Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

BNP Paribas Suisse SA v. Ashok Kumar Goel & Ors.

19 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:8496

The Delhi High Court held that a foreign decree from a reciprocating territory can be simultaneously executed in India and the cause country under Section 44A CPC, rejecting objections based on pendency of foreign proceedings and decree finality.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 44A CPC foreign decree execution simultaneous execution reciprocating territory

Court on its Own Motion v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:8465-DB

The Delhi High Court directed coordinated inspections, data reconciliation, and upgradation of industrial effluent treatment infrastructure under judicial supervision to prevent water pollution and water-logging.

administrative other Significant Effluent Treatment Plant Common Effluent Treatment Plant Delhi Pollution Control Committee Industrial pollution

Neeta Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Kamlesh Sharma

19 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2025:DHC:8475

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of an Administrator for Kalkaji Mandir's redevelopment amid baaridars' disputes, with the Supreme Court dismissing challenges but staying redevelopment pending resolution.

administrative other Significant Kalkaji Mandir Administrator appointment Temple redevelopment Baaridars disputes

Union of India v. EX 770906 SGT PK Rajesh

19 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8418-DB
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 post-entry are service-related unless rebutted by clear reasons.

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

Manoj Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8461-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the penalty of zero marks for a candidate who violated explicit examination instructions by writing his own name in the answer sheet, emphasizing strict adherence to rules to maintain fairness.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant examination instructions answer sheet evaluation personal identity disclosure competitive examination

Ashwani Kumar Sarpal v. High Court of Delhi

19 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8425-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw a writ petition deemed infructuous and dismissed the petition accordingly.

constitutional appeal_dismissed writ petition withdrawal infructuous dismissal

Rupinder Singh Sahni v. Manmeet Singh Sahni

19 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:8529

The Delhi High Court held that civil courts have jurisdiction over inheritance and title disputes despite pending NCLT proceedings and granted interim injunctions directing deposit of rental income to protect heirs' interests.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interim injunction civil court jurisdiction Companies Act 2013 Section 430

Surendra v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8319-DB

The Delhi High Court directed re-measurement of the petitioner’s height by the Appellate Authority due to an impractical appeal process and marginal shortfall in physical standards in CAPF recruitment.

administrative petition_allowed Significant recruitment physical standard test height requirement appellate authority

M/S INSPIRE EXIM PVT. LTD. & ANR. v. M/S JAIN BROTHERS SANITATION PVT. LTD. & ANR.

19 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:8335

The High Court allowed the petitioners one final opportunity to conclude cross-examination previously closed by the trial court, subject to payment of costs and strict time limits, to ensure fair trial and expeditious disposal.

civil appeal_allowed cross-examination right to cross-examine closure of evidence trial procedure

Ashok Kumar v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited

19 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8286-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act filed beyond the strict limitation period, even after excluding time spent in a court without jurisdiction under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, are barred and cannot be condoned.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Limitation Act, 1963 Section 14

M/S SSM Engineers Pvt Ltd v. State (GNCT) of Delhi

19 Sep 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:8314

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition upholding conviction under Section 138 NI Act, holding that the petitioners failed to rebut statutory presumptions of cheque issuance against a legally enforceable debt.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Cheque bounce Presumption under Section 139 NI Act Rebuttal of presumption

Salman Sayeed Siddiqui v. State (NCT of Delhi)

19 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8307

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a sophisticated cyber fraud case, holding that substantial incriminating evidence and risk of tampering justified denial of bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed bail cyber fraud confessional statement virtual mobile numbers

Vishal Jaiswal v. State of NCT of Delhi

19 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8309
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to Vishal Jaiswal in an NDPS case, holding that CDRs and co-accused disclosures alone cannot deny bail and emphasizing cooperation with investigation and compliance with conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail NDPS Act Tramadol call detail records

Union of India & Ors. v. Brijesh Singh through Lrs Vishal Saxena

19 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8287-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's quashing of recovery of alleged shortage amount from a retired railway employee's retiral benefits due to lack of evidence and proper inquiry.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant recovery of public money retiral dues departmental inquiry pecuniary loss

XXXXX v. State NCT of Delhi

19 Sep 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:8340
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of an uncle for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his minor nephew, relying on credible child testimony, DNA evidence, and independent witness identification under the POCSO Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant child witness testimony POCSO Act Section 29 POCSO presumption sexual assault

Nitesh Kumar & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr

19 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8329

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

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

Hoshiyar Singh & Ors. v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

19 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8332

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 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

Shanti Devi v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

19 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8308

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under dowry harassment and related offences based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Sanjay Kumar v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi

19 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8310

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 509, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

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

Dharmender & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

19 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8323

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on a voluntary and 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