Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Lal Mohammad v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Others

10 Oct 2025 · Vivek Chaudhary; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:9090-DB

The Court held that a major missing person’s autonomous choice to reside with her husband must be respected, and no further custody order is warranted in a Habeas Corpus petition filed by her parent.

constitutional petition_dismissed Habeas Corpus majority autonomy Section 164 Cr.P.C.

Trushtima Sharma v. The State of NCT of Delhi

10 Oct 2025 · Vivek Chaudhary; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:9089-DB

The court dismissed the Habeas Corpus petition after the alleged detainee appeared in person and denied illegal detention, holding no further relief was warranted.

constitutional petition_dismissed Habeas Corpus Article 226 illegal detention voluntary appearance

Priya Narayanan & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr

10 Oct 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:9022

The Delhi High Court held that a prompt in-house enquiry causing brief delay does not attract penal liability under Section 21 of the POCSO Act and quashed charges framed against school authorities for failure to report the offence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act Section 21 POCSO framing of charges Section 227 CrPC

Nishant Mukul v. Nischal Aggarwal

10 Oct 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:9023

The Delhi High Court held that a director who was in charge at the time of issuance of dishonored cheques can be held liable under Section 138/141 NI Act, and pre-trial quashing is inappropriate absent unimpeachable evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 141 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 CrPC quashing of complaint

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Geetanjali Yadav

10 Oct 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8970-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing appointment of a candidate excluded due to a minor technical error in the application form, emphasizing that trivial mistakes not affecting substantive eligibility should not bar selection.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant eligibility criteria application form error B.El.Ed qualification B.Ed qualification

Himanshu Yadav and Anr. v. A.I.I.M.S & Anr.

10 Oct 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8969-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld rejection of candidates' OBC-NCL certificates issued outside the prescribed validity period, affirming strict adherence to recruitment advertisement conditions for reservation eligibility.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant OBC-NCL certificate validity reservation eligibility recruitment advertisement conditions certificate issuance date

Sh. Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India

10 Oct 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8971-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition of a daily wager with over eleven years of continuous service, directing his regularisation as a one-time measure under the principles of Umadevi and Article 14 fairness.

labor appeal_allowed Significant regularisation daily wager compassionate appointment Umadevi judgment

Sushma Sahni v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

10 Oct 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:9017

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Sh. Rishant Sadh & Ors. v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr

10 Oct 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:9016

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Anirudh Dawar & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

10 Oct 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:9002

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 377, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Krishan Kumar Vats v. Shobha Ram Vats & Ors.

10 Oct 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:9051

The Delhi High Court held that the suit property is the individual property of Defendant No. 1 and not joint Hindu family property, rejecting the Plaintiff's partition suit and upholding the validity of the gift deed and will executed by Defendant No. 1.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Hindu Succession Act 1956 joint Hindu family property self-acquired property Order VII Rule 11 CPC

Divyanshu Kalra & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

10 Oct 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:9003

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Alkem Laboratories Ltd. v. Alchem International Pvt. Ltd.

10 Oct 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:8992

The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the deceptively similar trademark 'ALCHEM' for pharmaceutical products, rejecting the defence of acquiescence and delay.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off acquiescence interim injunction

Vinod Kumar & Ors. v. State Through SHO Sangam Vihar South Delhi & Anr.

10 Oct 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:9004

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Kuldeep Singh Dabas v. GNCT of Delhi

10 Oct 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8982-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pay re-fixation orders affecting an employee's emoluments must be preceded by a show-cause notice and allowed the petitioner to challenge the pay re-fixation afresh, setting aside the Tribunal's limited order on recovery.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme MACP pay re-fixation show-cause notice

Union of India v. S K Jasra

10 Oct 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8985-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order setting aside a chargesheet issued without disciplinary authority approval, affirming that such a chargesheet is void ab initio and cannot be retrospectively validated.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant chargesheet approval disciplinary proceedings CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 Rule 14(3)

Mr. Durga Dutt, Mr. Sahib Kochhar, Ms. Shayal Anand, Mr. Sai Manik Sud and Mr. Aryan Mishra v. Union of India and Anr

10 Oct 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:9049-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and dismissal of a BSF officer for attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC, rejecting his claim of accidental firing and affirming limited judicial interference in Security Force Court proceedings.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Security Force Court Border Security Force Act Section 307 IPC attempt to murder

Suresh Sankhla v. Union of India and Ors.

10 Oct 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Vimal Kumar Yadav · 2025:DHC:9046-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of the petitioner's representations against adverse performance appraisal remarks, holding that no reasons are mandatorily required to be recorded or communicated in such administrative orders and that subjective assessments warrant judicial deference.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant performance appraisal adverse remarks representation rejection subjective assessment

Sub Krishan Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Oct 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Vimal Kumar Yadav · 2025:DHC:9048-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the disciplinary punishment and discharge of a military serviceman for disobedience of lawful command, affirming limited judicial interference in Army Act proceedings while directing pension formalities to be completed.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Army Act, 1950 Section 41(2) Disobedience to lawful command Summary trial

Abhijeet Adhikari v. The State Govt of NCT Delhi

10 Oct 2025 · Vivek Chaudhary; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:9038-DB

The Delhi High Court suspended the life imprisonment sentence of a convicted murderer during the pendency of appeal, relying on prolonged incarceration, defense of suicidal death, and absence of external injuries.

criminal sentence_modified Significant suspension of sentence Section 430 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 Section 302 IPC homicidal strangulation