Delhi High Court

29,724 judgments

Year:

Dhurv Parsad Gupta v. State

17 Nov 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:10562-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a murder case due to failure of the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of evidence and the relevance of motive.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence murder Section 302 IPC recovery of evidence

Sunny Bharal & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10400

The Delhi High Court quashed a noncompoundable matrimonial offence FIR on compromise grounds under its inherent powers, emphasizing the ends of justice and non-prejudice to minor's rights.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC inherent powers of High Court Section 528 BNSS

Tanveer Khan & Ors. v. The State Govt. of NCT Delhi & Anr.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10401

The Delhi High Court quashed a noncompoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC inherent powers Section 528 BNSS

Atul Pratap Singh v. The State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10383

The Delhi High Court quashed a noncompoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Section 498A IPC based on an amicable settlement, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to prevent abuse of court process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC inherent powers of High Court Section 528 BNSS

Vikas Aggarwal & Anr. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10381

The Delhi High Court quashed FIRs under various IPC sections arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to prevent abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Section 528 BNSS non-compoundable offences

Prabhjot Singh and Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10384

The Delhi High Court quashed a noncompoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Section 498A IPC on the ground of amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to prevent abuse of court process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC inherent powers Section 528 BNSS

Sahil Gupta & Anr. v. State Through SHO PS Bindapur & Ors.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10385

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 354 IPC and 8 POCSO Act on compromise grounds, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, while imposing costs to serve justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 354 IPC Section 8 POCSO Act non-compoundable offences

State v. Sameer @ Pauwa

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10373

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's petition for leave to appeal against acquittal in a robbery case, holding that material contradictions and lack of corroboration entitled the accused to benefit of doubt.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 378 CrPC Acquittal Benefit of doubt Material contradictions

Mamraj v. The Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10380

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 354B, and 509 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, emphasizing the inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Section 528 BNSS compromise

Arun Kumar v. Subhash Chand & Ors.

17 Nov 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:10338

The Delhi High Court rejected the plaint for partition of properties as HUF assets due to failure to plead the creation or existence of an HUF post the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, holding that such bald assertions do not disclose a cause of action.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Hindu Undivided Family HUF properties Hindu Succession Act 1956 Order VII Rule 11 CPC

Ashish Kumar @ Vishnu Dev v. State

17 Nov 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:10336

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant due to failure of the prosecution to conclusively establish his identity beyond reasonable doubt in a molestation case.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant identification benefit of doubt molestation CCTV evidence

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Geeta

17 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10229-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order setting aside the removal from service of a missing employee presumed dead, directing grant of family pension and benefits to his wife.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant presumption of death Section 108 Indian Evidence Act disciplinary proceedings removal from service

Azidul Hoque & Ors. v. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd & Ors.

17 Nov 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:10213

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking electricity connection on private land occupied without ownership rights, holding that proof of ownership is mandatory outside notified JJ Clusters and illegal occupants cannot claim connection as a matter of right.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant electricity connection Jhuggi Jhopri Cluster proof of ownership Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission Regulations 2017

Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh; Ms. Aliza Alam; Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat v. Sh Mohinder Singh Lohia

17 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10205-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order directing pay fixation implementation for respondents, holding that a subsequent Supreme Court ruling cannot reopen an already implemented and unchallenged pay fixation order.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant pay fixation increment Fundamental Rule 22 Central Administrative Tribunal

Karan Luthra v. Late Shri M. K. Subba

17 Nov 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:10163-DB

The High Court held that a suit for specific performance is not barred by limitation unless there is an explicit and communicated refusal to perform, and silence or non-response does not constitute refusal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance limitation Article 54 Limitation Act Order VII Rule 11 CPC

Siddharth Goswami; Geetanjali Reddy; Aditya Sachdeva v. M/S Manmohan Singh Wadhwa Constructions Pvt Ltd

17 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:10181-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi's commercial appeal due to a 99-day delay in filing, holding that in commercial matters delay must be short and accompanied by bona fide and non-negligent conduct to be condoned.

commercial appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay commercial appeal limitation period bona fide

Manish Kumar Singh and Mritunjay v. Sarat Chandra Panda

17 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 318 (2025) DLT 711
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption of sound health at entry and limiting writ interference to errors of law apparent on record.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension primary hypertension armed forces tribunal certiorari jurisdiction

Anish Muralidhar v. Ex NB Sub Dori Lal

17 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 318 (2025) DLT 711
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption that such disability is service-related absent contrary proof and limiting its review to errors of law under certiorari jurisdiction.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Primary Hypertension Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board

Singh and Sgt. Mritunjay v. Sgt. Ranvir

17 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 318 (2025) DLT 711
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption of service connection absent proof to the contrary and limiting its review to jurisdictional errors under certiorari.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Primary Hypertension Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board

Amarjeet Rana & Ors. v. Gulshan Verma (Deceased) Through LRs & Ors.

17 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:10190-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the execution court's order attaching property held under unregistered GPAs, ruling that such possession does not confer ownership to obstruct decree execution.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant execution proceedings attachment of property General Power of Attorney registered sale deed