Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: July 11 To July 17, 2022

State Of Gujarat V/S Hasmukhbhai @ Harshadbhai Dahyabhai Makwana 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 266

Patel Manubhai Ramabhai V/S State Of Gujarat & 1 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 267

M/S Harekrushna Infra Projects Pvt Ltd & 1 Other(S) V/S State Bank Of India 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 268

M/s Magirsha Industries versus M/s Gujarat State Fertilizer and Chemicals Limited 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 269

Navinchandra Somchand, Died Through His Heirs & 1 Other(S) V/S Heirs Of Somchand Bechardas & 6 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 270

Sabirmiya Gulamahemad Ghori V/S Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & 1 other(s) ) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 271

Rajendrasinh Velubha Jadeja V/S General Manager (Project) ) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 272

R/Special Civil Application No. 12864 of 2021 ) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 273

State Of Gujarat Versus Kishorbhai Devjibhai Parmar & 4 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 274

abhishek industrial service pvt. Ltd v/s nathabhai bhagwanjibhai rathod & 2 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 275

Rajubhai Kamabhai Desai V/S State Of Gujarat & 1 other(s)

ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK

Gravity Of Offence Cannot Overweigh Legal Proof: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Of POCSO Accused

Case Title: State Of Gujarat V/S Hasmukhbhai @ Harshadbhai Dahyabhai Makwana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 266

The Gujarat High Court has dismissed the appeal of the State Government challenging the acquittal of a person accused under the POCSO Act, citing lack of evidence. A bench of Justice SH Vora and Justice Rajendran Sareen observed:

"Here in this case it is to be noted that on one side the complainant has alleged against the respondent accused regarding sexual assault upon her victim daughter and merely after a span of 3 to 4 days she has alleged against her own husband regarding sexual assault upon her victim daughter. As such, two contradictory versions have been stated by the complainant within a span of 4 days against two persons and both the allegations are based on suspicion and doubt, one against the present respondent accused and another against her husband. As such, mere suspicion and doubt cannot be considered to be cogent and convincing proof to prove the allegations."

'No Locus': Gujarat High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking CID Probe Into Alleged Corruption & Irregularities In Agriculture Produce Market

Case Title: Patel Manubhai Ramabhai V/S State Of Gujarat & 1 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 267

The Gujarat High Court dismissed a plea seeking probe by specialized agency like CID (Economic Offences Wing) or Anti-Corruption Bureau into alleged corruption and financial irregularities of "millions of rupees" in the Agriculture Produce Market.

Justice Nirzar Desai observed that the complainant (Applicant herein) could not establish his locus standi and that he could not point out as to how he is aggrieved by the alleged offences committed by the persons named in the application.

Principle Of Promissory Estoppel Applies After Customer Acts On Basis Of Bank's One Time Settlement Scheme: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: M/S Harekrushna Infra Projects Pvt Ltd & 1 Other(S) V/S State Bank Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 268

The Gujarat High Court has held that once a customer acts on the basis of offer made by a Bank under its One Time Settlement scheme, the principle of promissory estoppel applies and the latter is estopped from acting to the detriment of the former.

"It is clear that the principle of promissory estoppel applies. The bank by its conduct of offering an OTS settlement intended to create legal relations which the petitioners had acted upon in light of the promise made and paid the amount on or before 30th of December 2017. This action was apparently accepted in principle by the bank as not only for the title clearance certificate but valuation reports letters were written by by the bank to the advocates and the valuers. The amounts were paid and accepted by the bank and once the petitioners had acted upon on the promise set out by the bank, the bank cannot be allowed to go back on its proposal on the basis of a letter dated 28th August 2018 stating that the scheme of OTS was not applicable as the cases of the petitioners was reported as fraud."

Dispute Referred To Arbitration Under MSME Act; Court Can Extend The Mandate Of Arbitrator Under Section 29A Of A&C Act: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: M/s Magirsha Industries versus M/s Gujarat State Fertilizer and Chemicals Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 269

The Gujarat High Court has ruled that even in cases where the dispute has been referred to arbitration under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act), the Court is empowered under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to extend the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal.

The Single Bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar held that in view of Section 18(3) of the MSME Act, the provisions of the A&C Act would be applicable once the dispute is referred to arbitration under the MSME Act, and hence, the Court can extend the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 29A of the A&C Act.

S.91/92 Evidence Act Exclude Oral Evidence, Forbid Proving Contents Of Writing Otherwise Than By Writing Itself: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Navinchandra Somchand, Died Through His Heirs & 1 Other(S) V/S Heirs Of Somchand Bechardas & 6 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 270

The Gujarat High Court has explained the relationship between Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, while holding that the provisions in effect supplement each other.

Section 91 (Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of documents) relates to lead evidence of terms of contract, grants and other disposition of properties, which are reduced to form of documents. This Section merely forbids proving the contents of writing otherwise than by writing itself.

Section 92 (Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement) deals with conclusiveness of the documentary evidence and provides exceptions in which oral evidence against documentary evidence can be admitted.

Employees Can't Be Held Responsible If Employer Grants Terminal Benefits In Excess Of Their Entitlement: Gujarat High Court Quashes Recovery Order

Case Title: Sabirmiya Gulamahemad Ghori V/S Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & 1 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 271

The Gujarat High Court has set aside an order of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation directing recovery of Rs. 63,878 from its former employee on the ground that the terminal benefits were wrongly granted to him at a higher pay-scale than he was entitled to.

Justice Biren Vaishnav relied on several decisions of the High Court where it was held that when employees are paid excess amount, not because of any misrepresentation or fraud on their part and if such employees had no knowledge that the amount that was being paid to them was more than what they were entitled to, they can't be held responsible for a mistake on part of the employer.

Whether 'Appropriate Govt' In Industrial Dispute Concerning Person Working At 'Mine Office' Is Centre Or State Depends On Nature Of Work: Gujarat HC

Case Title: Rajendrasinh Velubha Jadeja V/S General Manager (Project)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 272

The Gujarat High Court has recently explained that when a dispute is raised by employees working in a mine or an office of the mine or ones employed in a mine, it needs to be determined whether the dispute has a nexus to activities in a mine. Only when the industrial dispute concerns a mine can the appropriate government be deemed to be the Central Government as per Sec 2(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Bench explained.

National E-Assessment Centre Acted Thick Skinned: Gujarat High Court

Citation: R/Special Civil Application No. 12864 of 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 273

The Gujarat High Court held that it was pandemic time when the department should have adopted a liberal approach in refusing the request for time for filing objections to the draft assessment order and finally passing the assessment order. The department acted thick-skinned.

The division bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Bharghav D. Karia has observed that the assessment proceedings were remanded to the Assessing Officer to be taken up afresh from the stage of the draft assessment order. The court directed the assessing officer to pass an appropriate order after giving the petitioner an opportunity to file a reply.

When Substantial Evidence Is Lacking To Connect Accused With Crime, Other Corroborative Evidence Loses Significance: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: State Of Gujarat Versus Kishorbhai Devjibhai Parmar & 4 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 274

The Gujarat High Court has held that where substantial evidence to connect an accused with the crime is lacking, other corroborative evidence loses its significance.

In light of the aforesaid, a Bench comprising Justices SH Vora and Rajendra Sareen upheld an order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Court in a criminal case under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act.

Employee's Termination Without Departmental Inquiry Based On Incomplete & Non-Specific Show Cause Notice Violative Of S.25G Of ID Act: Gujarat HC

Case Title: abhishek industrial service pvt. Ltd v/s nathabhai bhagwanjibhai rathod & 2 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 275

The Gujarat High Court observed that in case of an incomplete show cause notice, to which the respondent workman had no occasion to file his response as expected by the employer, inquiry by issuing specific charge sheet is necessary.

Justice AY Kogje thereby held that when the show cause notice /charge was not specific enough for the workman to respond, termination without proper departmental inquiry was a breach of Section 25(G) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

Gujarat High Court Refuses To Cancel Anticipatory Bail Granted To Rape Accused 5 Yrs Ago

Case Title: Rajubhai Kamabhai Desai V/S State Of Gujarat & 1 other(s)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 276

The Gujarat High Court has refused to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to a rape accused five years ago, stating that all this time the applicant-victim did not take a stand that seriousness of offence has not been considered by the Court below and that the accused has not misused his liberty nor violated any condition.

The accused was booked for offences punishable under Sections 376, 366, 328, 395, 397, 344, 406, 420, 506(2) and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Other updates from the High Court

Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind Moves PIL Against Mandatory Learning Of Bhagavad Gita In Gujarat Schools: Gujarat HC Seeks Govt's Reply

The Gujarat High Court issued a notice to the Gujarat State Government on a plea filed by Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind challenging a resolution of the state government introducing the Bhagavad Gita in schools as a prayer programme, and including it in the curriculum.

The PIL by the Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind has challenged the passed by the State Department of Education mandating the learning of the Shrimad Bhagavad Gita ('the Gita') by teaching its values and principles/ tenets and through stories, shlok singing, recitation and chanting, and reading of stories and prayers in prayer assemblies in the students of Classes 6 to 12 from the academic year 2022-23.

Gujarat High Court Directs Judicial Officers To Strictly Observe Court Working Hours

The High Court of Gujarat has directed all judicial officers in the state to maintain strict observance of court working hours and punctually dispose judicial business.

This was after the High Court's attention was drawn towards the frequent violation of instructions contained in Paragraph 2(B) of Chapter-I of the Civil Manual and various High Court Circulars and letters issued with regard to the observance of court working hours and full-time sitting in courtroom during working hours. Despite various circulars and orders issued by the High Court in the past, it observed that there has been "no improvement in the situation".