Delhi High Court

58,912 judgments

Year:

Tapas Chatterjee v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.

06 Oct 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:8824-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a patent application for a process recovering potassium sulphate from distillery effluent, holding it obvious and non-patentable under Section 3(d) for lacking inventive step and new reactants or products.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant patentability inventive step Section 3(d) prior art

EX CT/GD Ajit Singh v. Union of India

06 Oct 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:8802-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a government servant dismissed for unauthorized absence is entitled to compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the CCS (Pension) Rules unless misconduct involves moral turpitude or corruption.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate allowance Rule 41 CCS Pension Rules dismissal from service unauthorized absence

Rahul Tomar v. State

06 Oct 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:8856

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for rape based on credible prosecutrix testimony corroborated by DNA evidence, dismissing the appellant's challenge on delay and defence of consensual relations.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape Section 376 IPC delay in reporting DNA evidence

Dharmender Kumar v. State and Anr

27 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:8741

The Delhi High Court held that once charges are framed by the trial court, the FIR cannot be quashed by writ petition under Article 226 or Section 482 CrPC, and the petitioner must challenge judicial orders through statutory remedies.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR charge framing Article 226 Constitution Section 482 CrPC

Ekoh Collins Chidubem v. Narcotics Control Bureau

27 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3006

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail applications of accused in a commercial heroin trafficking case, holding that statutory bail bar under Section 37 NDPS Act applies and procedural irregularities do not vitiate prosecution.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail NDPS Act commercial quantity Section 37 NDPS

Pinki v. The State of NCT of Delhi; Ayush Bhedda v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

27 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of cheating and forgery in a partnership dispute, holding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given pending arbitration and cooperation with investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail partnership dispute cheating forgery

Tara Dutt v. State

26 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:9422

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Tara Dutt for abetment of bribery under Section 12 PC Act but acquitted co-accused Mukul Kumar and Ramesh Kumar due to insufficient evidence of conspiracy or abetment.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 12 PC Act Section 120B IPC Criminal conspiracy

State of NCT of Delhi v. Tauhid Khan; Ashhab Khan; Mohd. Tabrez

26 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:9334
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a narcotics case due to procedural lapses, inadmissible electronic evidence, and lack of independent witnesses, emphasizing strict compliance with NDPS Act safeguards.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act secret information Section 42 NDPS Act Section 65B Evidence Act

MS PLASTICOTES INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED v. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE & ORS

26 Sep 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:9044

The Delhi High Court directed DGFT to review and rationalize the eligibility criteria and allocation process for gold import TRQs under India-UAE CEPA, ensuring fairness, transparency, and adherence to natural justice.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Tariff Rate Quota Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Directorate General of Foreign Trade Eligibility Criteria

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Workmen

26 Sep 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Vimal Kumar Yadav · 2025:DHC:9026-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed NDMC's appeal against the unreasoned order refusing restoration of a writ petition dismissed in default after an inordinate delay without sufficient cause, emphasizing strict adherence to limitation laws.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant restoration of writ petition condonation of delay limitation period Section 5 Limitation Act

Hanu Faujdar v. State and Ors.

26 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 158(200) DLT 713

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a duly executed and registered Will, rejecting allegations of forgery and mental incapacity, and granted the petitioner letter of administration over the testator's estate.

civil petition_allowed Significant Indian Succession Act Will execution letter of administration sound mind

Kapil Chopra v. Sanjiv Rawal

26 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8957
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal complaint and summoning order under Sections 288 and 506 IPC, holding that the collapse of an old wall due to natural causes without ongoing repair does not attract criminal liability and vague intimidation allegations were insufficient.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 288 IPC criminal intimidation Section 506 IPC quashing of complaint

People Media Factory Private Limited v. Ivy Entertainment Private Limited

26 Sep 2025 · Tejas Karia, J.

The Delhi High Court recorded a settlement between film production and rights acquisition companies, referred their disputes to arbitration, and disposed of related suits with interim arrangements governing payments and rights.

intellectual_property settled Procedural Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Copyright Film Rights Assignment Agreement Theatrical Rights Acquisition Agreement

MERCK SHARP AND DOHME LLC v. BIOLOGICAL E. LIMITED & ANR.

26 Sep 2025 · Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:8698
Cites 6 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court holds it has territorial jurisdiction to entertain rectification petitions filed prior to suit challenging trademarks registered in Mumbai, and Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act does not bar issuance of notice absent suit prior to petitions.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 124 territorial jurisdiction rectification petition

Valent Biosciences LLC v. The Controller of Patents and Designs and Anr

26 Sep 2025 · Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:8670

The Delhi High Court allowed the patent appeal, holding that the claimed synergistic pest control method involves an inventive step and does not fall under the non-patentable 'method of agriculture' exclusion under Section 3(h) of the Patents Act.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant patentability inventive step synergistic combination Section 3(h) Patents Act

Major Anish Muralidhar v. EX NK MACP HAV M Krishna Moorthy

26 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · (2025) 318 DLT 711
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for CAD to an ex-serviceman, affirming the presumption of attributability to military service and limiting its review to errors of law apparent on record.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disability pension armed forces coronary artery disease medical board

Ultrahuman Healthcare Pvt Ltd v. Oura Health Oy & Anr

26 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8713-DB

The High Court quashed the premature dismissal of a commercial suit without issuance of summons and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed dismissal at threshold issuance of summons remand fresh consideration

Union of India v. WO Bharat Singh Retd

26 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8804-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's petition and upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension to a retired servicemember suffering from Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption that such disability is attributable to military service absent contrary proof.

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

Upkar Singh v. Siri Kishan Gupta

26 Sep 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:8642
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed the landlord's revision petition setting aside the dismissal of eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act, holding that family disputes cannot be considered in bona fide requirement claims and alternate accommodation must be reasonably suitable.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide requirement eviction petition

Mahabir Singh v. UOI & Anr.

26 Sep 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:8793

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act to Rs. 2,07,500 per Bigha, applying uniform rates to all affected villages and directing payment of balance amounts with statutory benefits.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation enhancement fair market value Section 28A