Delhi High Court
94,045 judgments
Shadab Anjum & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of unauthorized occupants of Waqf property who had given an undertaking to vacate, holding that the property belongs to the Waqf Board and the appeal was an abuse of process.
SZF EXPORTS PVT LTD AND ANR v. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the DRT order, directing the petitioners to pursue their appeal before the functional DRAT.
Trinity Alternative Investment Managers Ltd. v. Directorate of Enforcement
The Delhi High Court dismissed PMLA appeals for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that appeals must be filed before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the appellant resides or carries on business as per Section 42 of the PMLA.
North Delhi Metro Mall Pvt. Ltd. v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the petitioner’s contractual right to service access from Timarpur Road to its commercial plot, directing DMRC to ensure such access and rejecting respondent’s claim to exclusive rights.
Gaurav Singal v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of abetting disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, emphasizing bail as the rule and requiring exceptional circumstances for denial.
Sashi Kumar Nagaraji & Ors. v. M/S Magnifico Minerals Pvt Ltd & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed summoning orders against company directors in cheque dishonour cases for lack of specific allegations and failure to apply mind, affirming that mere directorship does not attract liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Smt. Rajesh & Anr. v. State
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal of Smt. Rajesh, setting aside her murder conviction due to inconsistencies in prosecution evidence and granting her benefit of doubt.
Sandeep alias Baba alias Imran v. State
The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants in a murder case due to failure of prosecution to conclusively prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a circumstantial evidence case.
Bablu v. State NCT of Delhi
Delhi High Court modified appellants' conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, holding that the assault was in heat of passion without premeditation.
Navi v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for murder based on the appellant's conduct, forensic DNA evidence, and post mortem report, dismissing the appeal challenging the admissibility of confession and forensic evidence.
Liyakat Ali v. The State of NCT Delhi
The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of murder and related charges due to insufficient and inconclusive circumstantial and DNA evidence, emphasizing the need for conclusive proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Narender v. State
Delhi High Court upheld convictions of four appellants for murder based on credible eyewitness and forensic evidence but acquitted one appellant due to identity doubts.
Madhu Bala v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the murder conviction of Madhu Bala, ruling that appeals by accused persons of unsound mind must be postponed until fitness to defend is established, and affirmed the admissibility of dying declarations recorded by police.
Jagdish v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder based on circumstantial and DNA evidence, emphasizing the accused's failure to discharge the burden under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Jitender alias Vikash alias Allu v. The State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction based on a voluntary and truthful dying declaration recorded by police in presence of a doctor, affirming that such declaration can be sole basis for murder conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Nikhil Rana v. State
The Delhi High Court set aside the murder conviction of Nikhil Rana due to incomplete circumstantial evidence and unreliable ballistic and mobile phone data, dismissing conspiracy charges against all accused.
Sandeep @ Sandy v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of six appellants for the murder of ASI Jogender and Munesh, affirming the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence including CCTV identification and recovery of weapons.
Anil Kumar v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal upholding the appellant's conviction for murder and related offences based on credible CCTV evidence, forensic reports, and admissions under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Umakant alias Anil Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the murder conviction of appellant Umakant based on circumstantial evidence and modified the sentence of co-accused Sumit Kumar, affirming that absence of direct cause of death or corpus delicti does not preclude conviction when the chain of circumstances is complete.
Raj Kumar & Anr. v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for rape and related offences based on the credible sole testimony of the prosecutrix despite absence of DNA corroboration, modifying the sentence for rape from 30 to 20 years imprisonment.