Delhi High Court

46,428 judgments

Year:

Sukash @ Sukesh Chandrashekar v. State

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3002

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail to the petitioner accused of serious forgery and corruption offences, holding that actual interference with the judicial process justifies denial of bail.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant bail forgery impersonation influencing witnesses

Devender Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3001

The Delhi High Court held that it can grant extension of time to complete investigation under its inherent powers without reviewing its earlier order, balancing the right to speedy trial with the interest of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC Section 362 CrPC Inherent powers Extension of investigation time

Devender Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3000
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that it can grant extension of time to complete investigation under its inherent powers without reviewing its earlier order, balancing the right to speedy trial with the need for proper investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant extension of time inherent powers Section 482 Cr.P.C. functus officio

C.B. Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3032

The Delhi High Court set aside the convictions of MCD officials for criminal conspiracy and corruption related to unauthorized construction due to failure of prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant criminal conspiracy unauthorized construction public servant Prevention of Corruption Act

Kaushal Kumar Narula & Anr v. The State & Anr

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3031

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable mediated settlement, exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC in a matrimonial dispute.

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

Jarnail Singh & Ors. v. State & Anr

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3030

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 506, and 34 IPC on settlement between parties, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC inherent jurisdiction settlement of dispute

Bhuwan Sharma & Ors v. The State & Anr

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3029

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC based on an amicable mediated settlement in a matrimonial dispute, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Sunil Kumar & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3033

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute on the basis of amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Kamal @ Sachin & Ors. v. The State & Anr.

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3034

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on a mediated settlement, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 34 IPC

Lavkush & Ors. v. The State & Ors.

31 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3035

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 354-A, 509, and 34 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between neighbors, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC as per the principles in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR inherent jurisdiction criminal proceedings

Devender Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3008
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that it can grant extension of time to complete investigation under its inherent powers without reviewing its final order, balancing the right to speedy trial with the interest of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. Section 362 Cr.P.C. Article 226 Constitution inherent powers

Amit Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi)

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3009

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 308 IPC based on reliable and corroborated evidence but modified the sentence to the period already served by the appellant.

criminal appeal_allowed Section 308 IPC grievous injury false implication corroborative evidence

Mohit Rajora @ Gotu v. State

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:2999

The Delhi High Court set aside the robbery convictions of appellants who were mere passengers and not identified as assailants, holding that mere presence without overt acts does not establish common intention under Section 34 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery Section 395 IPC common intention identification parade

Mohit Rajora @ Gotu v. State

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3003

The Delhi High Court set aside the robbery convictions of two appellants due to lack of evidence attributing overt acts to them and absence of common intention under Section 395/34 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery Section 395 IPC common intention identification parade

Mahender v. State of NCT of Delhi

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3006

The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging convictions for armed robbery, holding that minor contradictions in witness testimony do not vitiate the prosecution case when the accused were apprehended with stolen property and weapons.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery Section 392 IPC Section 397 IPC Section 25 Arms Act

Anupama Bansal v. Suraj Bhan Bansal & Anr

31 May 2019 · Hima Kohli; Vinod Goel · 2019:DHC:3007-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a decree on admissions invalidating a sale deed executed under a revoked power of attorney over HUF property and directed full accounting of revenue to the rightful owners.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC Power of Attorney revocation Hindu Undivided Family property Sale deed nullity

Monu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi)

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:3010

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for tampering with electricity meters under Section 138 of the Electricity Act, 2003 based on credible eyewitness testimony and seizure of tampering instruments.

criminal appeal_dismissed Electricity Act 2003 Section 138 meter tampering conviction

Shahnawaz @ Sanu v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:2994

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of Shahnawaz for robbery with a country-made pistol under Section 397 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act, finding the prosecution evidence credible and the defence improbable.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 397 IPC Section 27 Arms Act robbery country-made pistol

Allauddin v. State

31 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:2998

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 135 Electricity Act for theft of electricity, ruling that procedural irregularities and delay in complaint filing did not vitiate the prosecution where evidence proved illegal supply beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 135 Electricity Act theft of electricity inspection report proviso to Section 135

Hari Kishan v. State (NCT of Delhi)

31 May 2019 · Anu Malhotra · 2019:DHC:2993

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR and proceedings under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 against a petitioner for mere possession of a live cartridge without conscious knowledge, affirming that conscious possession is essential for criminal liability.

criminal petition_allowed Significant conscious possession Section 25 Arms Act 1959 live cartridge quashing of FIR