Delhi High Court

28,224 judgments

Year:

Sunil Kumar Kandikuppa v. State of NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:306

Anticipatory bail granted in a cheating and forgery case involving a commercial dispute, with conditions to cooperate in investigation and furnish bond.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail Section 420 IPC Section 468 IPC Section 471 IPC

Sumrat @ Bahadur v. State of NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:303

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused implicated only in recovery of stolen property with limited evidence and no direct identification, emphasizing that prolonged custody without substantial reason is unjustified.

criminal appeal_allowed bail Section 411 IPC Section 413 IPC recovery of stolen property

Pradeep Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi)

14 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:309
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to an accused previously absconding, emphasizing that prolonged detention without framing charges and the nature of the offence justify release subject to strict conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed bail absconding proclaimed offender Section 498A IPC

King Goswami v. The State (Govt. NCT of Delhi)

14 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:308

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused, holding that mere failure to intervene in an assault without active participation and procedural lapses do not justify arrest.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail Section 109(1) BNS Section 3(5) BNS non-intervention

Arun Kumar Gautam v. State of GNCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:304

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a forgery and cheating case based on parity with co-accused and absence of opposition from the investigating agency.

criminal bail_granted bail parity forgery impersonation

NCC Limited v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited

14 Jan 2026 · Jasmeet Singh · 2026:DHC:322

The Delhi High Court held that the arbitrator's mandate under Section 29A starts from the date of last pleading including rejoinder, and extended the arbitrator's mandate by one year on sufficient cause despite respondent's allegations of misconduct.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 29A extension completion of pleadings rejoinder

Ernst and Young LLP v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Circle-1-2-2, New Delhi

14 Jan 2026 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2026:DHC:259-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that a virtual service permanent establishment is not recognized under the India-UK DTAA, set aside the withholding tax order, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

tax appeal_allowed Significant virtual service permanent establishment India-UK DTAA Section 195 Income Tax Act Nil Withholding Certificate

Nord Anglia Education Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle Int. Tax 2(2) (2), New Delhi

14 Jan 2026 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2026:DHC:257-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed the assessing officer's rejection of a Nil Withholding Certificate application for managerial services, holding that mandatory procedural requirements under Rule 28AA were not followed and binding Tribunal decisions must be respected unless set aside.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 197 Income-tax Act Rule 28AA Income-tax Rules Nil Withholding Certificate Fees for Technical Services

Arti Rani v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

14 Jan 2026 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2026:DHC:283-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the appellant was liable to pay enhanced license fees at 40%, not 100%, as per the applicable MCD resolution, setting aside the higher demand.

property appeal_allowed Significant license fee enhancement Municipal Corporation of Delhi Resolution No. 9 of 1986 Resolution No. 6 of 1986

M/S. M.V. OMNI PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD. v. Union of India through Executive Engineer CPWD

14 Jan 2026 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2026:DHC:287-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court affirmed that an arbitrator appointed unilaterally in violation of Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act without an express written waiver is ineligible, rendering the arbitral award liable to be set aside.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 12(5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act express agreement in writing arbitrator ineligibility unilateral appointment

Union of India v. Mago Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

14 Jan 2026 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2026:DHC:323
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, upholding the arbitral award granting loss of profit and material escalation claims to Mago Constructions, affirming limited judicial interference in arbitration awards.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge public policy coercion

Akash Bindal & Anr. v. State Through SHO and Ors.

13 Jan 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:332

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 289 and 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 based on a bona fide compromise between the accused and the deceased's legal representatives, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR compromise in criminal case Section 528 BNSS death due to negligence

Himanshu & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr

13 Jan 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:331

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a matrimonial dispute on the basis of a compromise and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute compromise Section 482 CrPC

Jamipal Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

13 Jan 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:330

The Delhi High Court disposed of the petition seeking quashing of FIR under Sections 279 and 338 IPC, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing exemption from personal appearance for the accused serving in CRPF.

criminal other quashing of FIR Section 279 IPC Section 338 IPC mechanical inspection report

Kamlesh v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

13 Jan 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:329

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR and criminal proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act against a Fair Price Shop licensee following license restoration and absence of further violations over a decade.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Essential Commodities Act, 1955 quashing of FIR Fair Price Shop license restoration

Rizwan & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

13 Jan 2026 · Manoj Jain · 2026:DHC:328

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC based on a compromise in a matrimonial dispute and the complainant's withdrawal of prosecution.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC compromise

National Highways Authority of India v. Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited

13 Jan 2026 · Dinesh Mehta; Vinod Kumar · 2026:DHC:320-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court allowed NHAI's appeal, holding that injunctions restraining contract termination in infrastructure projects should not be granted if they delay project completion, emphasizing public interest over contractor's commercial claims.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9 injunction infrastructure project contract termination

Suraj Singh v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi

13 Jan 2026 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2026:DHC:296

The High Court acquitted appellants convicted under Sections 326/34 IPC due to failure of prosecution to prove their identity and common intention beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant identity of accused common intention Section 326 IPC Section 34 IPC

Sohail Malik v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

13 Jan 2026 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2026:DHC:262

The High Court upheld the Magistrate’s discretionary refusal to order police investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. where the petitioner’s complaint did not warrant FIR registration, emphasizing judicial discretion to prevent misuse.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. FIR registration police investigation cognizable offence

Chaman Singh Verma & Ors. v. Dharam Yug

13 Jan 2026 · Anish Dayal · 2026:DHC:266

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and granted injunction protecting the appellants' right to use the common passage and stilt parking access from the front lane, holding that locking the gate by respondent no.1 unlawfully obstructed their easementary rights.

civil appeal_allowed Significant common passage easementary rights interim injunction collaboration agreement