Nominal Index [Citations 370 – 377]

1. Santosh s/o Ananada Mane @ Chhotu v. State of Maharashtra 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 370

2. Abhimanyu Laxman Kumbhar v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 371

3. Oasis Realty v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 372

4. Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh v. State of Maharashtra 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 373

5. Pundlik Yevatkar v. Sau. Ujwala @ Shubhangi Pundlik Yevatkar 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 374

6. Binoy Kodiyeri v. State of Mahaharashtra and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 375

7. Sheetal Dilip Jain v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 376

8. Ruju Thakker v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 377

1. Custodial Interrogation Is Not Imperative Merely Because Offence Is Murder: Bombay High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Accused

Case Title: Santosh s/o Ananada Mane @ Chhotu v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 370

The custodial interrogation of an accused is not mandatory merely because he's been booked in a murder case, the Bombay High Court held while granting anticipatory bail to a man booked under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

A bench of Justice Bharati Dangre observed that the man's legitimate apprehension of arrested was enough to seek pre-arrest bail adding the offence allegedly occurred three years ago wherein he allegedly had a limited role.

2. Employer Cannot Deny Back Wages Citing 'No Work No Pay' After Refusing Reinstatement Due To Pendency Of Appeal Against Acquittal: Bombay HC

Case Title: Abhimanyu Laxman Kumbhar v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 371

The Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court recently held that an employer cannot deny wages citing pendency of a criminal appeal against an employee's acquittal on the principle of 'no work no pay'.

A division bench of Justices Mangesh S. Patil And Sandeep V. Marne granted back wages and continuity of service to the petitioner in a writ petition challenging Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited's decision to not pay back wages despite him being acquitted by the trial court.

"In our opinion, mere pendency of the appeal against acquittal would not entitle the respondents to continue the penalty of removal from service," the court said.

3. Bombay High Court Allows Taxpayer To Utilise Amount Available In Electronic Credit Ledger to Pay Pre-Deposit

Case title: Oasis Realty v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 372

The Bombay High Court has held that the taxpayer may utilise the amount available in the Electronic Credit Ledger to pay the 10% of tax in dispute as prescribed under Sub-section (6) of Section 107 of the CGST Act.

The division bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice A.S. Doctor court noted that any payment towards output tax, whether self-assessed in the return or payable as a consequence of any proceeding instituted under the MGST Act, can be made by utilisation of the amount available in the Electronic Credit Ledger. Hence, a party can pay 10% of the disputed tax either using the amount available in the electronic cash ledger or the amount available in the electronic credit ledger.

4. Anil Deshmukh May Not Get Convicted, Sachin Waze's Statements Contradictory : Bombay High Court In Bail Order

Case title: Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 373

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday granted bail to former Maharashtra home minister Anil Deshmukh, in a money laundering case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate stating that Deshmukh, in all probability, "may not be ultimately convicted".

The bench of Justice N. J. Jamadar refused to rely solely on Sachin Waze's statements considering his contradictory stand before the Justice Chandiwal Commission wherein he denied all the allegations against Deshmukh. The court also cited Waze's chequered past to prima facie discredit him as a witness.

5. Well Qualified Wife Expressing Desire To Pursue Job Not Cruelty; Reproductive Choice Insegregable To Woman's Personal Liberty: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Pundlik Yevatkar v. Sau. Ujwala @ Shubhangi Pundlik Yevatkar

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 374

The Bombay High Court held that a wife expressing a desire to work does not amount to cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act. The court further said that the right of a woman to have reproductive choice is an insegregable part of her personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Division bench of Justices Atul Chandurkar and Urmila Joshi-Phalke upheld family court's refusal to grant divorce to the husband on the ground that cruelty is not proven.

The court said that cruelty has to be distinguished from the ordinary wear and tear of the family life. The husband's allegation that the wife was harassing him by expressing that she wants to do the job is vague. Expressing desire by wife who is well qualified that she wants to do the job does not amount to cruelty. The husband has to make out a specific case that the conduct of wife was such a nature that it was difficult for him to lead the life along with her, the court said.

The husband had also accused his wife of terminating her second pregnancy without his consent and thereby subjecting him to cruelty. The bench said that even if the husband's allegations were taken at face value, the wife cannot be accused of cruelty for making a reproductive choice.

6. No Offence U/S 376 IPC- Bombay High Court Quashes Case Against Binoy Kodiyeri Following Settlement of Rs. 80 Lakhs

Case Title: Binoy Kodiyeri v. State of Mahaharashtra and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 375

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR by consent against Binoy Kodyeri, son of CPI(M) former secretary Kodiyeri Balakrishnan in a rape case after it was informed that the parties had arrived at a settlement of Rs. 80 lakhs for the woman and the couple's child.

In the consent terms before the bench of Justices R P Mohite-Dere and S M Modak, the woman withdrew all her statements which carry allegation that Kodyeri is her husband. She also said that their relationship was consensual.

7. Minimum 30 Days Time To Be Granted To File Reply To GST SCN: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Sheetal Dilip Jain v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 376

The Bombay High Court held that Section 73(8) of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act (MGST Act) permits a person chargeable with tax for a period of 30 days from the issuance of the show-cause notice to make payment of such tax along with interest payable. If he does not wish to make payment, then within the 30-day period he could file a reply to the show-cause notice.

The division bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice A.S. Doctor observed that to file a reply to the show-cause notice, the statutory period cannot be arbitrarily reduced to 7 days by the assessing officer.

8. Consider Handing Over All Roads Within Greater Mumbai To BMC: Bombay High Court To Maharashtra Govt

Case Title: Ruju Thakker v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 377

The Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra Government to consider Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) Commissioner Iqbal Chahal's suggestion of handing over all the roads in Greater Mumbai to the civic body for their better upkeep and maintenance.

In a contempt matter related to the bad condition of roads, the court found Chahal's proposal "appealing" while considering it from the aspect of coordination, monitoring, upkeep and maintenance of the roads.

The division bench of the Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice M. S. Karnik also said it expects the civic body to complete concretization work on all its roads within 30 months.

Other Developments

1. Direct Correlation Between Incinerator's Toxic Gases And Rising TB Cases, Shift Waste Plant: Govandi Residents To Bombay High Court

Case Title: SMS Envoclean Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

A civic action society in a case pending before the Bombay High Court has claimed that there is a direct correlation between the emission of toxic gases from a biomedical waste treatment plant's incinerator at Govandi and the annual figure of about 5000 tuberculosis cases in the area.

2. Six Judicial Officers Appointed As Additional Judges Of Bombay High Court

The Centre issued a notification for appointment of six judicial officers as additional judges of the Bombay High Court for a period of two years. The Bombay HC will now function with a strength of 67 judges. Its sanctioned strength is 94.

The new judges are -

1. Sanjay Anandrao Deshmukh

2. Yanshivraj Gopichand Khobragade

3. Mahendra Wadhumal Chandwani

4. Abhay Sopanrao Waghwase

5 Ravindra Madhusudan Joshi.

6. Vrushali Vijay Joshi