IPC 494 cannot be sustained just by mere admission of second marriage by husband but it has to be proved by the complainant-wife that such second marriage was valid marriage as per Hindu Marriage Act.
Vidyasagar Irappa Mane Vs The State of Maharashtra on 13 April 2018Category: High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification
Sanjay Damodar Kale Vs Kalyani Sanjay Kale and Anr on 26 May 2020
Nothing fancy in this judgment. A high court granted (rather reduced) maintenance to a working and earning (Beauty parlour) ex-wife who got MCD in 2007… to be paid from 2016 onwards.
Sanjay Damodar Kale Vs Kalyani Sanjay Kale and Anr on 26 May 2020Abuzar Shaikh Abdul Kalam Vs State of Maharashtra on 27 April 2020
Interesting case… A muslim man alleges indecent behavior by members of Tablighi Jamaat and as a consequence, he himself got booked by Police. In the following Order, he got Anticipatory bail from Bombay High Court.
Abuzar Shaikh Abdul Kalam Vs State of Maharashtra on 27 April 2020Citations:
Other Source links:
Ishwar Patange Vs State of Maharashtra on 11 March 2020
Bombay High Court held that since there is no natural calamity, there is no need to postpone, elections for Cooperative Societies.
Ishwar Patange Vs State of Maharashtra on 11 March 2020Citations: [(
Other Source links:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
State of Maharashtra Vs Ramchandra Bhikaji Wagh on 26 February 2020
State of Maharashtra Vs Ramchandra Bhikaji Wagh on 26 February 2020
Citations: [2
Other Source links:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Sanjay Vs State of Maharashtra on 13 January 2020
Bombay High Court held that, though
Sanjay Vs State of Maharashtra on 13 January 2020the Judge may come to a conclusion that, the question is not relevant at that stage, however possibility cannot be ruled out that the said question may become relevant at the later stage, and therefore, it was requested to the Court that, all the questions be taken and subject to objections the answers be taken and then the relevancy or admissibility of the questions may be later on considered.
…
It was also requested to the learned Judge that, in view of the procedure laid down in Bipin Panchal’s case (Supra) the evidence may be recorded even after the objection is raised so that the Appellate Court should be benefited, if it is found at a later stage that any question was or questions were relevant.
Citations:
Other Source links: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/84446763/
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Gopal Naidu and another Vs King-Emperor on 22 December 1922
Bombay High Court holds that,
“the purpose of the codified statute is that on any point specifically dealt with by it the law shall be ascertained by interpreting the language used.“
and,
The Indian Penal Code defines the offence and also states what matters will afford a defence, and therefore it may be said that this Code deals specifically with the question, and it follows that the Court is not entitled to invoke the Common Law of England in the matter at all.
Gopal Naidu and another Vs King-Emperor on 22 December 1922 ILRIndian Law Reports version:
Gopal Naidu and another Vs King-Emperor on 22 December 1922 CasemineCasemine version:
Citations: [(1923) ILR 46 Bom 605], [A. I. R. (10) 1923 Mad. 523 (F. B.)],
Other Source links: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/338846/ or https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5721afa7607dba2e3c8879c8
The Index for Defamation Judgments is here.
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Pratap Lal Teli Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors on 22 Oct, 2019
Pratap Lal Teli Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors on 22 Oct, 2019
Citations:
Indiankanoon.org link:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Santosh Machindra Mulik Vs Mohini Mithu Choudhari on 15 November, 2019
Santosh Machindra Mulik Vs Mohini Mithu Choudhari on 15 November, 2019
Citations:
Indiankanoon.org link:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
