Delhi High Court

30,090 judgments

Year:

Major Anish Muralidhar v. Bindu Chadha

29 Jul 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:6236-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's decision granting Special Family Pension to the widow of a deceased Army officer whose death from hypertension-induced cerebral haemorrhage was held attributable to military service.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Special Family Pension Army Pension Regulations 2008 Attributable to military service Intra Cerebral Haemorrhage

Deputy Comptroller and Auditor General v. Tilak Raj

29 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:6175-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed petitioners to file a review against the Tribunal's order directing acceptance of technical resignation, stayed the order briefly, and directed extension of joining date pending review.

administrative other Procedural technical resignation disciplinary proceedings Show-Cause Notice Central Administrative Tribunal

MMTC Limited v. Anglo-American Metallurgical Pty Limited and Ors.

29 Jul 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:6187
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

A civil suit seeking to nullify a final arbitral award on grounds of fraud inter se parties is barred by sections 5 and 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and constitutes abuse of process.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 5 Section 34

Equity Intelligence AIF Trust v. The Central Board of Direct Taxes

29 Jul 2025 · Devender Kumar Upadhyay, CJ; Tushar Rao Gedela, J · 2025:DHC:6170-DB

The Delhi High Court held that SEBI Regulations prohibiting naming investors in original Trust Deeds render CBDT Circular No.13/2014's mandate impossible for Category III AIFs, declaring the Circular ultra vires and the petitioner trust determinate for income tax purposes.

tax petition_allowed Significant Alternative Investment Fund Category III AIF Income Tax Act 1961 Section 164

Shahid Hussain v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

29 Jul 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:6197

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a rape and extortion case due to delay in complaint, lack of medical evidence, and indications of consensual relations.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail rape delay in complaint consensual relations

Medha Patkar v. V.K. Saxena

29 Jul 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:6199
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld Medha Patkar's conviction for criminal defamation under Section 500 IPC, affirming the admissibility of electronic evidence and admissions in withdrawn pleadings, and dismissed her revision petition challenging the conviction and sentencing.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant criminal defamation Section 500 IPC Section 65B Indian Evidence Act revisional jurisdiction

Medha Patkar v. V.K. Saxena

29 Jul 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:6183

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discretion to dismiss a belated application under Section 254(1) CrPC to examine an additional witness, emphasizing the balance between the right to lead evidence and the constitutional mandate of a speedy trial.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 254(1) CrPC Section 254(2) CrPC additional witness discretion of Magistrate

Honey Tyagi @ Nishant Bhardwaj v. State (NCT of Delhi)

29 Jul 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:6211

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner’s interim bail application seeking relief to attend post-funeral rites, holding that the primary ground no longer existed and concerns of security and trial integrity outweighed the request.

criminal petition_dismissed interim bail humanitarian grounds post-funeral rites Section 302 IPC

Puran Prasad v. State of NCT of Delhi

29 Jul 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:6213
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court granted parole to a life convict for four weeks to be present at his wife’s childbirth, applying prison rules and recognizing emergency grounds for parole.

criminal petition_allowed parole Delhi Prison Rules 2018 Section 302 IPC Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023

Gopal & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

29 Jul 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:6201

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 528 BNSS Section 498A IPC amicable settlement

Puneet Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

29 Jul 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:6202

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, applying the principle that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC amicable settlement

Masihudin Khan v. Union of India & Ors.

29 Jul 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:6235-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's high-altitude posting on medical grounds and stayed the posting order pending a reasoned decision.

administrative petition_allowed posting order medical fitness high altitude writ petition

Ravinder Kumar v. Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force

29 Jul 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:6234-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging deductions under the ITBP Force Act for non-impleadment of necessary parties, allowing refiling after proper party inclusion.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition writ of mandamus non-impleadment necessary parties

Mukesh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr

29 Jul 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:6224

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant due to failure of the child victim to identify him and contradictions in the prosecution case regarding his arrest and identity.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant child witness POCSO Act identity of accused sexual assault

Paramjit Singh v. Hardaman Singh Anand & Ors.

29 Jul 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:6145-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that court vacations do not extend the condonable period for filing replication when the registry remains open, dismissing the appeal against refusal of condonation of delay.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant limitation period condonation of delay replication Delhi High Court Original Side Rules 2018

Vinit Goswami v. The State (NCT of Delhi); Shoaib Saifi v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

29 Jul 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to accused in a murder case considering weak prosecution evidence, hostile witnesses, and parity with co-accused already on bail.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail murder Section 302 IPC Section 50 CrPC

Wajid Ali v. Union of India

28 Jul 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:6915-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside a CRPF dismissal order due to denial of cross-examination and enquiry officer bias, directing a fresh departmental enquiry in compliance with natural justice.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental enquiry natural justice cross-examination enquiry officer bias

BAYER CROPSCIENCE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT v. THE DEPUTY CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS & ANR

28 Jul 2025 · Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:6731

The Delhi High Court set aside the patent revocation order for non-application of mind and remanded the matter for fresh independent consideration by the Controller.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Post Grant Opposition Patents Act 1970 Section 25(2) Section 3(d)

M/S. Singh Finlease Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Bablu

28 Jul 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:6404
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, the court's role is limited to prima facie satisfaction of an arbitration agreement's existence and appointed the sole arbitrator accordingly, leaving merits and frivolity issues to the arbitral tribunal.

civil petition_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 appointment of arbitrator scope of judicial scrutiny arbitration agreement

IIFL Finance Limited v. Disha Voice Surviellance Private Ltd and Ors

28 Jul 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:6494
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, judicial scrutiny is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator as per the arbitration clause, leaving merits to the arbitral tribunal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Appointment of arbitrator Judicial scrutiny