Delhi High Court

59,687 judgments

Year:

Kishore Kumar v. The State & Ors.

08 Oct 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:6545

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition to quash an FIR under Section 324 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties and their consent to discontinue proceedings.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 324 IPC settlement deed Section 482 CrPC

Deepak Jain v. Union of India and Anr.

08 Oct 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:6546

The Delhi High Court held that in absence of a specific validity period in a Trial Court’s no objection certificate, passports issued during pending criminal proceedings are valid for one year as per the 1993 notification, not the full ten-year term under Passport Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant passport validity pending criminal proceedings Section 6(2)(f) Passport Act Ministry of External Affairs notification 1993

Tarun Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

08 Oct 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:6566

The Delhi High Court held that separate criminal cases involving similar allegations but distinct offences registered in different jurisdictions may be tried independently, dismissing the petition to consolidate all trials before the Delhi court.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 186 CrPC jurisdiction cognizance multiple FIRs

Rajesh Gupta & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

08 Oct 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:6539

The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs arising from family property disputes based on a bona fide settlement between parties, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would be futile and contrary to justice.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR family dispute settlement cross FIRs

Rajesh Gupta & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

08 Oct 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:6540

The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs arising from family property disputes on the ground of amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the futility of continuing criminal proceedings.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR family dispute settlement cross FIRs

Vijendra Kumar @ Vijendder Solanki & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr

08 Oct 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:6541

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial discord based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, emphasizing the court's power to prevent futile criminal proceedings.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC matrimonial dispute

Union of India v. M/S Ranganathan Enterprises

08 Oct 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:6537

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the trial court's dismissal of a recovery suit, holding that documents proved by affidavit stand valid even without formal exhibit markings, especially in ex-parte proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant proof of documents exhibit marks affidavit evidence ex-parte proceeding

Dhananjay @ Bunty v. State

08 Oct 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6536-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of murder and robbery charges due to failure of the prosecution to establish a complete and conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence chain of evidence recovery of currency notes disclosure statement

Hari Om v. State (NCT of Delhi)

08 Oct 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:6535

The Delhi High Court granted interim protection from arrest to the petitioner in a rape case pending regular bail application, emphasizing cooperation with investigation and procedural compliance.

criminal other anticipatory bail interim protection Section 376 IPC Section 506 IPC

Public Information Officer v. V. Chaudhary

08 Oct 2018 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2018:DHC:6538

The Delhi High Court upheld the CIC's order directing disclosure of police-held information on unauthorized construction, clarifying that Section 11 of the RTI Act does not prohibit disclosure of such non-confidential third-party information.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 11 RTI Act third party information unauthorized construction

M/S. PEARL DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. v. M/S. UNIVERSAL LAND AND FINANCE CO.

08 Oct 2018 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; A.K. CHAWLA · 2018:DHC:6533-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed Pearl Developers' appeal, upholding the setting aside of an arbitral award for lack of pleaded claims, evidence, and reasons, emphasizing the necessity of procedural fairness and reasoned awards in arbitration.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Section 34 Arbitration Act Natural justice Compensation

Rajiv @ Monu v. State NCT of Delhi

08 Oct 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6527-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for murder and criminal conspiracy based on admissible disclosure statements, circumstantial evidence, and conduct excluding any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant criminal conspiracy murder circumstantial evidence Section 8 Indian Evidence Act

Ramesh @ Pindari v. State

08 Oct 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6534-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted three appellants of gang rape charges due to inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, lack of corroborative medical and forensic evidence, and investigative lapses, emphasizing the need for reliable and consistent prosecution evidence in sexual offence cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant gang rape prosecutrix testimony reliability of witness medical examination delay

Ashwani v. State; Gaurav v. State

08 Oct 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel

The Delhi High Court acquitted two appellants convicted of murder and robbery due to failure of prosecution to prove a complete and conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory arrest procedure recovery of stolen property

Fatima Nafees v. State

08 Oct 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6530-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking a new SIT and court-monitored investigation into the disappearance of Najeeb Ahmed, holding that the CBI investigation is adequate and further proceedings lie before the criminal court.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant habeas corpus missing person investigation monitoring Special Investigation Team

Danish v. State

08 Oct 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6531-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges under Section 302 IPC due to failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC murder circumstantial evidence benefit of doubt

N C Gupta v. Punjab National Bank

08 Oct 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:6558

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for leave encashment filed after a seven-year delay, holding that the claim was barred by laches and that repeated representations do not extend limitation absent statutory remedy.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant leave encashment removal from service laches delay

Pacific Convergence Corpn. Ltd. v. Data Access (India) Ltd.

08 Oct 2018 · JAYANT NATH, J. · 2018:DHC:6556

The Delhi High Court allowed modification of restraint orders against SPIL's assets upon full repayment of principal and interest on funds improperly transferred by a controlling individual, clarifying liability and interest obligations.

civil petition_allowed Significant restraint order interest calculation joint and several liability locus standi

Ramesh Sharma v. Jagat Singh Nagar & Ors.

08 Oct 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:6561
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court restored trial proceedings by setting aside the revisional court's discharge order, holding that charges must be framed if a prima facie case or grave suspicion exists, even if electronic evidence lacks Section 65B certification at that stage.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant charge framing Section 227 CrPC Section 228 CrPC Section 482 CrPC

Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Komal & Ors.

08 Oct 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2018:DHC:6553

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal restoring a suit dismissed in limine on limitation grounds, holding that the longer limitation period for recovery of possession applies when such relief is claimed alongside declaration of forgery.

civil appeal_allowed Significant limitation recovery of possession declaration of forgery permanent injunction