Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Shanti Devi v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under dowry harassment and related offences based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Sanjay Kumar v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 509, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.
Dharmender & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on a voluntary and amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Chintu Kumar & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Naqibullah Rodaie v. Air Customs, IGI Airport, New Delhi
Bail was refused to an accused in a commercial heroin trafficking case under Section 37 NDPS Act due to failure to satisfy stringent twin conditions and high risk of absconding.
CBI v. V K Singh & Anr
The Delhi High Court held that in cases involving official secrets, the accused is entitled to inspect sensitive documents but not necessarily to receive hard copies, balancing fair trial rights with State security.
Chhotey Lal v. The State
The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of rape under Section 376 IPC, holding that consent obtained on a false promise of marriage is not vitiated consent unless the promise was made without any intention to marry from the outset.
ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION v. RAHUL MEHRA
The Supreme Court upheld the inclusion of eminent players with voting rights in AIFF's General Body, refined governance and disqualification norms, and directed expeditious elections under a new Constitution aligned with national and international sports governance standards.
Kaveri Plastics v. Mahdoom Bawa BahruDeen Noorul
A demand notice under Section 138 of the NI Act must specify the exact cheque amount; any discrepancy, including typographical errors, invalidates the notice and the complaint.
M/S QUIPPO ENERGY LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AHMEDABAD – II
The Supreme Court held that placing imported Gensets in containers with integral components amounts to manufacture under the Central Excise Act, 1944, attracting excise duty, while setting aside extended period demands and penalties due to bona fide conduct.
Bipin Chandulal Sodha v. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed a review petition seeking re-appraisal of facts, holding that review jurisdiction is limited to correcting patent errors and imposed costs for abuse of process.
Dhiral Vinit Gogari v. Pravina Purushottamdas Nagarawalla
The Bombay High Court held that duly registered confirmation deeds cure the defect of non-registration of an earlier conveyance deed and confer valid title, allowing the appeal and declaring the appellants as owners of the suit property.
Srikant Shyamanand Chaturvedi v. Dr. Roopali Chaturvedi
The Bombay High Court dismissed the husband's transfer application to move the wife's Domestic Violence complaint from the Magistrate Court to the Family Court, affirming the wife's statutory right to choose the forum and emphasizing expeditious disposal.
Abid Shiraz Merchant v. State of Maharashtra; Ramprakash Ramdas Chowdhry
The High Court set aside the appellate court's injunction order for exceeding jurisdiction and upheld the trial court's rejection of injunction due to suppression of material facts and absence of proprietary rights by the tenant.
Krishanabai Bhausaheb Gore & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the correction of a Consolidation Scheme under Section 31A of the Maharashtra Act as a valid rectification of clerical errors despite the long lapse of time, dismissing the petitioners' challenge.
JAIN SHIKANJI PRIVATE LIMITED v. SATISH KUMAR JAIN
The Delhi High Court corrected typographical errors in its judgment and emphasized that the appellant violated interim orders by continuing to use the old corporate name in transactions until compelled to change it after the respondent's complaint.
Srishti Rustagi v. Securities and Exchange Board of India
The Delhi High Court upheld SEBI's refusal to disclose details of an ongoing investigation under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, dismissing the appellant's plea for further information and emphasizing confidentiality in regulatory probes.
Soumya Bhattacharya v. Sudhir Kumar Thakur & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a brother managing the estate and maintenance of the deceased's dependents has locus to file a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, dismissing the maintainability challenge.
Umesh @ Kala v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed bail under MCOCA to an accused involved in organized crime, holding that delay in trial alone does not justify bail when the accused’s role and risk to society are significant.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/S Valley Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing insurer United India Insurance to pay ₹33.26 crores to insured Valley Iron & Steel, holding that the consent letter was signed under economic duress and that arbitrable disputes survived despite prior settlement.