Russia’s Lugovoy Law Meets Indian Enforcement: Bombay High Court Draws the Line
by Sanjeev Kapoor*, Dhritiman Roy** and Sania Abbasi***
by Sanjeev Kapoor*, Dhritiman Roy** and Sania Abbasi***
The Bombay High Court dismissed a review petition filed by a law student barred from appearing in semester examinations due to less than 75 per cent attendance, holding that the application merely sought to reargue issues already decided and failed to satisfy the requirements for review under Order XLVII CPC.
In writ petitions challenging notices issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 restraining landowners from obstructing drainage work, the Court held that the action constituted a statutory flood mitigation measure backed by law and did not amount to deprivation of property under Article 300-A, thereby rejecting the challenge.
“Bombay High Court allowed termination beyond 26 weeks based on the Medical Board’s finding of serious foetal abnormalities and the petitioner’s financial constraints.”
The Court held that the issue of how and at whose instance the forged judicial orders came into existence must first be investigated, and directed the Registrar General to lodge a police and cyber cell complaint, deferring consideration of the recall application until completion of the inquiry.
Bombay High Court, in a petition concerning enforcement of a service bond and issuance of a relieving letter to an aircraft technician trained under an airline arrangement, held that the Industrial Court’s interim order was unsustainable, emphasising that resignation in breach of the bond cannot compel the employer to issue such documents.
No surrender of tenancy without agreement or decree; Continuous acceptance of rent entitles tenant to repossession: Bombay HC
The Court held that tenancy cannot be said to have been surrendered in absence of a decree of eviction or a valid agreement evidencing surrender, and that temporary handing over of premises for a limited purpose does not extinguish tenancy rights, particularly when rent continued to be paid and accepted.
Know Thy Judge | Justice Prasanna B. Varale’s remarkable journey from Nippani to the Supreme Court of India
Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale’s journey from the small town of Nippani to the Supreme Court of India is a story of dedication, perseverance, and legal brilliance.
Whether a Shared Autorickshaw Used for Office Commute Constitutes a “Workplace” Under POSH Act? Bombay HC Answers
Bombay High Court considered the scope of “workplace” under the POSH Act in relation to an incident allegedly occurring during a shared autorickshaw commute to work.
Meena Kumar Rohra, a close associate of HDIL promoter Rakesh Kumar Wadhawan, was directed to disclose her assets on oath within four weeks, with the injunction restraining her from disposing of assets continuing in force.
The Bombay High Court granted leave to enable institution of a suit seeking protection against alleged infringement of Preity Zinta’s personality rights, copyright and reputation through AI-generated deepfakes, manipulated images, chatbot personas and other digital content disseminated online.
The Court held that landowners are entitled to compensation for land acquired for a service road in a National Highway widening project and directed payment of the compensation amount, holding the denial of compensation for such land to be arbitrary.
“Addressing the apprehension of auction sale of an arrested vessel, the Bombay High Court held that in view of the earlier auction process having failed due to technical reasons and the petitioner having made out a strong prima facie case, no auction of the vessel would be permissible at this stage.”
Observing that certain provisions of Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 were challenged for being ultra vires, the Court granted interim relief by restricting the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) from passing any coercive order against Anil Ambani.
In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 124(2) of the Constitution, the President appointed Justice Shree Chandrashekhar, Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, to be Judge of Supreme Court of India.
In the present case, the deceased had borrowed money from the creditors who allegedly pursued repayment, causing him stress and unusual behaviour. He later fell ill under suspicious circumstances and was declared dead, with allegations of suicide due to harassment.
The President of India has appointed 6 additional judges of Bombay High Court as Permanent Judges of the Bombay High Court on 6 June 2026.
The Court held that once a company ceases to exist pursuant to amalgamation, proceedings cannot be continued and an assessment order cannot be passed in its name.
Noting that nine years of complete inaction, with only vague references to settlement talks, constituted an implied abandonment terminating the proceedings under Section 32(2)(c), the Bombay High Court dismissed the application for substitution.
The Bombay High Court noted that since the FIR was registered under Section 376 IPC without prima facie examination of the allegations and given the unexplained delay and contradictions in the victim’s statements, the prosecution case lacked legal foundation and the conviction was liable to be set aside.