Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Anirudh Dawar & Ors. v. State & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under sections 323, 341, 506, 509, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process.
M/S Mandhar Marketing A Partnership Firm & Ors. v. Sh. Rakesh Gupta & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that revision petitions under Section 115 CPC are barred against interlocutory orders of Commercial Courts by Section 8 of the Commercial Courts Act, and constitutional jurisdiction under Article 227 must be exercised sparingly, restoring and then dismissing the petition on withdrawal.
SH Vinay Mishra & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.
Rishab Arora & Ors. v. The State Govt. NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 528 BNSS 2023 to prevent unnecessary criminal proceedings.
Chirag Adlakha and Ors. v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute-related FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.
Raj Saha @ Tarzen v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application in a murder case, holding that the serious nature of the offence, advanced trial stage, and prior conviction preclude bail despite prolonged incarceration.
Ex Hav (GD) Jag Mohan v. Union of India
The High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the appropriate forum and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Suresh Chand & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and pass a reasoned order within four weeks, disposing of the petition accordingly.
GEM SALES CORPORATION v. SHIVAM CORPORATION INDIA
The Delhi High Court dismissed the commercial appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to the appellant to initiate appropriate proceedings due to non-maintainability under Section 13A of the Commercial Courts Act and Order XLIII CPC.
Rajmani v. Union of India & Anr.
The court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to reconsider the petitioner's representation on posting with reasons for any rejection, while requiring the petitioner to report to the posting immediately.
Tridib Mondal v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that street vendors with valid Certificates of Vending must comply with conditions including non-encroachment of public spaces and may not be disturbed if compliant, dismissing the petition challenging removal and confiscation by MCD.
M/S GS Marbles v. M/S Shree Granites
The Delhi High Court upheld a decree for recovery against a defendant who failed to file a Written Statement within the statutory 120-day period, affirming the mandatory nature of procedural timelines under Order VIII CPC.
Hambir Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld that furlough cannot be granted during pendency of appeal before the Supreme Court under Note 2 to Rule 1224 of the Delhi Prison Rules, applying the principle of derogation of power from K.M. Nanavati, while recognizing furlough does not suspend sentence.
Budhi Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that furlough cannot be granted during pendency of appeal before the Supreme Court as it would derogate appellate powers, interpreting 'High Court' in prison rules to include the Supreme Court and upholding the constitutional validity of the bar on furlough during such pendency.
Jaykishor Chaturvedi v. Securities and Exchange Board of India
The Supreme Court upheld SEBI's authority to levy retrospective interest on unpaid penalties from the date of adjudication orders under Section 28A of the SEBI Act read with Income Tax Act provisions, dismissing the appellants' challenge to recovery proceedings.
Neethu B. @ Neethu Baby Mathew v. Rajesh Kumar
The Supreme Court allowed review of its earlier custody order based on new psychological evidence, restoring permanent custody to the mother while granting the father visitation rights to protect the child's best interests.
G. Kalawathi Bai v. G. Shashikala
The Supreme Court held that a power-of-attorney holder executing a document does not become its executant for registration purposes and must comply with authentication requirements under the Registration Act, 1908, overruling the contrary view in Rajni Tandon.
Vijay Kumar v. Central Bank of India
The Supreme Court held that reduction of pension on compulsory retirement requires prior consultation with the Board of Directors under Regulation 33 of the Central Bank of India Pension Regulations, and set aside the pension reduction order for lack of such consultation.
Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court set aside the appellant's conviction and death sentence in a double murder case due to unreliable circumstantial evidence, weak confession, and faulty investigation.
M/S TORINO LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA
The Supreme Court upheld the clubbing of two pharmaceutical companies as one establishment under the EPF Act based on cumulative factors of unity in management, finance, premises, and purpose, dismissing the appellant's challenge.