Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Toheed Khan v. State (GNCT of Delhi) and Anr

28 Jan 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:485

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of offences under the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita and POCSO Act, holding that lawful marriage under Muslim law and victim's no-objection statement justified bail after charge-sheet filing.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail POCSO Act Muslim law marriage age of puberty

State of NCT of Delhi v. Subhan Ali @ Gangi & Anr.

28 Jan 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:486-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's conviction under Sections 452 and 354 IPC and acquittal under Section 376 IPC, finding the survivor's testimony on rape not credible in light of prior statements and medical evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed sexual assault rape Section 376 IPC Section 354 IPC

GD Rahul Choudhary v. Union of India and Ors

28 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:539-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that medical fitness standards for LDCE promotion in CISF are distinct and stricter than routine medical exams, and a candidate declared unfit in the LDCE medical examination cannot claim appointment despite SHAPE-I status.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant LDCE medical fitness SHAPE-I Medical Category Central Industrial Security Force

Lovee Narula v. Directorate of Enforcement

28 Jan 2025 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2025:DHC:467
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a money laundering case, holding that the arrest complied with statutory safeguards, statements under Section 50 PMLA are admissible, and the petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of involvement in money laundering.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Section 19 PMLA Section 50 PMLA Section 24 PMLA

Rajesh Kumar v. Directorate of Enforcement

28 Jan 2025 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2025:DHC:466
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of Rajesh Kumar in a money laundering case, holding that his arrest complied with Section 19 of the PMLA, statements under Section 50 are admissible, and he failed to satisfy the twin conditions for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Section 19 PMLA Section 45 PMLA Section 50 PMLA

Naresh Kumar Jain v. R.L. Kapoor

28 Jan 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Transfers of immovable property during pendency of suit (transferee pendente lite) cannot resist execution of possession decree under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC due to lis pendens doctrine, barring appeals against such objections.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXI Rule 97 CPC Order XXI Rule 102 CPC lis pendens Section 52 Transfer of Property Act

Ms. Tanya Agarwal and Mr. Gaurav Kalra v. Directorate of Enforcement

28 Jan 2025 · Chandra Dhari Singh, J · 2025:DHC:462
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a PMLA money laundering case involving spurious anti-cancer medicines, holding that the stringent twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA were not satisfied and the statutory presumption of guilt was not rebutted.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act Section 45 PMLA Section 24 PMLA bail conditions

NBCC (INDIA) LIMITED v. AMAN LEKHI & ORS

28 Jan 2025 · Rekha Palli; Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:490-DB

The Delhi High Court clarified that the protected area of Dariya Khan Tomb is 1.25 acres, correcting a factual error, but upheld restrictions on construction without statutory permissions.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 Section 20A protected area prohibited area

M/S AMLOH AGGARWAL STORES v. M/S LSC MARKETING INDIA PVT. LTD

28 Jan 2025 · C. HARI SHANKAR; AJAY DIGPAUL · 2025:DHC:559-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a commercial appeal as withdrawn after the respondent challenged its maintainability for not assailing an order under Section 43 CPC as required by the Commercial Courts Act.

civil other Commercial Courts Act Section 13(A) Section 43 CPC maintainability of appeal

Akshay Kumar v. Directorate of Enforcement

28 Jan 2025 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2025:DHC:465
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of Akshay Kumar in a money laundering case under the PMLA, holding that he failed to satisfy the stringent twin conditions under Section 45 of the Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act Section 45 PMLA bail conditions money laundering

Iqbal Singh v. Hari Kishan Lal

28 Jan 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:562

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a 1937 sale deed proved through original registration records, dismissing the appellants' claim of ownership and affirming the respondents' title to the disputed property.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant sale deed Section 90 Indian Evidence Act res judicata Order 23 Rule 1(4) CPC

Union of India and Ors v. Kailash Ram Jakhar

28 Jan 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:551-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's direction for a dermatological examination to verify the presence of a tattoo on the candidate's right forearm, declining to interfere with the recruitment process condition.

administrative petition_dismissed Central Administrative Tribunal dermatological examination tattoo restriction Delhi Police recruitment

Union of India and Ors v. Sonali Damne

28 Jan 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:565-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's direction for dermatological examination to verify tattoo presence on the right forearm as per recruitment rules, declining to interfere with the administrative process.

administrative petition_dismissed dermatological examination tattoo restriction Delhi Police recruitment Central Administrative Tribunal

Sonu Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:507-DB

The Delhi High Court directed CISF to reassess the petitioner’s medical fitness for appointment through a Medical Board applying relevant guidelines, allowing the petition with conditions.

administrative petition_allowed medical fitness CISF appointment congenital brachymetatarsia Medical Guidelines May 2015

Mohd Zakir & Ors. v. Chandu Lal

28 Jan 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:601
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that tenants who continue possession under a stay of eviction must pay reasonable use and occupation charges at market rent to the landlord until final disposal.

civil other Significant use and occupation charges eviction stay interim compensation commercial tenancy

Saurabh Pruthi v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd

28 Jan 2025 · Jyoti Singh · 2025:DHC:521

The Delhi High Court upheld a six-month electricity bill assessment based on a slow meter test report under DERC Regulations, dismissing the petition challenging the bill and affirming the regulatory procedure.

administrative petition_dismissed electricity meter assessment DERC Regulations 2007 Regulation 38(f) meter slow error

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd v. Gaurav

28 Jan 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:484

The Delhi High Court upheld compensation for pain and suffering and attendant charges in a motor accident claim involving 100% permanent disability, affirming the distinct heads of damages and the use of the multiplier method despite limited documentary proof.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim pain and suffering attendant charges permanent disability

Goodai Global Inc v. Shahnawaz Siddiqui & Anr.

28 Jan 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:649

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner’s rectification petition and ordered removal of a deceptively similar trademark registered in bad faith by the respondent under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 57 Section 11(10)(ii) bad faith

Nitesh Kr. Singh; Laavanya Kaushik; Aliza Alam; Mohnish Sehrawat; Amitoj Chadha v. Harish Lamba

28 Jan 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:616

The Delhi High Court held that RTI Act does not apply to judicial functions requiring analysis of court records, setting aside CIC's order directing disclosure of such information.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Right to Information Act, 2005 judicial functions administrative functions exemption from disclosure

Rakesh Kumar v. Central Public Information Officer and Anr.

28 Jan 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:618

The Delhi High Court held that passport information of third parties is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and upheld non-disclosure due to destruction of records.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 8(1)(j) third party information passport details