Delhi High Court

102,696 judgments

Year:

Through: Mr. Himanshu Sethi, SPC v. 782707 EX SGT ABHISHEK KUMAR SINGH

09 Feb 2026 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO; HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MAN... · 2026:DHC:1092-DB

Through: Mr. Nipun Arora, Adv v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

09 Feb 2026 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMI... · 2026:DHC:1111-DB

Through: Mr. Shlok Chandra, SSC, Ms. Naincy Jain and Ms. Madhavi Shukla, JSCs v. M/S NTPC LTD

09 Feb 2026 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD... · 2026:DHC:1220-DB

BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA v. KAMESWAR RAO

09 Feb 2026 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO; HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MAN... · 2026:DHC:1190-DB

SAUSS HOME PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED v. RECKITT BENCKISER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

07 Feb 2026 · C. HARI SHANKAR; OM PRAKASH SHUKLA · 2026:DHC:1507-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld an interlocutory injunction restraining the appellant from using a deceptively similar Flying Bird device mark, rejecting the appellant’s claim of prior user based on fabricated evidence and affirming territorial jurisdiction and principles of passing off.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off copyright infringement interlocutory injunction

Abishek Kumar v. Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited

07 Feb 2026 · Amit Bansal · 2026:DHC:1243

The Delhi High Court held that while IRCTC could terminate the contract and forfeit deposits for delayed payment, the one-year debarment penalty was disproportionate and quashed it, emphasizing fairness and proportionality in administrative penalties.

administrative petition_allowed Significant administrative penalty debarment proportionality doctrine natural justice

Manu Chaudhary v. Controller of Patents and Design

07 Feb 2026 · Jyoti Singh · 2026:DHC:1095

The Delhi High Court held that a patent application cannot be refused solely for non-submission of NBA approval if the applicant has applied for it and intimated the Controller, directing re-examination with opportunity to the applicant.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Patents Act 1970 National Biodiversity Authority approval Section 15 Patents Act Section 3(p) patentability

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited v. Union of India

07 Feb 2026 · Prathiba M. Singh; Madhu Jain · 2026:DHC:1045-DB

The Delhi High Court directed joint consultation between the Legal Metrology Department and the Drug Controller General of India to resolve conflicting mandates on mandatory vegetarian/non-vegetarian labeling of packaged cosmetics and toiletries before deciding on the validity of the impugned notification.

administrative other Significant Legal Metrology Rules vegetarian non-vegetarian labeling jurisdiction Drug Controller General of India

Sarita Batra v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

07 Feb 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:1082

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and summoning order under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, following amicable settlement between the parties and no objection from the complainant.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3(2)(va) wrongful confinement

Sanjeev Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

07 Feb 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:1081

The High Court held that a trial court must adjudicate condonation of delay applications before summoning the accused under Section 138 NI Act and set aside summoning and condonation orders passed otherwise, directing a fresh hearing.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 NI Act condonation of delay summoning order

Rajesh and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

07 Feb 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:1080

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking recall of the prosecutrix for further cross-examination in a child sexual assault case, emphasizing judicial restraint and protection of the child victim from repeated trauma.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 348 BNSS Section 311 Cr.P.C. POCSO Act child sexual assault

Omvir Singh v. Union of India

07 Feb 2026 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2011 SCC OnLine Del 3921
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that non-production of a journey ticket does not bar a bona fide passenger from statutory compensation under the Railways Act, 1989 for injuries sustained in an untoward incident, affirming strict liability of the Railways.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Section 124-A bona fide passenger statutory compensation

Rohit Lamba & Anr. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

07 Feb 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:1023

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash FIR alleging fraudulently obtained marriage and divorce, holding that false pleadings and misrepresentation constitute fraud on the court warranting legal action and exemplary costs.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant fraud on court void marriage false pleadings Section 498A IPC