Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
Ranbir S. Arora v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of an FIR alleging sexual harassment and assault by pilots, holding that departmental exoneration does not bar criminal prosecution and sanction under Section 188 CrPC is required only before trial.
Balwant Kaur Chaudhary & Anr. v. Rambir Singh
The Delhi High Court held that the special eviction right under Section 14D of the Delhi Rent Control Act is personal to the widow landlord and ceases upon her death, dismissing the eviction petition filed posthumously.
Jagannath v. Shanti Devi
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction of a tenant on bona fide requirement grounds under the Delhi Rent Control Act, confirming the landlord's ownership and dependency of her disabled son, and rejecting tenant's defenses.
Syed Maqbool v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court upheld the extension of detention under UAPA and clarified that further investigation under CrPC Section 173(8) does not entitle accused to statutory bail once a charge sheet is filed.
Syed Maqbool v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court upheld the extension of detention under UAPA and clarified that filing a charge sheet completes investigation for statutory bail purposes, while further investigation under CrPC Section 173(8) supplements the charge sheet without entitling accused to bail.
Syed Maqbool v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court upheld the extension of detention under UAPA and clarified that filing a charge sheet with a prayer for further investigation does not entitle accused to statutory bail.
Syed Maqbool v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court upheld the extension of detention under UAPA and clarified that filing a charge sheet completes investigation for statutory bail purposes, while further investigation under CrPC Section 173(8) supplements but does not negate completion.
Union of India and Ors. v. Shakeel Ahmad Burney
The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's finding that appointment of a departmental employee as Postal Assistant through a competitive exam constitutes direct recruitment, entitling him to MACP benefits.
Maya Devi v. Director General of Posts (PLI) Department
The Delhi High Court held that nomination under the Insurance Act does not confer beneficial interest and upheld the requirement of a succession certificate for release of insurance proceeds when the nominee predeceases the insured.
M/S RANE VENTURES PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging permissions for a sugar factory, holding that the Bombay High Court had jurisdiction as the cause of action arose in Maharashtra and the petition in Delhi was an abuse of process.
Rajiv Kanwar v. State
The Delhi High Court granted a succession certificate to the sole legal heir petitioner for the movable assets of the deceased under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1956, in absence of objections.
Sant Kumar Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that delayed communication and cryptic rejection of adverse ACR entries violated natural justice and Articles 14 and 16, directing retrospective promotion of the petitioner with consequential benefits.
Syed Maqbool v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court upheld the extension of detention under UAPA up to 180 days based on the Public Prosecutor's report and clarified that filing a charge sheet with a prayer for further investigation does not entitle accused to statutory bail.
Pooja Saxena v. Union Bank of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking regularization of a contractual bank employee, holding that acceptance of explicit contractual terms and binding government directives preclude claims for absorption.
Union of India v. Sh. T.R. Sharma
The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT’s order granting second financial upgradation under the ACP scheme to Department of Posts employees by recognizing a 1977 Government circular equating diploma plus experience to an engineering degree for eligibility.
Vringo Infrastructure Inc. & Anr. v. Indiamart Intermesh Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court refused to confirm an interim injunction for patent infringement due to lack of prima facie case and expert evidence, directing a scientific panel to examine the technologies in dispute.
Ghanshyam v. Vijender
The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant's revision petition, upholding eviction on bona fide necessity grounds where ownership and tenancy were established and no genuine alternative premises existed.
Vakil Sahni & Anr v. State & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 420, 468, 471, and 34 IPC based on a court-mediated settlement, affirming the High Court's inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings in non-compoundable offences where justice so requires.
Prem Singh v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Prem Singh, Kamal Kishore, and Manoj Kumar for the murder of Hoshiyar Singh based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence including motive, presence, conduct, and recoveries.
Prem Singh v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of three appellants for murder based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence including motive, presence, conduct, recoveries, and forensic findings.