Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 20 - April 26, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 125 to 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 131Nominal IndexPremjibhai Hirabhai Gohil v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 125GEB v/s Nirmal Rajendra Madela ,WD/O Rajendra Sitaram Mandela & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 126X v/s Y & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 127Sant Shri Asharam Ashram through Trustee and Authorized Signatory Rajeshkumar Shadilal Bharti v/s State of Gujarat & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 128Namori Hajibhai Bukera v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 129Reliance Industries Ltd & Anr. v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 130Miskinbanu Jahidkhan Pathan & Ors. v/s Alisher Subhanali Ansari & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 131Judgments/OrdersDisproportionate Assets: Gujarat High Court Upholds Conviction Of Judicial Officer Whose Wife Received ₹7 Lakh 'Gift' From Non-RelativeCase title: Premjibhai Hirabhai Gohil v/s State of GujaratR/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 725 of 2011Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 125The Gujarat High Court upheld a trial court order convicting a judicial officer in a disproportionate assets case, after noting the officer could not prove that his wife was legally entitled to receive a gift from a person who was not his wife's blood relation or family member.It was alleged that the appellant while serving as Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Pardi, Valsad between 10.06.2002 to 01.10.2002, in abetment with accused No.2–his brother-in-law and accused No.3–his wife, while serving as a public servant had abused this position and illegally demanded and accepted bribe from prosecution witnesses.Gujarat High Court Upholds Compensation For Electrocution Death While Repairing TV Antenna, Says Electricity Board Strictly LiableCase title: GEB v/s Nirmal Rajendra Madela ,WD/O Rajendra Sitaram Mandela & Ors. R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1406 of 2002Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 126The Gujarat High Court upheld a trial court order granting compensation of Rs. 3 Lakh to the family of a man who was electrocuted while assisting his brother in repairing a television antenna on the terrace of a flat, after the antenna came into contact with an electric wire above it.In doing so the court applied the principle of strict and absolute liability and directed the trial court to disburse the compensation to the claimants.On October 30,1988 brothers Nitin Sitaram and Rajendra Sitaram lost their lives after being electrocuted on the terrace of a flat, wherein Nitin was repairing the television antenna on the terrace and Rajendra was assisting him.Gujarat High Court Warns Of 'Reverse Bias' Against Accused In POSH Cases; Says Misuse May “Create More Glass Ceilings” For Genuine EmployeesCase title: X v/s Y & Anr.R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3285 of 2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 127The Gujarat High Court upheld a report by a cooperative society's Internal Complaints Committee which had rejected a woman employee's sexual harassment complaint against two officials–including a woman, as false and baseless.In doing so the court found that the ICC was unbiased and had complied with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act. It further warned against operation of "reverse bias" against the male accused in such cases, which if extended by adjudicating forums might be counterproductive as it may create more glass ceilings thereby creating fetters in employment of genuine employees.Gujarat High Court Calls Asaram's Ashram 'Habitual Offender'; Upholds Eviction From Encroached Land, RiverbedCase title: Sant Shri Asharam Ashram through Trustee and Authorized Signatory Rajeshkumar Shadilal Bharti v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 107 of 2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 128The Gujarat High Court dismissed pleas moved by 'Sant Shri Asharam Ashram' challenging revenue and eviction proceedings, for encroaching upon a large area of land and after finding that the trust had violated allotment conditions and regularization orders.Upholding the findings of the single judge, a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice DN Ray in its order said:"Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that the petitioner – trust not only violated the conditions of the orders of allotment / regularization orders of grant of Government land, but also encroached upon a substantial area of open land surrounding the allotted lands, even the land from the riverbed, for its use and illegal occupation over the period of years. The petitioner is found to be a habitual offender, who had earlier encroached on a large area of about 51,101 sq.mtrs of open land forming part of Sabarmati river, which was proved in the eviction proceedings conducted under Section 61 of the Code in the year 2009. Even otherwise, the allegations of breach of conditions of the allotment / regularization orders have been found to be proved by the learned Single Judge as well as by us in view of the discussion made hereinabove".Gujarat High...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 20 - April 26, 2026

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags