Bombay High Court Weekly Round-up: June 10, 2024 To June 16, 2024

Nominal Index [Citation 284 - 292]Shamsher Ahmed Shaikh & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 284Razi Ahmed Khan v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 285XYZ v. The Dean of BJ, Government Medical College and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 286Karan Johar v. IndiaPride Advisory Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 287Jiv Maitri Trust v. Union of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 288Gopal C. Mehta & Ors. v. State Of Maharashtra & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 289Kalpana and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 290Jaiprakash Kulkarni v. The Banking Ombudsman and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 291Hajrat Peer Malik Rehan Mira Saheb Dargah, Vishalgad v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 292Reports/Judgments"Right To Decent Last Rites": High Court Directs Municipal Commissioner To Personally Address Issue Of Inadequate Burial Grounds In MumbaiCase Title: Shamsher Ahmed Shaikh & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 284The Bombay High Court directed the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) to personally look into the issue of inadequate burial grounds in Mumbai and take necessary steps to identify and acquire new burial plots.A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar expressed disapproval over the Municipal Corporation's lack of action, emphasizing the importance of the right to a decent burial.“Such callousness on the part of the authorities cannot be appreciated. Right of dead to be given a decent and respectful last rites is as important as any other right available when he is alive. Moreover, it is the statutory duty and obligation cast on The Municipal Corporation to provide adequate place for burial of the dead. The authorities of the Municipal Corporation, thus, cannot shirk their shoulders away from such statutory responsibility”, the court stated.The court was dealing with a PIL regarding paucity of space for adequate burial grounds in the city.Record Indicates They Conspired To Transform India Into Islamic Country: Bombay High Court Denies Bail To Alleged PFI MembersCase Title: Razi Ahmed Khan v. State of MaharashtraCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 285The Bombay High Court denied bail to three alleged members of the banned organization Popular Front of India (PFI) booked for allegedly conspiring to “overawe the Government by use of criminal force” and “transform India into an Islamic country by 2047”.A division bench of Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Shyam C Chandak rejected the appeals filed by three accused against the orders of the Special Judge, Nashik, which had previously rejected their bail applications.“Record of investigation indicates that, the Appellants in connivance with other Accused persons conspired to overawe the Government by use of criminal force. The first information report is self-eloquent. There is more than sufficient material available on record in the form of statements of witnesses and the documents seized from the electronic devices of the Accused persons that, they indulged into activity of inciting like minded people to join them to overawe the Government by use of criminal force. They also conspired to transform India into an Islamic country by 2047. They are not only propagators but actively intending to implement the Vision-2047 document of their organization”, the court observed.Abortion Can Be Allowed Where Continuing Pregnancy Would Cause Grave Mental Injury: Bombay High CourtCase Title: XYZ v. The Dean of BJ, Government Medical College and OthersCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 286The Bombay High Court held that abortion can be allowed in cases where continuing pregnancy would cause grave mental injury to the pregnant woman.The division bench of Justice N.R. Borkar and Justice Somasekhar Sudaresan held that such allowance cannot be limited to pregnancy emanating from sexual assault.The 19 years old petitioner had approached the High Court seeking permission to terminate her 25-weeks pregnancy which had resulted from a consensual relationship.Prima Facie Unauthorised Use Of Karan Johar's Name: Bombay High Court Restrains Release Of Film "Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar"Case Title: Karan Johar v. IndiaPride Advisory Pvt. Ltd. And Ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 287The Bombay High Court restrained the release of the upcoming film “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar”, and any promotional material finding a strong prima facie case that the makers have made unauthorised use of filmmaker Karan Johar's name and personality.The court also restrained the makers from using Johar's name or any other attributes or reference to the name “Karan Johar” in any manner, in the title of the film or in the promotion directly or indirectly including but not limited to all promotional materials etc. which is intended to be sold, promoted or otherwise distributed in relation to the film. Justice RI Chagla said in his order, “In my view a...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-up: June 10, 2024 To June 16, 2024

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags