Search Results

The Court held that the criminal cases were an abuse of the process of law and were driven by a vengeful complainant rather than any prosecutable offence.

The Maharashtra Advocate General and the Centre's counsel on May 8 told the Court that an Advocate Protection Bill is already under consideration and urged against issuing any directions on the issue. ...

The Bombay High Court currently has 78 judges against the approved strength of 94 judges.

The petitioner had contended that the board's composition violated a 2025 amendment to the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, which capped the number of life-trustees in public trust boards.

The Court expressed shock at the police affidavit filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police.

The Court ruled that the State government's approach was legally sound and in consonance with the Supreme Court's directives.

Justice Milind N Jadhav found the Corporation’s pace of action particularly troubling, noting that the entire process from notice to demolition was completed in just 13 days.

The Court held that the Supreme Court’s landmark Goa Foundation ruling bars revival of Goa mining leases after November 22, 2007.

The judge faulted Mumbai Police for failing to trace who forged the High Court orders.

The Court flagged the increasing trend of citizens being compelled to approach constitutional courts for technical irregularities including biometric anomalies in their Aadhaar records.

The plea says that the present board's composition violates a legal cap on the number of permissible life-trustees.

“There is certainly a need for an area-wise systematic and scientific approach to be adopted to phase-wise do away with the slums in Mumbai,” the Court added.

The Court said that acquittals can’t be set aside in a casual or cavalier manner or merely because another view is possible on the same evidence.

Such disparity would be Constitutional untenable, the Aurangabad bench of the High Court opined.

ILS challenged the communications of April 13 and 15, 2026 which called upon the College to refund ₹1,04,863 with interest to a student.

A division bench of Chief Justice and Justice Gautam Ankhad dismissed the appeals filed by Shaikh's brothers Rubabuddin and Nayabuddin.