Delhi High Court
93,877 judgments
University of Delhi v. Sh. Tahel Ram Bellani
The Delhi High Court held that the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 applies to the University of Delhi and dismissed its petition challenging the order directing payment of gratuity to a retired employee.
Punjab State Transmission Corporation Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court restrained coercive recovery actions under the EPF Act until the statutory appeal could be heard due to the non-appointment of the Appellate Tribunal's Presiding Officer.
M/S. THIRUMALAI CONSTRUCTIONS AND ENGINEERING INDIA PVT. LTD. v. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II
The Delhi High Court restrained coercive recovery under the EPF Act pending hearing of a statutory appeal that could not be heard due to the non-appointment of the Appellate Tribunal's Presiding Officer.
R.L. Traders v. Income Tax Officer Ward 29(1)
The Delhi High Court set aside the ITAT and CIT(A) orders rejecting the assessee’s accounts for non-maintenance of quantitative tallies and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
Abdul Alim v. The State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a man for sexually assaulting a four-year-old girl based on credible child testimony and corroborative evidence, rejecting claims of false implication.
Chandrika Prasad v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a security guard for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl, affirming that consistent child testimony supported by corroboration and documentary evidence suffices for conviction under the POCSO Act and IPC.
Vani Anand v. Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for default and non-prosecution due to failure to comply with court orders and repeated non-appearance.
Vijay Bali v. State & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of FIRs related to alleged electricity theft, holding that disputed factual issues require trial and inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly.
Navin Soni v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the acceptance of a cancellation report where investigation and FSL report negated the commission of a cognizable offence, dismissing the petitioner's complaint challenging the same.
Shikha Jain & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that courts cannot take cognizance of a time-barred defamation complaint by invoking Section 473 Cr.P.C. and directed the trial court to consider limitation before summoning the accused.
Sahab Singh & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A/34 IPC based on a mediated settlement in a matrimonial dispute, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 482 CrPC to end futile criminal proceedings when parties have amicably resolved their differences.
Naresh & Anr. v. Govt. of NCT of Dehi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 363 IPC where the prosecutrix above 16 years voluntarily accompanied the accused and was living with him as his wife, emphasizing amicable settlement and prevention of abuse of process.
Om Saran Gupta v. Nishi Gupta
The Delhi High Court held that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be exercised to quash a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act before the trial court frames the Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C., directing the accused to raise all pleas at that stage.
Rani Chauhan & Anr. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420, 468, 471, and 34 IPC based on a bona fide settlement between family members, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Mohinder Singh v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court refused to quash a criminal complaint under Sections 386, 388, and 34 IPC at the initial stage, holding that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised sparingly and factual disputes should be tested during trial.
Hardeep Singh & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, applying the principles of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.
Rampal v. State
The High Court declined to quash the FIR under Sections 338, 420, and 471 IPC, holding that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy before the trial court and thus dismissed the petition.
State v. Sudhir Mishra
The Delhi High Court set aside the discharge of the accused in a fatal burn injury case, holding that material evidence including the deceased's statement and witness testimonies warranted trial under Sections 285 and 304-A IPC.
Akash Jain v. Jitender Kumar Gupta
The Delhi High Court declined to quash proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act at an advanced trial stage, emphasizing the sparing exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd v. Global Steel Holdings Limited & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that it lacked territorial jurisdiction to enforce an arbitral award against foreign Judgment Debtors and their properties outside Delhi, and refused to order arrest or attachment without jurisdiction.