Delhi High Court

69,037 judgments

Year:

Sandeep Sachdeva & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7438

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable matrimonial FIR under Sections 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act based on an amicable settlement, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Dowry Prohibition Act

Atul Verma v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7437

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable criminal proceeding under Section 498-A IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC matrimonial dispute

Paramjeet Singh & Anr v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7436

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 420, 406, and 120B IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR compromise non-compoundable offences

Jai Karan v. State

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7427

The Delhi High Court upheld the police's administrative order to keep the petitioner under surveillance based on reasonable belief of habitual criminality despite acquittals, dismissing the petition to quash his name from the Surveillance Register.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Surveillance Register Punjab Police Rules Section 482 Cr.P.C. reasonable belief

Amit Kumar Mutreja & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7426

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC upon amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC matrimonial dispute

Sachin Goyal & Ors. v. State & Anr.

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7428

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A/406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes upon amicable settlement, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC matrimonial dispute

Hafiz Ahmad Hussain & Ors. v. State & Ors.

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7429

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 323, 324, 341, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offences settlement

Farhan Alam v. The State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr

10 Nov 2016 · P.S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7430

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable theft FIR under Section 380 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offence Section 380 IPC

Brijesh Gautam and Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7431

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable offence FIR under Sections 326/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offence Section 326 IPC

Pawan Kumar Aggarwal v. Usha Rani

10 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7432

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the dismissal of a perjury application under Section 340 Cr.P.C., holding no prima facie case of perjury was made out and inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. were rightly not exercised.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 340 Cr.P.C. perjury Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Kanhiya Lal v. The Ld. District and Sessions Judge (HQ)

10 Nov 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:7424

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition for lack of cause of action and absence of prayer to set aside the disciplinary authority's order limiting suspension benefits to suspension allowance.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition Article 226 disciplinary authority suspension allowance

Mr. Vivek Chib, Mr. Asif Ahmed, Mr. Rishabh Kapur and Mr. Kushal Gupta, Advocates. v. DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY & ANR .....

10 Nov 2016 · HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA; To be referred to the R... · 2016:DHC:7425

The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions seeking regularization of contractual Assistant Professors, reaffirming that regularization requires adherence to constitutional recruitment procedures as laid down in the Supreme Court's Umadevi judgment.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant regularization contractual employees temporary appointments public employment

Pooja Saxena v. Union Bank of India

10 Nov 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:7423

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking regularization of contractual employment on res judicata grounds but directed payment of any outstanding variable monetary component as per the employment contract.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant regularization contractual employee res judicata variable component

Subhash Kwatra v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies & Ors.

10 Nov 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:7448-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed review petitions to exclude flats D-403 and F-301 from eviction orders, recognizing lawful allotment and possession by original allottees or their transferees.

property appeal_allowed Significant cooperative society lawful allotment eviction possession

J.P. Dubey v. UOI & Ors.

10 Nov 2016 · Indira Banerjee; Anil Kumar Chawla · 2016:DHC:7449-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a CRPF officer on deputation is entitled to arrears of salary and promotion benefits granted by a binding Supreme Court order, and directed payment of such arrears with interest.

administrative petition_allowed Significant arrears of salary deputation Central Reserve Police Force promotion

Bablu Kumar Tiwari v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr

09 Nov 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:9047

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of FIRs on compromise grounds due to the petitioner’s prior criminal record and public interest considerations.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR compromise criminal antecedents Section 448 IPC

Sarita Khokhar v. State

09 Nov 2016 · S. P. Garg · 2016:DHC:8738

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused under Sections 323/341/354B/506/34 IPC, considering simple injuries, delay in FIR, and cooperation with investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. simple injuries delay in FIR

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-9 v. Vishuimpex Pvt. Ltd.

09 Nov 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:8397-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's decision that penalty under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act cannot be imposed beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 275(1)(c), dismissing the appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 271D Section 275(1)(c) Income Tax Act penalty

Commissioner of Income Tax-III v. Shubhani Engineering & Consultant Pvt. Ltd.

09 Nov 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:8396-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's time-barred appeals for lack of sufficient cause to condone a 997-day delay in re-filing against the ITAT's order.

tax appeal_dismissed condonation of delay time barred appeals Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Income Tax Commissioner

Travelport L.P. v. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation -3, New Delhi

09 Nov 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:8395-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeals holding that the legal question was identical to a prior binding decision which the tribunal had correctly applied.

tax appeal_dismissed Income Tax Appeal Binding precedent Stare decisis