Topic
The Gujarat High Court hears appeals and original jurisdiction matters under Indian law within the state of Gujarat, including disputes involving tribal rights, maintenance, negotiable instruments, and administrative remedies.
The Gujarat High Court ruled that a minor’s temporary move due to a parent’s job transfer does not break continuous residence for a domicile certificate. It quashed the rejection and ordered issuance within three weeks, affecting minors facing parental transfers.
Advocates providing legal services are exempt from service tax under Notifications 25/2012-ST and 30/2012-ST, as held by the Gujarat High Court, which quashed tax demands under the Finance (Service Tax) Act, 1994. This removes service tax liability on advocates' professional fees across the state.
Assessing officers cannot invoke Section 148 to reopen returns when the material originates from a search conducted before 31 March 2021; such cases fall within the block period of Section 153C. This limits revenue’s power to reassess older assessments and guides practitioners on the correct statutory basis. Taxpayers with assessments from that period are protected from improper reopening.
Under Section 195 of the CrPC, a police FIR alleging obstruction of a public servant is invalid unless the servant files a written complaint; the Gujarat High Court therefore quashed the FIR. The ruling bars cognizance of such offences without the statutory complaint, protecting accused persons from unwarranted prosecution.
Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 306 and 107 IPC, ruling that mere harassment without a proximate act or specific intent cannot constitute abetment of suicide. This narrows the scope of criminal liability for alleged harassers and safeguards individuals from frivolous suicide-abetment prosecutions.
The Gujarat High Court ruled that a District Valuation Committee report is valid evidence for compensation when sale deeds are missing, and upheld the 60 % market-value deduction with a 10 % annual escalation. This sets a clear valuation method for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, affecting both landowners and acquiring authorities.
Gujarat HC ruled that the complainant in a cheque-bounce matter is the victim and may file an appeal against an acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, directing the case be transferred to the Sessions Court. This expands the victim’s procedural rights in NI Act prosecutions.
Gujarat High Court ruled that an insurer cannot be compelled to pay interest on workmen's compensation when the employer-liability policy expressly excludes such liability. The decision overturns the Labour Court's interest award, reinforcing the primacy of policy terms. Employers and insurers must review policy wording to avoid unexpected interest obligations.
The Gujarat High Court held that interest on excess compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act accrues from the date of the Special Land Acquisition Officer’s award (or permanent possession), not from the date of temporary possession. This limits claimants' interest entitlement and clarifies future compensation calculations in land-acquisition cases.
The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR for wildlife offences, ruling that Section 55 mandates a formal complaint by a statutorily authorised officer for cognizance, not a police-style FIR. The decision reinforces that special statutes with specific complaint procedures oust the general CrPC framework, barring proceedings initiated without jurisdictional foundation.
Gujarat HC struck down notifications that retroactively stripped exporters of Service Exports from India Scheme benefits, ruling that Section 5 of the Foreign Trade Act cannot be applied retrospectively. The decision safeguards vested export incentives for firms relying on SEIS.
The Gujarat High Court set aside a 2019 Section 148 notice, ruling that without new, concrete material a tax authority cannot reopen an assessment merely on a revised opinion. This reinforces that any reassessment must be backed by fresh evidence, protecting taxpayers from arbitrary reopening.
The Gujarat High Court ruled that a co-owner of a joint account cannot be charged under Section 138 NI Act unless their signature appears on the cheque, limiting liability to the actual drawer. This safeguards joint account holders from criminal prosecution for cheques they did not sign.
Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal, noting that while Sec 50 mandates informing a suspect of the right to be searched before a gazetted officer or magistrate, failure to do so alone does not invalidate a trial court's finding of reasonable doubt. The ruling limits the fatal impact of such procedural lapses in NDPS cases.
The Gujarat High Court set aside the FIR and charge-sheet, ruling that a civil property dispute cannot be transformed into a criminal case, and invoked its power under Section 482 CrPC to curb abuse of process. This safeguards subsequent land purchasers and others from criminal prosecution over purely civil title matters.