Delhi High Court

36,666 judgments

Year:

Vijay Singh @ Vijay Pehlwan v. State NCT of Delhi

19 Feb 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:1045-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Vijay Singh for murder based on last seen theory, circumstantial evidence, and failure to explain whereabouts, dismissing his appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant last seen theory circumstantial evidence Section 302 IPC Section 106 Evidence Act

Sgt Rockey Angral v. Union of India

19 Feb 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:1049-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Indian Air Force's decision to transfer the petitioner despite compassionate grounds, allowing limited time to join the new posting without penalty.

administrative appeal_dismissed posting screening compassionate grounds Indian Air Force

Sameer v. State; Imran @ Murgi Chor v. State

19 Feb 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Dharmesh Sharma
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of two appellants for robbery and murder based on reliable witness identification, lawful recovery of stolen goods, forensic evidence, and call detail records.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant robbery murder identification recovery of stolen property

Satinder Singh Bhasin v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

19 Feb 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:1075-DB

The Delhi High Court held that inter-state arrests must comply with prescribed procedural safeguards and directed production of the petitioner arrested by UP police in Delhi for non-compliance with the protocol.

criminal other Significant inter-state arrest protocol habeas corpus illegal arrest procedural safeguards

Smt Raj Kumari Bansal & Anr. v. Sh Gurcharan Singh & Ors.

19 Feb 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:1822

The Delhi High Court allowed the landlord's eviction petition under the DRC Act, holding that co-ownership nondisclosure and alternate accommodation issues raised no triable issues, tenancy was admitted, and bona fide need was established.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 eviction petition landlord-tenant relationship bona fide need

IDBI Bank Ltd v. Gaurav Goel & Ors.

19 Feb 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela; Devendra Kumar Upadhya... · 2025:DHC:1034-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the requirement of personal hearing under the RBI Directions before classifying a borrower's account as fraud, affirming the Supreme Court's ruling on audi alteram partem in administrative proceedings with civil consequences.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant audi alteram partem personal hearing RBI Directions fraud classification

Renewflex Recycling v. Facilitation Centre Rohini Courts & Ors

19 Feb 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela; Devender Kumar Upadhya... · 2025:DHC:1020-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act must strictly follow the statutory process and informal mediation attempts or non-response do not satisfy procedural requirements.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 12A Commercial Courts Act Pre-institution mediation Non-Starter Report Statutory procedure

Juned Alam v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi

19 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1101

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in an extortion case, emphasizing the primacy of personal liberty, parity with co-accused, and completion of investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant regular bail extortion personal liberty Article 21

Supriya Shahi v. The State NCT of Delhi

19 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1102

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in an extortion case, emphasizing the presumption of innocence, parity with co-accused granted bail, and the completion of investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail extortion personal liberty Article 21

Ashish @ Kalu v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

19 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1103

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in an alleged attempt to murder case, emphasizing a holistic approach to bail considering investigation status, antecedents, and imposing strict conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail attempt to murder Section 307 IPC Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita

Lt. Col Parag Doval v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Feb 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:1082-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Armed Forces Tribunal erred in disposing of the petitioner’s initial challenge to Court of Inquiry proceedings without merit adjudication merely because a subsequent application was filed, and restored the initial application for hearing on merits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Court of Inquiry Show Cause Notice Army Rules Army Act, 1950

Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited v. Fitwell Constructions

19 Feb 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:1193

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising from a contract containing a valid arbitration clause, rejecting objections to the appointment.

civil petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator arbitration clause sole arbitrator

Jai Kishan Khanna v. Registrar of Delhi Cooperative Societies & Anr.

19 Feb 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1114

The Delhi High Court dismissed the contempt petition against the Registrar for delay in passing an order, as the order was eventually passed, but cautioned strict future compliance.

administrative petition_dismissed contempt of court wilful disobedience Registrar of Delhi Cooperative Societies court directions

Anuj Ghuliani v. Income Tax Officer & Anr.

19 Feb 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:1111-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) must provide at least seven days to respond and that the Assessing Officer must consider any timely reply before issuing a notice under Section 148, setting aside the impugned order and notice.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148A(b) Section 148A(d) Section 148

Rawat v. Archaeological Survey of India & Ors.

19 Feb 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:1106-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking demolition of alleged illegal constructions as motivated and frivolous, emphasizing strict scrutiny of PILs to prevent misuse and uphold genuine public interest.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Public Interest Litigation Frivolous PIL Oblique Motive Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958

TM 25 Holding BV v. Akhtar Ali & Ors.

19 Feb 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:1671

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to the plaintiff against defendants manufacturing and distributing counterfeit goods bearing the registered 'G-STAR' trademarks, proceeding ex parte due to defendants' non-appearance.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Permanent injunction Registered trademark Counterfeit goods

Rohit Singh v. Anil Kumar Poddar

18 Feb 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:1006

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld summary decree in a suit for recovery based on bounced cheques, holding that the appellant failed to raise a substantial or triable defence under Order XXXVII CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII CPC summary suit leave to defend bounced cheque

Mahakaleshwar Infratech Pvt. Ltd v. Chief Engineer, National Highways, UPPWD

18 Feb 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:1018
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award that compensated delay in appointed date declaration but denied claims for prolongation costs and held Covid-19 delays as non-compensable force majeure.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 appointed date delay force majeure

Sentec India Company Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Delhi & Ors.

18 Feb 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:1060-DB

The Delhi High Court held that Extra Duty Deposit is not a customs duty and refund claims of EDD are not subject to the one-year limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, directing refund of EDD deposited during provisional assessment.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Extra Duty Deposit Customs Act, 1962 Section 27 limitation refund of customs duty

VIJAY POWER GENERATORS LTD v. TARUN ENGINEERING SYNDICATE

18 Feb 2025 · Jasmeet Singh

The High Court upheld the acquittal of the respondent in a cheque dishonour case, holding that the petitioner failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt and the respondent successfully rebutted the statutory presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 NI Act Rebuttable presumption Dishonour of cheque