Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
Through: Ms. Sahila Lamba, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) v. N.C.T. OF DELHI
Delhi High Court modified convictions and reduced sentences in dacoity case, clarifying the distinction between Sections 411 and 412 IPC and setting aside convictions under Section 398 IPC due to lack of proof.
Through: Ms. Sahila Lamba, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) v. N.C.T. OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court modified convictions and reduced sentences in a dacoity case, clarifying the distinction between Sections 411 and 412 IPC and setting aside convictions under Section 398 IPC where minimum sentence criteria were not met.
Through: Ms. Sahila Lamba, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) v. N.C.T. OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court altered Nasiruddin's conviction from Section 412 to 411 IPC, set aside convictions under Section 398 IPC for other appellants, and reduced their sentences to the period already served, emphasizing the necessity of knowledge of dacoity for Section 412 and proportional sentencing.
Through: Ms. Sahila Lamba, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) v. N.C.T. OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court modified convictions and reduced sentences of appellants in a dacoity case, clarifying the distinction between Sections 411 and 412 IPC and setting aside convictions under Section 398 IPC due to insufficient evidence.
Mohinder Singh v. BSES Rajdhani Power Limited
The court held that all acquittals are legally equivalent for pay during suspension, and the competent authority must consider all circumstances and give a hearing before withholding full pay and allowances.
Vikas Yadav v. State of U.P.
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Vikas Yadav, affirming that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt and no legal or procedural errors warranted interference.
Sukhdev Yadav v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the criminal appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant after finding the prosecution evidence credible and no procedural infirmity in the trial.
Vishal Yadav v. State of U.P.
The Delhi High Court upheld the convictions of Vikas Yadav, Vishal Yadav, and Sukhdev Yadav for the abduction and murder of Nitish Katara, affirming the principles of fair trial, burden of proof, and appellate reappraisal of evidence.
Abdul Rasheed v. State
The Delhi High Court acquitted two accused for lack of common intention and reduced the murder conviction of the third accused to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC due to absence of premeditation and heat of passion.
Pyare Lal and Ors. v. M/S Kores (India) Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld lawful retrenchment of workmen category-wise following the 'last come first go' principle under the Industrial Disputes Act, dismissing the petitioners' challenge to the Labour Court Award.
M/S EXPLICIT LEATHERS v. ARVIND KUMAR & ORS
The Delhi High Court upheld ex-parte awards reinstating terminated employees with back wages, dismissing the petitioner's applications to set aside the awards due to failure to prove non-receipt of notice or lack of employer-employee relationship.
H.K. Chhabra v. Manmeet Kaur
Specific performance of an agreement to sell involving construction cannot be granted where the contract lacks essential terms describing the construction, entitling the plaintiff only to refund of earnest money with interest.
Rahul Jain @ Sonu v. The State (Govt. of NCT), Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and seven-year sentence of the appellant for robbery under Sections 392/397 IPC based on credible identification, recovery of stolen goods, and possession of a deadly weapon.
Jagdish v. Monika
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the Family Court's rejection of a divorce petition on grounds of cruelty, holding that irretrievable breakdown is not a statutory ground for divorce and the appellant failed to prove cruelty with requisite particularity.
Sh. Surai Besra v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and held that the Railways are strictly liable to pay compensation for the death of a bonafide passenger due to an untoward incident, setting aside the Tribunal's dismissal.
Madhvi Jain v. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that the limitation period for recovery of a deposit for electricity load enhancement runs from the date of demand, not deposit, allowing the appellant's claim for refund despite the suit being filed more than three years after deposit.
Sh. Ram Chander & Anr. v. Sh. Krishan Kumar Sharma
The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal, affirming that the disputed plot not included in the sanctioned layout plan is private property and the plaintiff has title and entitlement to construct on it.
M/S. ADHARSHILA DESIGNS (P) LTD. v. M/S. MVL LIMITED
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a suit from Tis Hazari courts to Saket courts, upholding the Chief Justice's administrative circular on case distribution.
Haji Abdul Mateen (Deceased) through his LRs v. Sheikh Haji Firozuddin & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that transferees pendente lite cannot resist execution of a possession decree under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act and Order 21 Rule 102 CPC, and the decree binds them even if not impleaded as parties.
Jitender Singh v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a son for murdering his mother by acid attack, affirming the admissibility and reliability of a police-recorded dying declaration despite hostile witnesses and absence of magistrate or medical certification.