Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Manish Kumar and Anr. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Another

25 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8624

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in matrimonial disputes.

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

Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. v. The State of Delhi & Anr.

25 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8639

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under dowry harassment and related offences following an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Simranpal Singh Dua and Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

25 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8602

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

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Abhilash Agrawal and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

25 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8601

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 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

Dhruv Rai Sahore & Ors. v. State of GNCT of Delhi & Anr.

25 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8611

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 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 quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Mohd Tahir Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)

25 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8605
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of Mohd. Tahir Hussain in a communal riots and murder case, holding that prima facie evidence of his role as instigator and conspirator outweighs grounds for bail despite prolonged incarceration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail communal riots instigation conspiracy

Shardha Nand Bansal v. Ashok Kumar Bhalla

25 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8607

The Delhi High Court upheld conviction under Section 138 NI Act, holding that issuance of cheques revives even time-barred debts as legally enforceable liabilities and the petitioner failed to rebut statutory presumptions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act time-barred debt Section 25(3) Indian Contract Act statutory presumption Section 139 NI Act

Pabitra Narayan Pradhan v. State of NCT of Delhi

25 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8609

Bail denied to the petitioner, the mastermind of a spurious cancer medicines racket, due to gravity of offences, territorial jurisdiction of Delhi Police, and his central role despite prolonged incarceration and delay in trial.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail spurious medicines kingpin territorial jurisdiction

Brightstar Telecommunications India Ltd. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

25 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR against a company and its directors for alleged forgery and cheating involving blank signed cheques, holding the dispute to be civil in nature without prima facie criminal offence.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC forgery cheating

Union of India & Anr. v. Sunil Kumar

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:6244-DB

The High Court allowed an application to correct the record of a judgment by reflecting the appearance of the petitioners' counsel omitted in the original order.

other other Procedural appearance of counsel correction of judgment clerical error judicial record

Union of India & Ors. v. Ramesh Chandra Shukla

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8503-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that promotion takes effect only from the date it is granted and not from the date of recommendation, dismissing the claim for retrospective promotion absent mala fide delay.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant notional promotion Departmental Promotion Committee retrospective promotion Non Functional Upgradation

Rohit Dandriyal & Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India & Anr.

24 Sep 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court directed the RBI to implement accessibility measures for visually impaired persons in currency notes and digital financial services, while recognizing currency redesign as a complex policy matter beyond judicial mandate.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant visually impaired currency note accessibility digital financial services Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016

Nikhil Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

24 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:8537

The Delhi High Court dismissed the fifth anticipatory bail application of accused Nikhil Jain in a property fraud case, holding no change in circumstances post dismissal of earlier bail pleas and censuring judicial and investigative lapses.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail change in circumstances concealment of facts judicial indiscipline

State NCT of Delhi v. Karnail Singh

24 Sep 2025 · Vivek Chaudhary; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:8557-DB

The High Court upheld the acquittal of an accused in a minor sexual assault case due to lack of corroborative evidence and inconsistent testimony, emphasizing limited appellate interference in acquittals.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant acquittal sexual assault minor hostile witness

A.R. Rahman v. Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar & Ors.

24 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025: DHC:2907

The Delhi High Court upheld interim relief recognizing the plaintiff’s prima facie authorship and copyright in the Indian classical musical composition “Shiva Stuti,” affirming protection of original compositions transmitted orally and directing credit attribution in the impugned song.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant copyright infringement Indian classical music Dagarvani Dhrupad authorship

Sheikh Habil v. State

24 Sep 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:8533

Conviction for kidnapping and rape set aside due to denial of effective legal representation and failure to cross-examine prosecution witnesses, violating the accused's right to a fair trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant right to legal representation cross-examination fair trial kidnapping

Sh Inderjeet Singh v. Kaushalya Devi and Ors

24 Sep 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:8845-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant's suit for damages challenging a final eviction order, holding that such matters are barred by res judicata and limitation and do not disclose a valid cause of action under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC eviction proceedings res judicata Delhi Rent Control Act

Rajnish v. State NCT of Delhi

24 Sep 2025 · Sanjeev Narula · 2025:DHC:8789
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for kidnapping and repeated sexual assault of a minor under the POCSO Act, affirming the prosecutrix’s credible testimony and statutory presumptions regarding age and consent.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act minor victim sexual assault sterling witness

Sh. Naresh Chand Gupta & Anr. v. Vigneshwara Developers Pvt. Ltd.

24 Sep 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju

The Delhi High Court directed transfer of pending winding up petitions against Vigneshwara Developers Pvt. Ltd. from the High Court to the National Company Law Tribunal under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 for further adjudication.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Companies Act, 1956 Companies Act, 2013 Section 434 winding up

Union of India & Ors. v. Sh Shubham Kumar

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8644-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a retest for a candidate affected by a technical glitch during a recruitment Skill/Typing Test, emphasizing fairness and discretion in procedural timelines.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Skill/Typing Test technical glitch fair opportunity retet