages idleness or becomes disproportionate to the husband's income and liabilities.Justice P. M. Raval held that the Family Court had doubled the maintenance amount without providing adequate reasons or justification.“It is true that considering the rate of inflation, the amount ought to have been enhanced, but merely considering the fact that now wife is not earning and that the inflation rate has gone up and that five years have elapsed after the earlier maintenance order, the trial Court has doubled the amount of maintenance, however, without giving any palpable reasons therefor and/or without giving any justification for coming to such a conclusion and doubling the amount of maintenance.”Delay Beyond 60 Days To Seek Discharge U/S 250 BNSS Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right: Gujarat High CourtCase Title: Kartikbhai Jashubhai Patel v. State of GujaratCase No.: R/Criminal Revision Application No. 2627 of 2025 (with connected matters)Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 80The Gujarat High Court has held that although Section 250(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) prescribes a period of sixty days to file a discharge application after committal, the expiry of that period does not extinguish the accused's right to seek discharge where sufficient cause for delay is shown.Section 250(1) of the BNSS allows an accused to file an application seeking discharge within 60 days from the date on which the case is committed to the Court of Session.Justice P. M. Raval observed that limitation provisions regulate the procedure but do not eliminate the substantive defence available to an accused.“Thus, by virtue of Section 250(1) an accused may prefer an application for discharge within a period of sixty days from the date of commitment of the case under section 232, if at all he desires to prefer such an application, but, in the considered opinion of the Court, it does not exclude the judicial discretion in appropriate cases or where delay is not attributable to the accused as in the present facts of the case. Thus, it can be held that 60 days period under Section 250(1) of the BNSS regulates the procedure and it does not extinguish the right to seek discharge. It also does not exclude the judicial discretion in appropriate cases where delay is not attributable to the accused while considering the condonation of delay as it reflects prima facie from the facts of the present case.”Family Court Can Admit CCTV Footage Showing Husband Assaulting Wife Without Certificate U/S 65B Evidence Act: Gujarat High CourtCase Title: X v. YCase No.: R/First Appeal No. 2908 of 2019Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 81The Gujarat High Court has upheld a Family Court decree dissolving a marriage on the ground of cruelty, holding that the Family Court was justified in relying on CCTV footage of an incident involving the husband's assault on the wife at a railway station, despite the lack of a Section 65B certificate.Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act requires that any electronic record (computer output, video, email, etc.) presented as evidence be accompanied by a mandatory certificate identifying the electronic record, describing the manner of its production, specifying the device involved, and confirming that the conditions under Section 65B(2) are satisfied, duly signed by a person responsible for the operation or management of the relevant device, to be admissible.Home Guards Entitled To Duty Allowance Equivalent To Minimum Pay Of Police Personnel: Gujarat High CourtCase Title: Rajeshbhai Maheshbhai Jani & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Anr.Case No.: R/Special Civil Application No. 9072 of 2020Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 82The Gujarat High Court has directed the State Government to increase the duty allowance payable to Home Guards so that it matches the minimum...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 09 - March 15, 2026

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags