Delhi High Court

59,406 judgments

Year:

C Natesan & Ors. v. NCT of Delhi & Ors.

20 Aug 2018 · R.K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:5255

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in a multi-victim economic offence case, holding that settlement with some victims does not justify quashing and suppression of prior dismissal warranted dismissal.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of criminal proceedings economic offences multiple victims

Deepak Sahu v. State & Anr.

20 Aug 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:5252

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking quashing of a Section 498A IPC FIR on the ground that the complainant opposed quashing and the merits of the case must be decided at trial.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 482 Cr.P.C. Section 498A IPC quashing of FIR settlement

Vijay Singh v. State & Ors.

20 Aug 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:5256

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash criminal proceedings for forgery and cheating of a bank, holding that serious offences affecting public interest cannot be quashed merely on settlement or no-objection.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR forgery cheating

Sunita Gupta v. Union of India

20 Aug 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:5251

The Delhi High Court held that provisional attachment orders under the Benami Act are invalid without prior show cause notice but the Initiating Officer may issue fresh notices to cure procedural defects, and such re-initiation is not barred by earlier orders set aside on procedural grounds.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 Section 24(1) Section 24(3) provisional attachment

Sunita Gupta v. Union of India

20 Aug 2018 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2018:DHC:5250

The Delhi High Court held that provisional attachment orders under the Benami Act are invalid without prior show cause notice, and procedural defects do not bar the Initiating Officer from re-issuing fresh notices.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 Section 24(1) Section 24(3) Section 26(3)

Sunita Gupta v. Union of India

20 Aug 2018 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2018:DHC:5249

The Delhi High Court held that provisional attachment orders under the Benami Act require prior show cause notices and that procedural defects do not bar the Initiating Officer from re-initiating proceedings after curing such defects.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 Section 24(1) Section 24(3) provisional attachment

Sunita Gupta v. Union of India

20 Aug 2018 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2018:DHC:5248

The Delhi High Court held that provisional attachment orders under the Benami Act require prior show cause notices and that procedural defects do not bar fresh proceedings by the Initiating Officer.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 Section 24(3) Section 24(1) Provisional attachment

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi – 1 v. AT & T Global Network Services (India) Pvt. Ltd.

20 Aug 2018 · Sanjiv Khanna; Chander Shekhar · 2018:DHC:5245-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the period of special audit is excluded from the limitation period for assessment under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, and the limitation is extended to sixty days if less time remains, validating the draft assessment order passed within the extended period.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 153 special audit limitation period

ECL Finance Ltd. v. Ms. Sukhmani Bedi & Anr.

20 Aug 2018 · R.K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:5257

The Delhi High Court held that mere directorship without specific responsibility for company affairs at the time of cheque dishonour does not attract criminal liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, dismissing the petition to reinstate proceedings against the respondents.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Section 141 Director liability

Veena Devi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

20 Aug 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:5242

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking compensation for a fatal accident caused by alleged municipal negligence, holding that such tort claims involving disputed facts must be pursued in civil courts, not under writ jurisdiction.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 negligence compensation

Sanjeev K. Saroha & Anr v. NDMC

20 Aug 2018 · Rekha Palli · 2018:DHC:5211

The Delhi High Court quashed NDMC's cancellation of permission for a wall wrap advertisement due to procedural lapses and held that the Petitioners must be given proper notice under the applicable policy before cancellation.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Delhi Outdoor Advertising Policy 2008 Delhi Outdoor Advertising Policy 2017 wall wrap advertisement natural justice

Haradhan Bhowmik v. The State Govt of NCT Delhi

20 Aug 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5216

The Delhi High Court held that allegations of forgery and cheating in property transfer constitute cognizable offences warranting investigation and refused to quash the FIR despite pending or dismissed civil proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR cognizable offence cheating forgery

Haradhan Bhowmik v. The State Govt of NCT Delhi

20 Aug 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5215

The Delhi High Court held that an FIR alleging forgery and cheating in property transfer cannot be quashed merely because the dispute appears civil or related civil suits were dismissed, affirming the validity of criminal proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR cognizable offence cheating forgery

Haradhan Bhowmik v. The State Govt of NCT Delhi

20 Aug 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5212

The Delhi High Court held that an FIR alleging forgery and cheating in property transfer discloses cognizable offences and cannot be quashed merely because the dispute is civil in nature or civil proceedings exist.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR cognizable offence cheating forgery

Darshan Mukhiya v. State

20 Aug 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5213

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Darshan Mukhiya for dacoity based on credible victim identification despite procedural challenges to the TIP.

criminal appeal_dismissed Identification of accused Test Identification Parade Section 392 IPC Section 397 IPC

Ikechukwu Chukwubuikem Stanley v. Narcotic Control Bureau

20 Aug 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5220

The Delhi High Court denied bail to a repeat narcotics offender found in conscious possession of heroin but granted bail to a courier agency owner who lacked prima facie knowledge of the contraband.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act conscious possession Section 35 NDPS Act bail

Sukhmeet Singh Anand v. State of NCT Delhi

20 Aug 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5221
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court upheld the issuance of non-bailable warrants against an accused evading investigation abroad, affirming jurisdiction and procedural validity despite absence of notice at foreign address.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant non-bailable warrants jurisdiction service of notice passport misrepresentation

Raj Bahadur @ Bahadur Singh v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

20 Aug 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:5223

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of rape and criminal intimidation due to lack of prima facie evidence and procedural delays, subject to conditions safeguarding the investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail Section 376 IPC Section 506 IPC rape

Rajesh Singh v. The State

20 Aug 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:5224

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR under Section 411 IPC against the petitioner as the alleged stolen property was not established as stolen by AIIMS, and the prolonged trial lacked sufficient evidence.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 411 IPC dishonestly receiving stolen property quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC

Shubhashish Ganguly & Anr v. The State & Anr

20 Aug 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:5225

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial discord following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute Lok Adalat settlement