Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Pramod Kumar v. The State GNCT of Delhi and Anr.

23 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8505

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 337 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC amicable settlement non-compoundable offences

Daman Preet Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

23 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8470

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 380 and 411 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC amicable settlement non-compoundable offences

Vineet Kumar Singh v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr

23 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8476

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406, 420, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC amicable settlement non-compoundable offences

Naveen Kumar and Others v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

23 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8478

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act based on an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

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

M.R. Chanchal v. State Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

23 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8479

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act based on 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

Bharat Sah v. The State of NCT of Delhi

23 Sep 2025 · Vivek Chaudhary; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:8539-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Habeas Corpus petition after the minor son was recovered, produced before the court, and expressed his free will to stay with his elder brother, requiring no further judicial intervention.

constitutional petition_dismissed Habeas Corpus minor recovery Section 164 Cr.P.C. Child Welfare Committee

Revacure Lifesciences LLP v. State Govt of NCT Delhi

23 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8558

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR against the petitioners for offences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and IPC, holding that police lack jurisdiction under the D&C Act and no prima facie IPC offence was made out, with the FIR also barred by limitation.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 Section 32 D&C Act Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Section 274 IPC

Ranjan Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi

23 Sep 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:8543
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail to an accused found with commercial quantity of Heroin, emphasizing strict application of Section 37 NDPS Act and rejecting bail on procedural grounds and parity with co-accused.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act Section 37 NDPS Act commercial quantity bail application

Prakash Chand Joshi v. Union of India and Ors

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8562-DB

The High Court allowed withdrawal of a writ petition on seniority re-fixation due to non-impleadment of necessary parties, granting liberty to file afresh.

administrative other writ petition refixation of seniority impleadment withdrawal of petition

Anish Muralidhar v. Ex Hav Birendra Kumar Singh

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption that disabilities arising during service are service-connected unless rebutted by the employer.

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

Pardeep Kumar v. Union of India and Anr.

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8561-DB

The High Court dismissed a writ petition on jurisdictional grounds, directing the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal for service matters concerning civilian personnel in the Indian Navy.

administrative petition_dismissed service matters civilian personnel Indian Navy jurisdiction

Union of India & Ors. v. Ex- Sgt Vimal Kumar Singh

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 2358
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal’s grant of disability pension for Diabetes Mellitus Type-II, affirming the presumption that diseases manifesting during service are service attributable unless proven otherwise by the employer.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Disability pension Diabetes Mellitus Type-II Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board

Major Anish Muralidhar v. Ex Hav Raghubir Singh

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 2549
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's petition and upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension to an ex-serviceman, affirming the presumption that disabilities arising during service are attributable to military service unless rebutted by clear evidence.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension armed forces presumption of sound health attributability to military service

Deepak Khanduja v. Pukhraj Gulecha and Company

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8544-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of an appeal against an interim order after the main suit was decreed, holding the appeal infructuous.

civil appeal_allowed interim order appeal cause of action withdrawal of appeal

Tata Play Ltd. v. Union of India

23 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain

The Delhi High Court upheld the constitutional validity of anti-profiteering provisions under GST but remanded the matter for factual determination of profiteering by Tata Play Ltd.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Anti-profiteering GST Input Tax Credit Section 171 CGST Act

Seven Seas Lights Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner, Shahdara Division CGST

23 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8588-DB

The Delhi High Court held that uploading GST notices on the portal constitutes valid service and allowed the petitioner to file a belated appeal despite limitation, dismissing the writ petition for non-service.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant GST notice service Input Tax Credit demand GST portal notice opportunity to be heard

Surender Kumar Wadhwa v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-18 & Anr.

23 Sep 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:8486-DB

The Delhi High Court held that both jurisdictional and faceless Assessing Officers have concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment and that notices issued within the extended limitation period under the Income Tax Act, 1961 are valid.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A(b) Section 148A(d)

M/S EMPIRE FASTENERS v. THE ASSISTENT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

23 Sep 2025 · V. KAMESWAR RAO; VINOD KUMAR

The Delhi High Court held that both Jurisdictional and Faceless Assessing Officers have concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, dismissing the petition challenging jurisdiction.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 148A Faceless Assessing Officer

State v. Shiv Kumar

23 Sep 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:8723

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of a public servant in a corruption case, holding that proof of both demand and acceptance of bribe is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7 PC Act Section 13 PC Act demand and acceptance of bribe

Sarita Khatri & Ors v. Govt. of NCTD & Ors.

23 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8661-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court directed the government to convert long-serving temporary supervisors under the ICDS scheme into permanent employees, affirming that prolonged continuous service in regular posts mandates regularization despite initial temporary appointments.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant temporary employment regularization Central Administrative Tribunal Office Memorandum 2011