Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Sagar Ujjwal @ Udham v. State NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:7831

The Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused charged only under arms provisions for facilitating weapon supply in a murder case, emphasizing limited role and circumstantial evidence at the bail stage.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Section 25(8) Arms Act Section 302 IPC disclosure statement

Suleman @ Monu v. State

09 Sep 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2017 SCC OnLine Del 8723

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a POCSO case due to failure of the child victim to identify him and absence of foundational evidence to invoke the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act Section 29 POCSO presumption of guilt foundational facts

Vijay Ujjwal v. State of NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:7832

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner charged under the Arms Act as a facilitator, holding that circumstantial evidence and disclosure statements are insufficient to deny bail absent direct proof and given the limited role attributed.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Section 25(8) Arms Act Section 302 IPC facilitator

Manno Devi v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

09 Sep 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:7882

The Delhi High Court granted interim protection against demolition of the petitioner’s property pending hearing of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal MCD due to the tribunal’s non-functionality.

administrative petition_allowed demolition interim protection appeal Appellate Tribunal MCD

Rohit Singh v. Delhi University & Ors.

09 Sep 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:7881

The Delhi High Court held that a preventive suspension does not disqualify a student from contesting DUSU elections and directed the University to consider the petitioner’s nomination in accordance with rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant DUSU Elections student suspension Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations student union election eligibility

Sadique Ahmad @Nanhe & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

09 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7865

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 452, 323, 341, and 34 IPC based on a voluntary amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to secure ends of justice.

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

Rabi Ghosh v. Jayanta Kumar Ghosh

09 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7846

The High Court upheld the trial court's order closing further cross examination due to the petitioner's deliberate delays, emphasizing that the right to cross examine is not absolute and must be exercised within reasonable limits.

civil petition_dismissed Significant cross examination dilatory conduct Local Commissioner right to cross examine

Neelam Arora and Anr v. Manju Arora

09 Sep 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:7879

The Delhi High Court held that an owner can evict a daughter-in-law from a shared household under the PWDV Act by providing alternate accommodation without awaiting trial on domestic violence allegations.

family appeal_allowed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 shared household right to residence eviction

Abhishek Verma and Others v. State of NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7864

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 420 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 420 IPC Section 482 CrPC amicable settlement

Romy Mehra & Anr. v. Gautam Mehra & Anr.

09 Sep 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:7878

The Delhi High Court allowed an interim injunction directing the daughter-in-law to vacate the matrimonial home with alternate accommodation, balancing ownership rights and the right of residence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act shared household interim mandatory injunction alternate accommodation

Rajinder v. The State NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:7871

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of an accused involved in an organized child trafficking racket, holding that the commercial sale of newborns constituted exploitation under Section 370 IPC and bail was not warranted given the gravity and prima facie evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant child trafficking Section 370 IPC exploitation bail application

Dr. Azra Abidi v. Jamia Milia Islamia & Ors.

09 Sep 2025 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:7903

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of respondent no.5's selection as Reader by interpreting UGC Regulations to allow cumulative teaching and research experience and declined to interfere with the expert selection committee's decision.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant UGC Regulations 2000 Reader post eligibility teaching and research experience judicial review of selection committee

Alcon Inc v. Controller of Patents and Designs

09 Sep 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:9987

Delhi High Court allowed the patent appeal and remanded the application for fresh consideration, holding that the Controller failed to properly apply the legal test for inventive step under the Patents Act.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant inventive step obviousness person skilled in the art five-step test

ICRA Limited v. Naresh Takkar

08 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:8326

The Delhi High Court held that amounts payable under an arbitral award and settlement constitute judgment debts exempt from TDS deduction, directing the deductor to seek refund of wrongly deducted TDS from tax authorities.

civil appeal_allowed Significant judgment debt Tax Deducted at Source TDS refund arbitral award

JV Industries Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & Ors.

08 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8034-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that redemption fine under the Central Excise Act is covered as penalty under the SVLDR Scheme and waived upon payment of duty, directing refund of encashed redemption fine and issuance of discharge certificate.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 redemption fine Central Excise Act 1944 penalty in rem

Lokesh Pathak v. Designated Committee, SVLDRS, Central GST, Delhi West

08 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8167-DB

The Delhi High Court held that redemption fine is covered under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme's waiver of penalty and duty, allowing petitioners to avail scheme benefits and directing issuance of discharge certificates.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 redemption fine confiscation Central Excise Act 1944

Gaurav Jain v. Union of India & Ors.

08 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8258-DB

The Delhi High Court held that redemption fine is covered under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme and discharge certificates must be issued for show cause notices involving confiscation upon payment of prescribed duty, overruling the CBIC's exclusion of redemption fine.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 redemption fine confiscation discharge certificate

Remco Industries India v. Union of India

08 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8027-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that redemption fine is covered under the SVLDR Scheme as penalty or duty, and taxpayers who pay the settled amount, even with minor delays due to technical glitches, are entitled to discharge certificates and relief from further proceedings.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 redemption fine discharge certificate Central Excise Act 1944

Radhey Shyam Aggarwal v. Union of India

08 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8261-DB

The Delhi High Court held that redemption fine is covered under the penalty waiver of the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, and discharge certificates must be issued without requiring separate payment of redemption fine.

tax petition_allowed Significant redemption fine Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 Central Excise Act 1944 penalty in rem

Meeta Singh v. Union of India & Anr.

08 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8130-DB

Writ petitions challenging resignations tendered over two decades ago were dismissed on grounds of inordinate delay and laches without examining merits, applying principles of constructive res judicata and Order II Rule 2 CPC.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition resignation delay and laches constructive res judicata