Delhi High Court

28,840 judgments

Year:

Aayush Goyal v. State of NCT of Delhi

15 Dec 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:11359

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of cyber-fraud facilitating mule accounts, emphasizing the principle of parity, absence of direct evidence, and settled status of the complainant.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail cyber-fraud mule accounts cryptocurrency

Arun Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

15 Dec 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:11365

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in a serious cyber fraud case after investigation completion, emphasizing prevention of pre-trial punishment and parity with similar cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant regular bail economic offence cyber fraud chargesheet filed

Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt Ltd v. Rajdip Bambawale & Ors.

15 Dec 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:11284
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a revocable license to tenants does not confer ownership over common facilities and appointed a commissioner to inspect an unsafe lift, allowing the landlord's appeal for interim relief reconsideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant revocable license common areas interim injunction Order XXXIX CPC

Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

15 Dec 2025 · Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:11360

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for rioting and related offences but modified the sentence to release the appellants on probation considering their age, conduct, and prospects for reformation.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Probation of Offenders Act Section 149 IPC unlawful assembly rioting

Shiv Prashad @ Kartaru v. State (NCT of Delhi)

15 Dec 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 962
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of POCSO and related IPC charges due to failure of prosecution to conclusively prove the prosecutrix's minority as required under the Juvenile Justice Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant POCSO Act minority proof age determination school admission register

Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi v. Jitender Kumar

15 Dec 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:11283
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that non-renewal of fixed-term contractual employment does not amount to retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, setting aside the Tribunal's order of reinstatement with back wages.

labor appeal_allowed Significant fixed-term contract non-renewal retrenchment Section 25-F Industrial Disputes Act

Motor & General Finance Limited v. Director General & Anr

15 Dec 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:11290
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition challenging the dismissal of an appeal under the ESI Act, holding that review is limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record and that statutory amendments and evidentiary issues not raised earlier cannot be entertained at the review stage.

civil petition_dismissed Significant review petition Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 Section 45A ESI Act

Jairaj Developers v. Varendhishakt Prdhiesubhaag

15 Dec 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:11295-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal against rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, holding that limitation and cause of action issues require trial and a third party suit enforcing pre-existing rights is not barred by a compromise decree.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC specific performance limitation cause of action

ANU v. SURESH VERMA & ORS.

15 Dec 2025 · ANIL KSHETARPAL; HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR · 2025:DHC:11289-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the refusal to grant a summary decree in a partition suit due to unresolved factual disputes, emphasizing that clear and unequivocal admissions are necessary for relief under Order XII Rule 6 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC partition suit summary decree admissions

Leayan Global Pvt Ltd v. Bata India Ltd

15 Dec 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:11331-DB

Delhi High Court upheld interlocutory injunction restraining Leayan from using the mark POWER FLEX, affirming Bata's exclusive rights in the trademark POWER and clarifying permissible use of related taglines and stock disposal.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant Trademark infringement Trade Marks Act 1999 Interlocutory injunction Deceptive similarity

Sagar v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

15 Dec 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11397
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in a serious sexual offence case against a minor, emphasizing delayed trial and lack of independent evidence while imposing protective conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail sexual offence minor victim Section 376 IPC

Hari Singh v. Kitabo Devi

15 Dec 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:11398
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal by modifying the decree to record a settlement whereby the respondent paid Rs. 3,00,000 to the appellant and ordered a partial refund of court fees.

civil appeal_allowed specific performance settlement payment admission court fees refund

M/S USHA JEWELLERS PVT LTD v. STATE BANK OF INDIA

15 Dec 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:11664
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's applications for suspension of sentence in a cheque dishonour case due to non-compliance with mandatory deposit conditions under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing that financial incapacity alone does not exempt such deposit.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 148 Negotiable Instruments Act suspension of sentence deposit condition

Khemo Devi Public School v. Central Board of Secondary Education

13 Dec 2025 · Vikas Mahajan · 2025:DHC:11314

The Delhi High Court set aside CBSE's disaffiliation order for the secondary level of a school, holding that curable deficiencies must be remedied before imposing such a severe penalty.

administrative petition_allowed Significant disaffiliation CBSE Affiliation Bye-Laws 2018 secondary level

Rahul Vattamparambil Remesh v. Union of India & Ors.

12 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1444-DB

The Delhi High Court partially waived warehousing charges by 50% under Section 151 CPC due to unexplained delay in seeking full waiver, modifying its earlier order.

civil appeal_allowed Section 151 CPC warehousing charges modification of order waiver of charges

Tushar Bansal & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

12 Dec 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:11298

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

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

M/S J.K. Enterprises v. Superintendent, Delhi North, Ward-24, Zone-1, Delhi

12 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:11373-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a consolidated SCN for multiple years, confirmed proper service of notices, rejected writ jurisdiction in a fraudulent ITC case, and directed the petitioner to pursue statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit Consolidated Show Cause Notice CGST Act Section 107 CGST

Mohd. Guddu v. Ganga Devi and Anr.

12 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:11342-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Commercial Court's jurisdiction and possession decree in a commercial tenancy dispute, modifying the decree to allow continued occupation till June 2026 with payment of arrears, while remanding disputed issues for trial.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Order XII Rule 6 CPC Order VII Rule 10 CPC possession decree

Pranij Heights India Pvt Ltd v. The Joint Commissioner of Customs

12 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:11343-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that non-communication of an extension order under Section 28(9) of the Customs Act does not vitiate adjudication proceedings and dismissed the writ petition challenging delayed adjudication of a Show Cause Notice.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Customs Act 1962 Section 28(9) extension of adjudication period show cause notice

Manikjeet Singh Kals v. Union of India & Ors.

12 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:11344-DB

The Delhi High Court held that jurisdiction for adjudication and appeal under the CGST Act is determined by the highest tax demand and procedural objections do not invalidate orders, directing the petitioner to pursue remedy through appeal.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit CGST Act 2017 jurisdiction appellate authority