Delhi High Court

59,406 judgments

Year:

Ved Prakash v. Union of India & Anr.

09 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7911-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition for default and non-prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to appear.

constitutional petition_dismissed writ petition default non-prosecution dismissal

ABB India Ltd v. Power Finance Corporation Limited

09 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:7945

The Delhi High Court dismissed ABB India's summary judgment application against Power Finance Corporation and RFC Limited, holding that serious triable issues exist regarding contract liability, admissibility, and jurisdiction, requiring a full trial.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant summary judgment Order XIII-A CPC Minutes of Meeting privity of contract

Union of India & Ors. v. Sub Hony Lt Rajesh Kumar Retd

09 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · AIR 1960 SC 1168
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 attributable to military service unless rebutted, and limited its review to errors of law under certiorari jurisdiction.

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

Union of India v. IC-44476M Col Laxmi Chand Dahiya (Retd)

09 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 2355
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

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 the employer.

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

Puneet Batra v. Union of India & Ors.

09 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:7897-DB

The Delhi High Court held that searches and seizures involving advocates must respect attorney-client privilege and be conducted with procedural safeguards, permitting GST officials to examine seized electronic devices only in the advocate's presence and subject to strict conditions.

administrative other Significant attorney-client privilege search and seizure GST Department Section 67 CGST Act

K. S. Rekhi v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

09 Sep 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:7887

The Delhi High Court directed MCD and DDA to consider petitioners' license applications for selling meat at Dabri Mor market subject to compliance with MCD policy and Aircraft Rules, 1937, and exempted petitioners from fresh fees where already paid.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant License for meat shops Municipal Corporation of Delhi policy Rule 91 Aircraft Rules 1937 Slaughtering prohibition near aerodrome

SH VIPUL AGGARWAL v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

09 Sep 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:7886

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to file a regularization application within two weeks and restrained the MCD from taking coercive action during its pendency, directing expeditious consideration of the application.

administrative petition_allowed Significant unauthorized construction demolition Municipal Corporation of Delhi regularization application

IHOME AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD & ORS v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

09 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2024 INSC 1046

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellate court's discretion to direct a 20% deposit under Section 148 of the NI Act pending appeal against conviction under Section 138, dismissing the petitioners' challenge for waiver absent prima facie invalidity or sufficient proof of hardship.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 148 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 NI Act deposit pending appeal postdated cheques

Nikhil @ Sonu v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · AIR 1997 SC 2417
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail applications of accused in a murder case, holding that despite hostile eyewitnesses, forensic evidence and weapon recovery established a prima facie case against them.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail hostile witnesses forensic evidence recovery of weapon

Emma Odogwu Emeafu v. Narcotic Control Bureau

09 Sep 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:7833
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a narcotics trafficking case, holding that the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies due to possession of commercial quantity of narcotics and failure to satisfy conditions for bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 37 NDPS Act bail under NDPS Act commercial quantity narcotics prima facie case

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