Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Sunil v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

18 Jul 2014 · S.P. Garg · TR 2014:DHC:3336

The Delhi High Court disposed of Criminal Appeal No. 550/2013 by referring to a detailed common judgment in a related case, without issuing a separate ruling.

criminal other Procedural criminal appeal disposal common judgment Delhi High Court

Bhudev Pal @ Boby v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

18 Jul 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:3335

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on credible testimony of the injured witness and medical evidence, while reducing the sentence from ten to eight years.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 304 Part II IPC culpable homicide interested witness delay in FIR

Edini Steels Private Limited v. Satish Autogas Private Limited

18 Jul 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3327

The Delhi High Court allowed a Scheme of Amalgamation between two private companies, dispensing with meetings of shareholders and creditors based on their written consents under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 dispensation of meetings

EnQuest Offshore Private Limited v. EnQuest Petro Solutions Private Limited

18 Jul 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3333

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between two private limited companies under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 after ensuring statutory compliance and absence of objections.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 sections 391 to 394 court sanction

M/S Kanjimull and Sons v. Radeka Chaudhary & Anr

18 Jul 2014 · G. S. Sistani · 2014:DHC:3332

The Delhi High Court granted summary decree under Order XXXVII CPC for recovery of Rs. 2.38 crores against defendant no.1 due to dishonoured cheques and non-appearance, but dismissed the suit against defendant no.2.

civil appeal_allowed Order XXXVII CPC summary suit dishonoured cheque Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act

Subhash Solanki & Anr. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

18 Jul 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3347

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 324/34 IPC based on a genuine settlement between neighbors, applying the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process in a non-heinous offence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR settlement between parties non-heinous offences

Union of India v. Dr. O P Nijhawan

18 Jul 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:3342-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's petition, upholding the CAT's order to reckon special pay for pension benefits and extend it to all eligible retired scientists without requiring individual claims.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant special pay pension computation Central Administrative Tribunal 5th Pay Commission

Gautam Goswami v. State

18 Jul 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Sunita Gupta · 2014:DHC:3350-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the life convictions of a wife and her paramour for the murder of her husband based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence including illicit relationship, administration of sedatives, and manual strangulation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder illicit relationship Section 302 IPC

Rohit Bhardwaj & Ors. v. State & Anr.

18 Jul 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3349

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC based on an amicable settlement and divorce decree, applying its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC in matrimonial disputes.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Section 406 IPC

Shanker & Ors. v. The State & Anr.

18 Jul 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3346

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement in a matrimonial dispute, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC where the possibility of conviction was remote.

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

Ravinder Nath Sahni v. Poddar Construction Co. Private Ltd. & Sabina Jajodia

18 Jul 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3328

The Delhi High Court held that Sahni's suit for specific performance was barred by limitation and dismissed his claim, upheld the sale deed in favor of Jajodia, and set aside the grant of compensation to Sahni.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance limitation agreement to sell readiness and willingness

th July, 2014 SUDHAKAR SINGH..... Through Mr. K. K. Sud, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chirag Khurana, Mr. Vishal Dabas & Ms. Banita Singh, Advocates. v. STATE.....

18 Jul 2014 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.... · 2014:DHC:3338-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for dowry death and cruelty under Sections 304B and 498A IPC based on the suicide note and evidence of harassment, modifying the sentence under Section 304B to the minimum term.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 498A IPC cruelty

Ravinder Nath Sahni v. Poddar Construction Co. Private Ltd. & Sabina Jajodia

18 Jul 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3326

The Delhi High Court held that Sahni's suit for specific performance was barred by limitation and dismissed his appeal, cancelled the sale deed in favor of Jajodia as a sham transaction, and set aside the compensation awarded to Sahni.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance limitation agreement to sell bona fide purchaser

Ravinder Nath Sahni v. Poddar Construction Co. Private Ltd. & Sabina Jajodia

18 Jul 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3330

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for specific performance filed beyond the fixed six-month period is barred by limitation and that readiness and willingness to perform is essential for such relief, dismissing the claim and clarifying the burden on bona fide purchasers.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance limitation agreement to sell bona fide purchaser

SMT. SANTOSH v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

18 Jul 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Sunita Gupta · 2014:DHC:3351-DB

Siri Ram and Ors. v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

18 Jul 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Sunita Gupta · 2014:DHC:3341-DB

Delhi High Court upheld life convictions under Section 302 IPC for murder, rejecting appellants' claim of a sudden fight and acquittal of co-accused, affirming the credibility of eyewitness and forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC murder common intention Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC

Kamal Kishore & Anr. v. State of Delhi

18 Jul 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Sunita Gupta · 2014:DHC:3344-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a murder case due to failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence and hostile eyewitnesses.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence murder Section 302 IPC recovery of weapon

Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

18 Jul 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; G.P. Mittal · 2014:DHC:3343-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Sections 354 and 302 IPC based on credible ocular testimony and a valid dying declaration recorded by the police officer in presence of a doctor and witnesses.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration ocular testimony Section 302 IPC Section 354 IPC

J.P. Singh v. Director General Railway Protection Force

17 Jul 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:3315-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the removal from service of a Railway Protection Force Head Constable for serious misconduct and insubordination, affirming the authority's power to enhance punishment and the applicability of proportionality in judicial review of disciplinary actions.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings Railway Protection Force punishment enhancement judicial review

Raj Kumar Goel v. Bhagwan Singh & Ors.

17 Jul 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:3319

The Delhi High Court held that Magistrates must exercise discretion judiciously under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and are not obliged to order FIR registration mechanically when cognizable offences are alleged.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. FIR registration Magistrate discretion Cognizable offence