Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Praveen v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi

21 Apr 2025 · Shalinder Kaur, J. · 2025:DHC:2759

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application under Section 438 BNSS, holding that prima facie involvement in an organized narcotic syndicate and the stringent conditions under Section 37 NDPS Act preclude grant of bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 37 NDPS Act regular bail organized narcotic syndicate intercepted calls

Vinod Kumar v. State & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:2927

The Delhi High Court set aside an unreasoned charge framing order under the POCSO Act and remanded the case for a fresh, reasoned decision reflecting judicial application of mind.

criminal remanded Significant charge framing POCSO Act Section 164 Cr.P.C. reasoned order

Anwar Ali v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

21 Apr 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:3504

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash a rape FIR under Section 376 IPC, holding that serious offences cannot be quashed merely on compromise without exceptional circumstances.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 376 IPC quashing of FIR compromise in criminal cases Section 482 CrPC

Suraj Narayan Sinha v. Anuradha Sinha

21 Apr 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:2938

A divorced wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. only from the date of divorce decree, not prior, and penalties for non-payment of arrears calculated before that date are unsustainable.

family appeal_allowed Significant maintenance Section 125 Cr.P.C. divorced wife desertion

Rahul Dass v. Anamika Rastogi

21 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:2750-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Family Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the divorce petition as the parties last resided together in Australia, not Delhi.

family appeal_dismissed territorial jurisdiction Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 19(iii) Order VII Rule 10 CPC

Sparkin Sunlit Private Limited v. Commissioner Delhi Goods and Service Tax and Anr

21 Apr 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:2917-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside GST demand orders for improper service of show cause notices, directing fresh adjudication after affording the petitioner a fair opportunity to be heard.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant show cause notice GST portal service of notice natural justice

Mohan Lal v. Barkha & Ors.

21 Apr 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:3367
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court’s maintenance award assessing the husband’s income based on minimum wages, rejecting claims of wife’s desertion and independent earnings.

family appeal_dismissed Significant maintenance Section 125 Cr.P.C. income assessment domestic violence

Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir v. Bimla Koul Handoo and Anr

21 Apr 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Tushar Rao Gedela, J · 2025:DHC:2868-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld its jurisdiction and ruled that recovery of excess pension without proper notice and after long delay is impermissible, dismissing the appellant's appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction Article 226 Constitution of India Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulations Article 291 J&K Regulations

Kanchana M Shekhar v. Avinash Shekhar

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2833

The Delhi High Court held that dissatisfaction with an adverse custody order does not justify transfer of the case, directing the matter to continue before the same Family Court.

family petition_dismissed custody dispute visitation rights Special Marriage Act, 1954 Section 24 CPC

Mahendra Malhotra v. Uma Arora

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2829

The Delhi High Court held that an objection petition in execution proceedings cannot be dismissed for non-appearance when the objector is duly represented by counsel and restored the objection petition for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant execution petition objection petition representation by counsel personal appearance

Manjeet Karketta v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi

21 Apr 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:2749

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in a murder case due to failure to identify the deceased and prolonged ineffective investigation despite circumstantial evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail circumstantial evidence identity of deceased last seen theory

Mother X of Victim A v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Dr. Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:2746

The Delhi High Court held that delayed reporting of child sexual abuse by a mother who is herself a victim of domestic violence does not constitute failure to report under Section 21 of the POCSO Act and set aside charges against her.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act Section 21 POCSO failure to report delayed reporting

Samsung India Electronics Pvt Ltd v. Raju

21 Apr 2025 · Dharmesh Sharma, J. · 2025:DHC:2774
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and refused to condone a 530-day delay in filing an appeal against a compensation award under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, holding that the appellant failed to provide sufficient cause for the delay.

labor appeal_dismissed Employees Compensation Act, 1923 Section 30 condonation of delay sufficient cause

Kuldeep v. State of NCT of Delhi

21 Apr 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:2753

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Sections 354, 354B, and 506 IPC based solely on the credible testimony of the complainant despite absence of public witnesses and minor contradictions.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant sexual assault Section 354 IPC Section 354B IPC Section 506 IPC

Rajat Pandhi v. The State & Ors.

21 Apr 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:2754

The Delhi High Court held that disputes over competing Wills and conveyance deeds concerning property title are civil matters not warranting police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC and dismissed the petition seeking FIR registration for alleged forgery.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC police investigation property dispute conveyance deed

Brij Kishor Mishra v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

21 Apr 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:2755

The High Court upheld the Trial Court and Sessions Court orders dismissing the belated application to summon remaining prosecution witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C., emphasizing that such power must be exercised judiciously and not after unexplained delay post closure of prosecution evidence.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 311 Cr.P.C. recall of witnesses closure of prosecution evidence delay in trial

Ramesh Suneja v. Union of India

21 Apr 2025 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:2687

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and awarded compensation to a passenger injured due to accidental fall from a moving train, rejecting the Railways' claim of self-inflicted injury under Section 124-A of the Railways Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 Railways Act, 1989 Section 123(c) Section 124-A

Rizwan Ahmad & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:2761

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR No. 1195/2023 under sections 498/406/34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce between the parties, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 528 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita settlement in criminal cases matrimonial dispute

Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Delhi v. IILM Foundation

21 Apr 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia

The Delhi High Court held that reasonable salary paid to a prohibited person for services rendered does not violate Section 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, thereby upholding exemption for the charitable trust under Sections 11/12.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 13(1)(c) Section 13(2)(c) charitable trust exemption

Vineet Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

21 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:2696-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the enhanced 'very good' benchmark for MACPS financial upgradation applies prospectively from 2016, and employees with lower grade pay remain entitled to benefits under the earlier 'good' benchmark for prior years.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme MACPS financial upgradation benchmark