Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Lt Col Bharat Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Dec 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:11769-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that petitions challenging adverse remarks and seeking promotion do not automatically merit priority hearing over other urgent cases involving Armed Forces personnel and dismissed the petitioner’s request for advancement of hearing.

administrative petition_dismissed priority hearing Armed Forces personnel confidential reports promotion

Lalit Kumar v. Union of India

19 Dec 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:11770-DB

The Delhi High Court held that no separate finding is required on a charge that merely reiterates other charges and allowed condonation of delay but dismissed the review petition seeking such finding.

administrative petition_dismissed disciplinary proceedings charge-sheet unauthorized absence conduct rules

Chetan Vats @ Chetan & Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

19 Dec 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:11612

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties.

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

Sheeba; Mohammed Salik v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

19 Dec 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:11711-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the non-evaluation of candidates' answer sheets due to incorrect bubbling of roll numbers, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural requirements in selection exams.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant OMR sheet bubbling error selection examination procedural compliance

Moazzam Ali & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

19 Dec 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:11625

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and dissolution of marriage by Mubarat.

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

Vicky & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) through S.H.O. Jaitpur & Anr.

19 Dec 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:11626

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, exercising inherent powers to promote reconciliation and prevent abuse of process.

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

Deepak Minda & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

19 Dec 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:11632

The High Court held that only the Public Prosecutor or the Court can move applications under Section 311 CrPC to recall witnesses, and a private complainant cannot independently do so without statutory permission, setting aside the trial court's order allowing such an application by the complainant.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 311 CrPC Public Prosecutor Private complainant Section 302 CrPC

Rajesh Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi

19 Dec 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11646

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 354 IPC but commuted the sentence to the period already served considering mitigating factors and prolonged trial delay.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 354 IPC sentence commutation mitigating circumstances prolonged pendency

Som Nath v. State

19 Dec 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11645

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under the Essential Commodities Act but reduced the sentence to the period already served considering mitigating circumstances and prolonged litigation.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Essential Commodities Act, 1955 sentence modification mitigating circumstances commutation of sentence

Shekh Rafiq v. State of NCT of Delhi

19 Dec 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:11617
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application in a murder case, holding that a prima facie case exists and the petitioner's conduct and identification by witnesses weigh against bail despite trial delays.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail Section 302 IPC prima facie case proclaimed offender

Mohd. Abid v. State

19 Dec 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of two appellants for gang rape under Section 376D IPC, relying on consistent prosecutrix testimony corroborated by independent witness and medical-forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape Section 376D IPC sexual assault prosecutrix testimony

Sachin Dev Duggal v. Directorate of Enforcement

19 Dec 2025 · Amit Sharma · 2025:DHC:11624

The Delhi High Court upheld the issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants against a foreign national suspect for non-cooperation in a money laundering investigation, emphasizing proper service of summons and the scope of Section 73 CrPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Non-Bailable Warrants Section 73 CrPC Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty Prevention of Money Laundering Act

Ajay Kumar Goyal v. Sanjay Goyal

19 Dec 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:11650

The Delhi High Court allowed an appeal to restrain parties from creating third-party interests in a disputed property pending suit for specific performance, emphasizing preservation of the subject matter despite allegations of forgery.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance interim injunction Order XXXIX Rule 1 CPC Order XLIII Rule 3 CPC

Union of India v. Deepak Mehra

19 Dec 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:11680
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Railway Claims Tribunal's award of compensation to a passenger injured in a train accident, applying the principle of strict liability under the Railways Act despite technical issues regarding the boarding station.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Railways Act, 1989 strict liability Railway Claims Tribunal compensation

Nand Kishor and Anr v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr

19 Dec 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11640

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial dispute on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC inherent powers of High Court Section 528 BNSS

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

19 Dec 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11643

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement, applying inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to prevent abuse of court process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC inherent powers

Praveen Kumar & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

19 Dec 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11628
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court quashed a noncompoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Section 498A IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between the parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC inherent powers of High Court Section 528 BNSS

SS 47150F Maj Sneha B Sapkal v. Union of India and Ors

19 Dec 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:11656-DB

The High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition and disposed of the case accordingly.

other other Procedural writ petition withdrawal disposal High Court of Delhi

Kumar Singh and Sgt. Mritunjay v. 698117 Sgt Surender Singh Rohilla Retd

19 Dec 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · (2025) DLT 711
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of broad-banding relief in disability pension cases but limited its application prospectively from the Supreme Court's ruling date.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant broad-banding disability pension Armed Forces Tribunal retrospective relief

Ram Bhajan Yadav v. Delhi Transco Ltd & Anr.

19 Dec 2025 · Dinesh Mehta; Vimal Kumar Yadav · 2025:DHC:11659-DB

The Delhi High Court held that cancellation of provisional appointment on eligibility grounds without issuing notice violates natural justice and directed reconsideration of the appellant's eligibility based on subsequent clarificatory certificate.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant natural justice cancellation of appointment probation experience certificate