Page 3 - Bombay High Court

Bombay HC orders immersion of all idols up to 6 ft in artificial tanks

The Bombay High Court on Thursday ordered immersion of all idols of up to six feet height in artificial tanks starting from the 10-day Ganesh festival being celebrated from August 27 this year. The order will be effective till March next year for the festivals that require immersion of idols of deities, including those made of Plaster of Paris (PoP). "The court has to make an endeavour that the impact of immersion of idols is bare minimum on the environment. Therefore, idols up to 6 feet should compulsorily be immersed in artificial water tanks," a bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne said. The high court further asked the state government to ensure implementation of its policy regarding immersion of idols in "letter and spirit". All the local bodies must ensure that the idols, up to six feet in height, are immersed in artificial water bodies, the bench said. The high court also asked the government to form an expert committee for suggesting measures to ...

SC stays Bombay HC order acquitting all 12 in 2006 Mumbai train blasts case

The Supreme Court stays Bombay HC verdict acquitting all 12 in Mumbai train blasts; says judgment will not be treated as precedent, issues notice to accused on Maharashtra's appeal

Bombay HC restrains Pune auto rickshaw unions from disrupting Uber services

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday restrained rickshaw unions in Pune from obstructing the services of app-based aggregator service Uber during their protest, and asked police to provide protection to its vehicles if necessary. Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd has moved the HC fearing that its operations across Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad cities would be disrupted during a protest announced by Baghtoy Rikshaw-wala Union and others. The protest was supposed to start from Wednesday. Justice R I Chagla said the company had made out a "strong prima facie case for grant of ex-parte ad-interim relief". An ex-parte order is an order passed in the absence of one of the parties to a litigation. The court restrained the unions and their members from stopping, blocking, or assaulting Uber's driver-partners or passengers, and from interfering in its business. The HC also directed the Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic) to provide immediate police protection to Uber's vehicles if any complaint is ..

Bombay High Court clears MIAL to replace Celebi at Mumbai airport

The court had in May restrained MIAL from finalising tenders to appoint new ground handling service provider amid Celebi's legal challenge to revocation of its security clearance by the central govt

SC to hear plea against acquittal of 2006 Mumbai bomb blast case accused

Seeking an urgent listing of the matter, Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, mentioned it before a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai. The matter has been listed for Thursday

'Will challenge in SC': Fadnavis shocked over HC decision on Mumbai blasts

On Monday, the Bombay High Court acquitted all 12 accused who had been convicted by the trial court for their alleged roles in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts

Explained: Why Bombay HC acquitted all 12 in 2006 Mumbai train blasts case

On July 11, 2006, seven blasts tore through Mumbai local trains, killing 187 people and injuring over 800. Nineteen years later, Bombay High Court acquits all 12 accused, citing 'lack of credible evid

2006 Mumbai train blasts case: Chronology of events following HC acquittal

Following is the chronology of events in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case, in which the Bombay High Court on Monday acquitted all the 12 accused. *July 11, 2006: Seven bomb blasts in first class compartments of seven local trains on western suburban railway line between 6.23 pm and 6.29 pm. 187 persons killed and 824 injured. *July 11, 2006: Seven separate FIRs lodged in different police stations. Later clubbed and investigated by the Maharashtra Anti- Terrorism Squad (ATS). *July-August 2006: Thirteen persons arrested in the case by the ATS for their involvement in the case. *November 30, 2006: Chargesheet filed against 30 accused, including 13 Pakistani nationals, several of whom are wanted. *2007: Trial begins. *August 19, 2014: Trial ends. Special court reserves its order against 13 arrested accused. *September 11, 2015: Special court convicts 12 out of the 13 accused. One accused acquitted due to lack of evidence against him. *September 30, 2015: Special court imposes de

7/11 Mumbai blast: HC acquits all 12, says prosecution failed to prove case

The Bombay High Court on Monday quashed the conviction of 12 persons in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case and acquitted them, noting the prosecution has "utterly failed" to prove the case against them. The judgment comes 19 years after the terror attack that shook the city's Western Railway network, resulting in the loss of over 180 lives and leaving several others injured. A special bench of Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak said the evidence relied by the prosecution was not conclusive to convict the accused persons. "The prosecution has utterly failed to prove the case against the accused. It is hard to believe that the accused committed the crime. Hence their conviction is quashed and set aside," the HC said. The bench said it refuses to confirm the death penalty imposed on five of the convicts and also the life imprisonment on the remaining seven, and acquitted them. The court said the accused shall be released from jail forthwith if not wanted in any other case. A speci

HC dismisses PIL against Prada for unauthorised use of Kolhapuri chappal

A Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne questioned the legal standing and statutory right of the five advocates who filed the PIL

Marriages sacred to Hindus at stake due to couples' trivial issues: HC

Marriages considered sacrosanct by Hindus are at stake now because of small and trivial issues between couples, the Bombay High Court remarked while quashing a dowry harassment case against a man and his family members. The Nagpur bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and M M Nerlikar, in an order dated July 8, held that in matrimonial disputes, if a reunion is not possible, the same should be ended immediately to ensure the lives of the parties involved are not ruined. The bench was hearing a petition filed by a man and his family members seeking to quash a dowry harassment case registered against them by his estranged wife in December 2023. The estranged couple informed the court that they had settled their dispute and had been granted a divorce by mutual consent. The woman informed the court that she had no objection if the case was quashed, as she wished to move on with her life. The court, while quashing the case, said though the provisions pertaining to dowry harassment and unnatur

BookMyShow, PVR win: HC allows convenience fees on online movie tickets

Bombay High Court quashes Maharashtra's orders banning convenience fees on online movie bookings, ruling that the state lacks legal authority under the MED Act

HC grants relief to Galderma against infringers using 'CETAPHIL' trademark

Bombay HC issues John Doe injunction allowing Galderma to take immediate action against counterfeit CETAPHIL products; seizures made in New Delhi and Mumbai

SC declines to quash FIR against HDFC Bank MD Sashidhar Jagdishan

The Supreme Court declined to intervene in the FIR against HDFC Bank MD Sashidhar Jagdishan as the Bombay High Court is set to hear the matter on 14 July

No fear of arrest as case is malafide, says HDFC Bank CEO's lawyer Rohatgi

Mukul Rohatgi, representing HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan, assures no threat of arrest, calls FIR "malafide" as Supreme Court defers case to Bombay High Court for hearing on July 14

Kolhapuri chappal row: PIL filed against Prada over summer collection

A PIL has been filed in Bombay HC against Prada for allegedly copying GI-tagged Kolhapuri chappals in its ₹1.2 lakh sandal line; petition seeks apology, compensation, and govt action on GI protection

SIT rules out foul play in Disha Salian case, Sanjay Raut demands apology

The SIT submitted its report to the Bombay High Court, stating that no evidence of murder or conspiracy was found in the case

Saying 'I Love You' not sexual intent, rules Bombay HC in Pocso case

Case dates back to 2015, when the accused allegedly approached a 17-year-old girl on her way home from school. According to the complaint, he held her hand, asked her name, and told her, "I love you"

Multiple HC benches recuse from hearing plea of HDFC Bank CEO in fraud case

Several benches of the Bombay High Court have recused from hearing HDFC Bank CEO and MD Sashidhar Jagdishan's plea to quash an FIR of cheating and fraud registered against him on a complaint filed by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust. While some judges cited having worked with either the Trust or the lawyers appearing for it, one judge on Thursday voluntarily disclosed that he held few shares of the HDFC Bank. Senior counsel Amit Desai appearing for Jagdishan said they do not have an objection with the same but counsel Niteen Pradhan appearing for the Trust took an objection. Pursuant to this, the bench of Justices M S Sonak and Jitendra Jain recused and said the matter shall be placed before another bench. According to the complaint filed by the Trust, which owns and manages the prominent Lilavati Hospital in Mumbai, Jagdishan allegedly accepted a bribe of Rs 2.05 crore in exchange for providing financial advice to help the Chetan Mehta Group retain illegal and undue ...

HCs not custodian of revenue department, says SC; stays Bombay HC order

High courts are not the "custodian" of the revenue department, the Supreme Court has said while dealing with a petition challenging a Bombay High Court order that stayed a tribunal's direction for a refund of Rs 256.45 crore to a firm. A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan observed that prima facie, the high court could not have stayed the order after holding that the appeal filed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Belapur Commissionerate, was not maintainable. "A high court is not the custodian of the revenue," the apex court, which stayed the high court's June 12 order, observed. "Prima facie, the high court could not have passed the order of stay after holding the appeal to be not maintainable and after recording that the writ petition and the appeal are disposed of as not pressed," the bench said in its order passed on June 20. The top court passed the order while hearing a plea filed by the firm, challenging the high court order. The bench noted that the