Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 04 - May 10, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 144 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 150Nominal IndexAsim @ Munmun @ Asif Abdulkarim Solanki v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 144Harishchandra R Pednekar (Deceased) Through Legal Heirs & Ors. v/s Bhaskar R Pednekar (Since Deceased Thru Legal Heirs) & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 145Union of India & Ors v/s Bhanuben w/o Manojbhai Dhirubhai Rathod, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 146Vasudev Kantilal Mahesuriya & Ors. v/s Mohanlal Jethalal Purohit & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 147Narayan @ Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 148Aksharbhai Rameshbhai Baraiya & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat and batch, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 149Jayprakash Ghastelal v/s Union of India through General Manager, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 150 X v/s Y & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 151Judgments/Orders13 Yrs On, Gujarat High Court Acquits Man In Murder Case, Says Prosecution "Suppressed" Alibi EvidenceCase title: Asim @ Munmun @ Asif Abdulkarim Solanki v/s State of Gujarat R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 249 of 2019 and R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 417 of 2019Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 144The Gujarat High Court acquitted a man in a murder case after observing that he had raised a plea of alibi which was supported by 13 independent witnesses, however this material was "deliberately suppressed" and not produced along with the charge-sheet.In doing so the court observed that the Investigating Officer failed to place the material on record before the trial court amounting to dereliction of duty.The court observed that despite the accused no. 1 taking the plea of alibi from the very inception, neither the Investigating Officer, nor the Public Prosecutor/special Public Prosecutor, nor the Presiding Officer of the trial Court thought it fit to properly examine or place on record the material collected during the investigation concerning the said plea, "thereby failing to make efforts to reach at the truth".Mere Registration Of Will Doesn't Prove Genuineness, Beneficiary Must Dispel Suspicious Circumstances Through Evidence: Gujarat High CourtCase title: Harishchandra R Pednekar (Deceased) Through Legal Heirs & Ors. v/s Bhaskar R Pednekar (Since Deceased Thru Legal Heirs) & Ors. R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1320 of 1995Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 145The Gujarat High Court quashed probate proceedings in favour of "beneficiary" of a Will, noting he was unable to dispel various suspicious circumstances including sequence of obtaining signatures from the deceased and attesting witnesses, the physical presence of parties and the testator's medical condition at that time.In doing so the court reiterated that mere registration of will does not prove its genuineness; the propounder/beneficiary must dispel suspicious circumstances by leading evidence.Justice JC Doshi referred to Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and said that it is an instrument declaring last testimony of the deceased to dispose of his property before his death and is a legally acknowledged mode of bequeathing a testator's property during his life time to be acted upon his death and carries with it a element of sanctity.Deceased Railway Employee's Widow Entitled To Challenge Penalty Imposed On Him To Remove Stigma: Gujarat High CourtCase title: Union of India & Ors v/s Bhanuben w/o Manojbhai Dhirubhai Rathod R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5667 of 2023Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 146The Gujarat High Court has observed that a deceased Railway employee's widow is legally entitled to challenge penalty imposed on her husband, and she and his family members are the real aggrieved persons and have the legal right to remove the stigma attached to their breadwinner.The court passed the order in Railway's plea against a Central Administrative Tribunal's order quashing penalty of removal from service imposed on deceased employee after noting that the employee had not been heard. The CAT had directed the Railways to communicate order of imposition of penalty within one month to the employee's widow and had permitted to file a representation. Against this Railways had moved the high court.Posthumously Filed Income Tax Return Can Be Considered To Determine Motor Accident Compensation: Gujarat High CourtCase title: Vasudev Kantilal Mahesuriya & Ors. v/s Mohanlal Jethalal Purohit & Ors. R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 55 of 2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 147The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that posthumus filing of income tax return can be considered for deciding quantum of compensation in a motor accident claim.In doing so the court partly allowed an appeal for enhancement of compensation, after noting that the Motor Accident Tribunal had not considered the income of deceased reflected in the income tax return for assessment year 2017-2018 filed posthumously.'Prima Facie Adopted Delay Tactics': Gujarat High Court Refuses To Suspend Narayan Sai's Life Sentence In Rape CaseCase title: Narayan @ Narayan Sai v/s State of Gujarat & Anr. CR.MA/4/2025(FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) PENDING In...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 04 - May 10, 2026

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags