Tag: Bombay High Court

Bench grants interim stay as it find substance in petitioner’s arguments against State’s move to impose SC/ST/OBC quotas on open seats in minority colleges

Vacation bench says detention of Indian-born girl unjustified; invokes principles of due process, liberty, and jurisdictional restraint under Foreigners Act and May 2025 Central Government Resolution

In a landmark judgement delivered on May 6, Maksud Gaffur Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay HC reaffirmed the legal sanctity of continuing and specific consent and rejected character assassination of survivors/victims in rape trials

Comedian cannot be arrested during pendency of FIR quashing plea; Court directs Mumbai Police to question him only in Chennai and bars trial proceedings if chargesheet is filed

Comedian argues that the FIR is a misuse of state power to silence dissent; Court notes arrest not warranted under BNSS summons, reserves order on plea to quash FIR.

In a scathing indictment of State inaction and custodial impunity, the Court affirms the constitutional duty to investigate alleged extrajudicial killings—regardless of the victim’s social standing or the State’s silence

Key guidelines were recently issued by the Bombay High Court through a bail order, in a case concerning a young accused

The recent Bombay High Court judgment (23rd January 2025) addresses the contentious issue of the use of loudspeakers at places of worship and their legal standing under Article 25 of the Constitution. The case was initiated following complaints by residents about persistent noise pollution caused by loudspeakers from religious institutions (masjids), particularly during early morning and late-night hours. The court examined whether such practices constituted an essential religious function or merely a cultural practice subject to regulation under existing noise pollution laws. The court ruled that loudspeakers are not an essential part of religious practice and directed the Maharashtra government and police to take strict action against violations of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. This ruling aligns with past judicial pronouncements while also raising questions about unequal enforcement of noise regulations across different religious communities.

Their freedom comes after years of judicial neglect and the systemic abuse of laws to silence opposition; highlights the weaponisation of anti-terror laws to crush dissent and derail justice.

After over six years in custody without charges being framed, the High Court cites prolonged detention and trial delays as grounds for bail, imposing strict conditions on the accused.