Delhi High Court

59,687 judgments

Year:

Harpreet Singh & Ors. v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

21 Aug 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7128

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 354, and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute on the basis of an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Amar Singh @ Amarjeet Singh & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr

21 Aug 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7126
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR involving non-compoundable offences based on a genuine amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

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

Atul Punj v. Union of India

21 Aug 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:7168

The Delhi High Court allowed suspension of the Look Out Circular against the petitioner on medical grounds, emphasizing the right to travel abroad under Article 21 subject to proportionality and conditions safeguarding investigation.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Look Out Circular Article 21 Right to travel abroad Proportionality

Pankaj Bisht and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

21 Aug 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7124

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

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR

Nitin Hooda v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr

21 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7146

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR involving attempted firing and threat to life, holding that an earlier unconditional withdrawal bars maintainability and quashing is not warranted in serious offences despite compromise.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR Section 109(1) BNS Section 27 Arms Act unconditional withdrawal

Chand Mehra v. Union of India & Ors.

21 Aug 2025 · HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GE... · 2025:DHC:7102-DB

The Delhi High Court held that advocates are not required to verify the truthfulness of their client's case and dismissed the appeal challenging the dismissal of a professional misconduct complaint against respondent advocates.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant professional misconduct advocate duties fiduciary relationship Bar Council of India Rules

Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited v. Xiamen Longking Bulk Material Science & Engg. Co. Ltd.

21 Aug 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:7139
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award for ignoring mandatory contractual conditions requiring the respondent to open a local office and Indian bank account, holding such failure amounted to repudiation justifying contract termination.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Project Execution Methodology Local office and bank account

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. Niharika Puhan; Kusum Gupta v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board

21 Aug 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that incorrect bubbling of Roll Numbers on OMR sheets is a condonable error if the sheet is otherwise identifiable and evaluated, but non-evaluation due to such error justifies rejection of candidature.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant OMR sheet incorrect bubbling Roll Number examination process

Parvez @ Bhoora v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

21 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7127

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in an NDPS case due to lack of credible evidence connecting him to the contraband parcels and deficiencies in the investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 37 NDPS Act regular bail contraband parcels

Ugochukwu Paschal v. State (NCT of Delhi)

21 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7134

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in an NDPS case due to lack of evidence of possession or knowledge of contraband, emphasizing that mere presence on a vehicle carrying drugs is insufficient for denial of bail.

criminal bail_granted NDPS Act bail possession contraband

Asif Mirza and Ors v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr

21 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7144

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR involving multiple rape and criminal intimidation charges, holding that such serious allegations cannot be quashed merely on an alleged compromise without clear evidence.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR Section 376 IPC rape criminal intimidation

Girdhar Lohani v. State (G.N.C.T. of Delhi)

21 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7121

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused for lack of any change in circumstances since the earlier dismissal and held that the court cannot re-examine findings of a coordinate bench.

criminal petition_dismissed anticipatory bail change in circumstances coordinate bench Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

Mayank Sharma and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

21 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7155

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR arising from a road rage incident after the complainants pardoned the accused, subject to a cost deposit to ensure deterrence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR road rage Section 354 IPC Section 323 IPC

Neeraj @ Kuppa v. The State Govt of NCT Delhi

21 Aug 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions under the POCSO Act and IPC based on credible and reliable testimony of child victims despite minor contradictions and hostile witnesses.

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

Anurag Sant v. Anupriya Vij & Anr.

21 Aug 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:7100-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that in a partition suit, where plaintiffs plead joint and constructive possession without admitting ouster, fixed Court Fees under Article 17(vi) of the Court Fees Act are payable, and ad valorem Court Fees arise only upon clear ouster disclosed in the plaint.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Court Fees Act, 1870 ad valorem Court Fees fixed Court Fees partition suit

Kuldeep Kaur v. Swaran Kaur through LRs

21 Aug 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:7098-DB

The High Court upheld the Family Court’s decree affirming the respondents’ ownership and possession of the matrimonial property and held that the appellant’s right to reside ceased upon divorce, dismissing her appeal.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 shared household right to residence matrimonial home

Sharda Devi & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.

21 Aug 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:9840-DB

The Court held that cashiering alone does not justify withholding pension without a separate forfeiture order but allowed the respondents liberty to proceed under the CCS Pension Rules for pension forfeiture.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant cashiering pension withholding forfeiture of past service Army Act 1950

M/S BHAGIRATI ENTERPRISES AND ANR v. M/S KIRTI ENTERPRISES

20 Aug 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7145-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that a written statement filed beyond the 120-day statutory limit under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC as amended by the Commercial Courts Act cannot be admitted, and a party is bound by its earlier sworn admissions before the trial court.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant written statement Order VIII Rule 1 CPC Commercial Courts Act 2015 condonation of delay

Rishi Enterprises v. Additional Commissioner Central Tax Delhi North & Anr.

20 Aug 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:7353-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a consolidated GST order issued within limitation by email service in a fraudulent ITC availment case and dismissed the writ petition, permitting appeal on merits.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 74 CGST Act Show Cause Notice

Shanti Udyog Weldsafe Pvt Ltd and Ors. v. Mallcom India Ltd

20 Aug 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7270-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a commercial appeal as withdrawn after the parties settled the underlying dispute and the settlement was decreed.

civil appeal_dismissed settlement appeal withdrawal commercial suit decree