Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 1 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 597NOMINAL INDEXSandeepa Virk v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 1Nippon Steel Corporation v. The Controller Of Patents 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 2Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi M/S TCK Advisers Pvt. Ltd. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 3U.S. Green Building Council v. Deming Certification Services Pvt Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 4TENZIN YOUTEN & ANR v. THE STATE...
Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 1 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 597
NOMINAL INDEX
Sandeepa Virk v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 1
Nippon Steel Corporation v. The Controller Of Patents 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 2
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi M/S TCK Advisers Pvt. Ltd. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 3
U.S. Green Building Council v. Deming Certification Services Pvt Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 4
TENZIN YOUTEN & ANR v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 5
Zydus Healthcare Ltd. v. Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 6
Triveni v. Home Department Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 7
PROFESSOR ALKA ACHARYA v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 8
YERRAM VENKATA SUBBA REDDY & ANR v. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 9
MR KONIDALA PAWAN KALYAN v. ASHOK KUMAR JOHN DOE & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 10
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v. Controller General Of Patents 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 11
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 12
Rajvaidya Shital Prasad And Sons v. Karna Goomar And Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 13
MOIN AKHTAR QURESHI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 14
DHEERAJ ARORA v. PARINEY KHANNA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 15
ANUSHA GUPTA & ANR v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY THROUGH THE DIRECTOR & OTHERS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 16
Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc & Ors v. animesugez.to & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 17
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE v. KAMAL KISHORE AGGARWAL 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 18
Emitec Gesellschaft Fur Emissionstechnologie mbH v. Controller General Of Patents, Designs & Trademarks & Arn 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 19
VIPIN KUMAR SHARMA & ORS v. THE RETURNING OFFICER NDBA ELECTIONS, 2025 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 20
Maj (Retd.) Sukesh Behl Proprietor, M/S Pearl Engineering Company & Anr. v. Koninklijke Philips NV 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 21
DHARMENDRA KUMAR v. STATE 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 22
Sana Herbals Private Limited v. Mohsin Dehlvi & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 23
Sumit Vijay & Anr. v. Major League Baseball Properties Inc. & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 24
Ex-Servicemen Welfare Union v. Union Of India And Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 25
Ravinder Singh Gandoak v. State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 26
Manoj Mishra v. State (and connected matter) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 27
Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited v National Highway Authority of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 28
Sh. Vimal Ghai v. Sh. M. P. Sharma 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 29
Jai Mangal Rai v. UoI (and batch) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 30
CBI v. Kukwant Rai 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 31
Automat Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. And Ors v. Aquestia Limited & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 32
Avinash Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 33
X v. State & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 34
Anuradha @ Chiku v. State (Nct Of Delhi) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 35
China Trust Commercial Bank v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 36
Ram Kuber v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 37
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 38
DUSHYANT KUMAR GAUTAM v. URMILA SANA WAR & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 39
Roseland Buildtech Private Limited v. Vihaan 43 Reality Private Limited & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 40
Smt Sudha Sharma v. State Nct Of Delhi & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 41
Renuka Jain v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 42
Veena Arora v. Commissioner Income Tax - 12 Delhi & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 43
UMESH KUMAR & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 44
Arun Kumar Bagla v. M/S SCJ Plastics Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 45
UoI v. Naresh 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 46
Vedanta Limited v. Union of India and Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 47
Dr Manoj Khanna v. Income Tax Office 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 48
Birendra Singh Kunwar v. Union Of India Through Secretary (R) And Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 49
Satish Kumar Gupta v. Sushil Kumar Loomba 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 50
SJVN Ltd. v. Patel Gammon Joint Venture 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 51
Sumeet Suri v State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 52
JLT Energy 9 SAS v. Hindustan Cleanenergy Limited & Ors. and connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 53
Microsoft Corporation India Pvt. Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 54
Shree Krishna Steel Traders Through Proprietor Nikhil Sharma vs. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 55
GE Energy Parts Inc v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. (and connected matter) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 56
Parvesh Mann @ Sagar Mann v. State Nct Of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 57
Vinod @ Vinode @ Bhole v. The State (Govt Of Nct) Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 58
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-1 v. Borgwarner Emissions Systems India Private Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 59
HIND SAMRAJYA PARTY v. UOI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 60
Vodafone Idea Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Central GST Division Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate (MCIE) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 61
Tulip Multispecialty Hospital Private Limited v. Akhil Saxena & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 62
Koshaliya Devi Rastogi v. Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-27, New Delhi And Anr (and batch) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 63
Shri Satya Narain, Since Deceased Through LRs v. Chairman Delhi Development Authority Through Its Chairman & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 64
JC v. BS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 65
Sh. Sanket Behari Mittal v. Sh. Subhash Chand Gupta 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 66
HARSHIT AGRAWAL v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 67
MCDONALDS INDIA LTD v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 68
Court On Its Own Motion v. Union Of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 69
BHUVAN BAM & ANR v. INKWYNK & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 70
Sandeep Sethi & Anr v. Rajinder Kumar Sethi Deceased Through Lrs 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 71
MCD v. M/S Ram Niwas Goel 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 72
ABHIMANYU SINGH AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 73
Union Of India v. Shri Raj Priy Singh 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 74
Mr Gautam Mondal Through His Wife Mrs Ashima Mukherjee Mondal v. Union Of India Through Its Standing Counsel & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 75
First Generation Lawyers Association v. GNCTD & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 76
Court on its own motion v. State & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 77
P v. A 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 78
JUSTICE FOR ALL v. HON'BLE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 79
HEMANT JAIN & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 80
Madhu Shudhan Dutto v. State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 81
SANGITA RAI v. NEW DELHI BAR ASSOCIATION & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 82
PRATAP CHANDRA v. MR. MANISH SISODIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 83
Somnath Bharti v. Shri Satish Upadhyay 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 84
Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income Tax & other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 85
Babita Chopra v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 86
Kuldeep Singh Sengar v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 87
Vikas Pawha v. Ashok Kumar (John Doe) & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 88
Deputy Commissioner of Police v. Ex. Const. Arvind Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 89
Anand Legal Aid Forum Trust v. High Court & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 90
DEVYANI SINGH v. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 91
MS. MUSKAAN AAMIR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 92
Sunil Kumar Tiwari And Ors. v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 93
RAM SWAROOP GUPTA & ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 94
HARKIRAT SINGH SODHI v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 95
UoI v. 627281 EX MWO (HFO) Tejpal Singh 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 96
DRY v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 97
National Institute Of Tuberculosis And Respiratory Diseases v. Ms. Shweta & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 98
North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Shri Darshan Singh 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 99
DR AVADESH KUMAR v. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 100
PHYSICSWALLAH LIMITED v. NIKHIL KUMAR SINGH & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 101
MAHUA MOITRA v. LOKPAL OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 102
JUSTICE FOR ALL v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 103
Ashok Kumar v. Commissioner of Police & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 104
Narender Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 105
SMT. LAKSHMI DEVI AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 106
MAHILA HAWKER WELFARE ASSOCIATION v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SHAHDRA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 107
Karan Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 108
Harsh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 109
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 110
SSB v. DBC 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 111
NARENDRA SHARMA V/s GNCTD & ORS. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 112
ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH VS. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 113
Aduram v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 114
CHANDANI CHOWK SARV VYAPAR MANDAL (REGD.) V/s GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 115
Sarita Tiwari v. M/S Deccan Charters Pvt Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 116
SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENTS PVT. LTD. & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 117
Baldev Singh v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 118
VIJAY GUPTA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 119
CBI v. I M QUDDUSI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 120
MANJEET v. INDIAN OLYMPIC ASSOCIATION (IOA) AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 121
Jamia Millia Islamia v. Roshan Ara & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 122
State v. Sunil @ Pahalwan & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 123
The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Haazari Singh Rawat & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 124
KUSUM SEHGAL v. HERITAGE CONSERVATION COMMITTEE & ORS & Other Connected Matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 125
NA Sebastian & Anr v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 126
BHASKAR YADAV v. ED & Other Connected Matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 127
MRS. AJIT INDER SINGH v. MR. SIMRANJIT SINGH GREWAL & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 128
Shivam v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 129
ASIAN PATENT ATTONRNEYS ASSOCIATION (INDIAN GROUP) v. REGISTRAR GENERAL DELHI HIGH COURT 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 130
SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENTS PVT. LTD. & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 131
Rahul Singh Tolia v. Union Of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 132
SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 133
Okoli Anayo Franklin v. The State NCT Of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 134
Meet Bhadresh Shah v. All India Institute Of Medical Sciences & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 135
HARPREET SINGH v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 137
ALL INDIA PICKLEBALL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 138
YANGCHEN DRAKMARGYAPON v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 139
Manoj Kumar v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 140
SONU @ SONU SINGH @ GOPAL v. STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 141
Amit Gulia v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 142
VARUN KUMAR SINGH v. STATE (SHO RAJINDER NAGAR) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 143
Pramod @ Parmal v. State (Nct Of Delhi) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 144
VICKY KASHYAP v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 145
Delhi Medical Technical Employees Association (Regd.) And Anr v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 146
SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 147
CAG v. Manoj Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 148
Great Legislation Movement India Trust v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 149
Amardeep Sharma v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 150
Mr Raj Kumar Gupta Sole Proprietor Of M/S Kanwarji Raj Kumar v. Delhi Pollution Control Committee & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 151
SAHIL ARSH v. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 152
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 153
HANUMANT LAL PATEL & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 154
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 155
SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 156
DEVYANSHU SURYAVANSHI & ORS v. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ANR & Other Connected Matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 157
PRABHROOP KAUR KAPOOR & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 158
SHLOK BHARDWAJ v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 159
LAXMI DEVI & ANR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 160
UNION OF INDIA v. INDER 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 161
SURESH SHARMA v. KRISHAN LAL THUKRAL 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 162
PARVEEN TANEJA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 163
AYUSHMAN INITIATIVE FOR CHILD RIGHTS & ANR v. HIGH COURT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 164
PRERNA GUPTA v. REGISTRAR GENERAL OF DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 165
MALABAR GOLD AND DIAMOND LIMITED & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 166
SURJEET KUMAR @ KALU v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 167
AMAN PRATAP SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 168
Vivek Anand Oberoi v. Collector Bazar & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 169
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v/s GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 171
THE FORUM OF MINORITY SCHOOLS v. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 172
GBL Chemicals Limited & Ors. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 173
Mahender Chaturvedi v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 174
Rohit Lamba & Anr. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 176
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 177
VIKAS PUNDHIR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 178
SH. SUNIL KUMAR v. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 179
DR. VINOD KUMAR JAIN AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & Other Connected Matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 180
ANUP KUMAR RAMPAL v. DELHI POLICE THROUGH JOINT COMMISSIONER 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 181
SARVESH SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 182
Life Insurance Corporation of India v. G.K. Nijhawan 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 183
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 184
M/S CSAT System (P) Ltd v. Appellant Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 185
VIKAS YADAV v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 186
Madanjit Kumar v. Central Electronics Limited 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 187
MARIA RAMESH v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 188
Rohit Gagerna v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 189
Aman@ Prince @ Bhura v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 190
Dr. Bahubali N. Shetti v. AIIMS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 191
Arvind Kejriwal v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 192
Mohan @ Akkar v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 193
Savitri v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 194
Feroz Ahmad v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 195
Union of India & Anr. vs. Raj Kumar Manocha 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 196
DEEPANSHU SAHU v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 197
Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajesh 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 198
SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 199
Dinesh & Anr. v. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research through its Director General & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 200
SANCHIT SETH v. NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATION IN MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 201
Mrs. Priya S. Kapur v. Mandhira Kapur Smith & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 202
Moideen Kutty K @ M. K. Faizy v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 203
Sunita Rani v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 204
MAHESH CHAND v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 205
M/S Dhanvine Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. DJB 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 206
UoI v. B Srinivasa Rao & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 207
Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 208
Palika Bazar Shopkeepers Welfare Association v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 209
MS A v. STATE & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 210
Vikas Garg & Anr. v. State through CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 211
Gaurav Verma & Ors. v. AAI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 212
Shivmani Yadav v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 213
Anand Legal Aid Trust v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 214
DEEPA SINGH v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & Other Connected Matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 215
KAJOL VISHAL DEVGAN v. KASH COLLECTIVE 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 216
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 217
ARUN SURI v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 218
RACHIT GUPTA v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 219
NARENDER KUMAR SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 220
OM PRAKSH MALHOTRA & ANR v. SACHIN MALHOTRA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 221
RAJ KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 222
Heritage Foods Limited v. Jagati Publications Limited & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 223
Asif @ Naeem v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 224
JAYANT VATS v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 225
Save India Foundation v. MCD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 226
JUBIN NAUTIYAL v. JAMMABLE LIMITED & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 227
Mujeeb Khan For And On Behalf Of Aftab Khan Missing v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 228
NOOR MOHAMMAD v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 229
UJJWAL v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 230
SWAMI RAMDEV v. JOHN DOE (S) AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 231
Sakshi Sharma v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 232
Neeraj Kumar v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 233
SURESH CHAND SHRIVASTVA v. AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BUREAU 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 234
Himanshu Gupta v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 235
R. Usha @ G. Usha v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 236
PRATAP CHANDRA v. MR. MANISH SISODIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 237
VIDYA DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 238
Master Athrava Tripathi & Anr. v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 239
Master Athrava Tripathi & Anr. v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 240
MTNL v. Shri Ram Ratan 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 241
Ms. X v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 242
RAMBIR SINGH.GOLA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 243
Bachu Singh v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 244
Union of India v. Sameer Wankhede 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 245
UoI v. Brijendra Kumar Sharma & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 246
NS v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 247
Aviation Services LLC v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 248
THE FORUM OF MINORITY SCHOOLS v. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 249
Mohan Tanksale v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 250
Uday Chib v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 251
KARTIK & ANR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 252
Vimla Singh EX PGT History v. Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 253
Ram Kumar Pathak v. Shashi Devi & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 254
Sanyogita Gupta & Ors v. Ashok Kumar Gupta 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 255
RAVJEET SINGH v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 256
SANJAY KUMAR SAIN v. STATE 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 257
MINOR CHILD K & ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 258
SHRI BALAJI v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 259
DIMPY CHUGH v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 260
ED v. M/S Mahanivesh Oils & Foods Pvt Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 261
State v. Shiv Shanker 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 262
HIMAYANI PURI v. KUNAL SHUKLA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 263
Ghunna Ram v. Union of India and Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 264
SSC v. Yashpal Singh 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 265
Padmaja Kumari Parmar v. Lakshyaraj Singh Mewar And Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 266
SP v. LT 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 267
Hindustan Scouts And Guides Association Through Its National Secretary Champat Singh & Anr. v. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Railways 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 268
Bina Modi v. State & Anr and other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 269
SB TRIPATHI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 270
Veer Pal v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 271
Ajay @ Shantu v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 272
Rajinder Kumar v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 273
Isha Foundation v. Google LLC & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 274
ASSOCIATION FOR PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS (APCR) v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 275
KANWARJEET SINGH BATTH v. UNION OF INDIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 276
PROF SUJATA ASHWARYA v. JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 277
Newslaundry v. TV Today Network Pvt Ltd & Other Connected Matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 278
DR PRANNOY ROY & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 279
HARIS NISAR LANGOO v. NIA and ZAMIN ADIL BHAT v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 280
GULAM NABI v. STATE (THROUGH SHO PS KHAJURI KHAS) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 281
WASIM AKHTAR v. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 282
Habibur Molla @ Sonu v. State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 283
Dharamawati v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 284
Manjay Kumar v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 285
Rajnesh Singh v. MCD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 286
Pankaj Vaid v. ICICI Bank 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 287
Aam Janata Unnayan Party v. ECI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 288
Pawan Kumar Goel v. Jyoti Sikka 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 289
United News of India v. Union Of India Through Land And Development Officer Ministry Of Housing And Urban Affairs & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 290
PJ v. N 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 291
Manish Yadav v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 292
SONAKSHI SINHA v. CHARACTER TECHNOLOGIES INC & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 293
PRESIDENT, INDIAN OLYMPIC ASSOCIATION & ANR v. SKI AND SNOWBOARD INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 294
NADIA v. DR B R AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 295
JUDICIAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF DELHI v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 296
SHRI LALU PRASAD YADAV v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 297
Dr Rita Bakshi v. Seema Bajaj & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 298
Rohan Book Company Private Limited v. Sachin Tyagi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 299
Geeta Arora @ Sonu Punjaban v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 300
GAUTAM GAMBHIR v. ASHOK KUMAR/JOHN DOE & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 301
State v. Vikram Singh Meena 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 302
Amit Goel & Anr. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 303
Pradeep Batra v. Kuldip Singh Verma 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 304
M/S.Thermoking v. P.O.& Rashtriya Gen.Maz.Union 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 305
Manish Popli v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 306
Preeti Singh v. Principal Judge 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 307
Ms Shalu Pruthi v. KVS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 308
Hanuman Prasad Sharma @ H.P. Sharma v. J. Mithyleshwar 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 309
PK Varun v. PNB 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 310
Shravan Gupta v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 312
State v. Sweety 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 313
Rajat Verma v. HP Suman 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 314
Delhi Police & Anr. v. Sudheer Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 315
Tulsi Das v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 316
Smt. Bindu Sharma v. Kapil Sud And Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 317
Rajeev Miglani v. Urmil Gujral & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 318
Jaideep Kumar V. Commissioner of Police & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 319
Virender Alias Bablu v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 320
Nisha Chandola & Anr v. Manoj Sharma And Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 321
ABUBACKER E v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 322
PREM SHEELA KUMARI v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 323
VISHWAJYOTI v. VIRENDER KUMAR SARDANA & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 324
The New India Assurance Company Ltd v. M/S Kapoor Diesels Garage Pvt Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 325
International Visa Services Pvt Ltd Formerly Known As Ivs Lanka Pvt Ltd v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 326
Ajit Kumar Singh Through Smt. Poonam Singh Wife And Pairokar v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 327
MR. NIDISH GOPALKRISHNAN NAIR v. X & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 328
UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. PADMA JAISWAL IAS (AGMUT:2003) & Other Connected Matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 329
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SK 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 330
ANIL KUMAR TIWARI ANIRUDHACHARYA v. JOHN DOE ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 331
ANUSHKAA ARORA & ORS v. BCD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 332
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 333
HINDU SHAKTI DAL & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 334
ANJU TANWAR v. LAWYERS CHAMBERS ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 335
POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR v. AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 336
SANDEEP @ KALA @ KALE @ SONU @ SINOTHIA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 337
Union of India & Ors. v. Naresh Kumar Gupta 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 338
ITGOA & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 339
HAJI MOHD. ALTAF v. STATE & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 340
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 341
MOHANLAL VISWANATHAN NAIR v. JOHN DOE/ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 342
AJIT KUMAR GOLA v. STATE (GNCTD) AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 343
UOI & Ors. Vs B.N. Chaubey & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 344
Debasis Das Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 345
GNCTD vs Najma & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 346
Kunal Shukla v. Himayani Puri & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 347
Prateek Sharma v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 348
RAJAB ALI v. STATE & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 349
GODREJ AGROVET LTD v. FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARDS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 350
Shri Shashi Shekhar Prasad v. Lokpal of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 351
Reepak Kansal v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 352
Madan Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 353
Christian Michel James v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 354
Meena Akhilesh Yadav & Anr. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 355
AMITA SACHDEVA v. UOI & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 356
Aman Kathpal v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 357
Rahul Chauhan v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 358
Dinesh Garg v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 359
Indian Professional Nurses Association v. Union Of India Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 360
Subodh Chandra Saha v. Punjab National Bank And Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 361
Sanjay Bhandari v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 362
NB SUB RAMAKANT SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 363
Ms. Parul Daware & Anr. v. Regional Passport Officer & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 364
Ambika Gupta v. CPIO LIC 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 365
Uma Shankar Sharma v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 366
SAROJ (WIDOW OF KHEMCHAND) v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 367
Ranjit Kaur v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 368
Perch A Unit of Sunrise F and B Restaurant Pvt Ltd v. NDMC & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 369
NANDU @ RAM KISHORE v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 370
JASPREET KAUR v. JAGJEET SINGH & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 371
RISHABH GEHLOT v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 372
BALBIR CHAND TIWARI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS and other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 373
ONKAR SHARMA v. UNION OF INDIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 374
SUMIT v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 375
Gayassudin v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 376
Mujabil v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 377
VK Sood PIL JV v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation And Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 378
UA v. IPA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 379
Manish Kumar Gupta v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 380
Justice on Trial v. BBC 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 381
Ms X v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 382
MAHESH KUMAR YADAV v. MANISH KUMAR GUPTA AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 383
TEHSIN RAZA RAFIULLAH SHAIKH ALIS BAPU v. State & other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 384
Rohit v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 385
CHINMOYJIT SEN v. LOKPAL OF INDIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 386
DK v. N 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 387
Mohd Aman Rana v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 388
HARMEET SINGH v. STATE OF GNCT DELHI AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 389
Sudarshan v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 390
KIRTI AND ANR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 391
Mr. Sunil Malhotra & Ors. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 392
X & Anr v. X CORP AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 393
ANISH ARUN & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 394
CHARANJIT LAL AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 395
Shri Mohkam Singh v. Delhi Jal Board 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 396
CBI v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 397
Rajkiran Yadav v. State Bank Of India Through Its Chief General Manager And Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 398
Gur Kaur Minor & Ors. v. Union Of India & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 399
ALLU ARJUN v. FRANKLY RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 400
Gaurav Bhardwaj v. State NCT of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 401
Rihan Khan @ Dulare v. State NCT of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 402
Md. Karimunnisa v. National Highways Authority Of India Through Its Chairman & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 403
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SHIV NARAYAN SHARMA ADV. AND ORS and other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 404
NG Dev v. State & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 405
J L Wali & Others v. Union Of India & Others 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 406
M/S Kaushik Medical Store v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 407
Syeed Asima Ali v. Hockey India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 408
Rakesh Kumar Mittal v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 409
Vikram Kumar Jha v. Union Of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 410
Kuldeep Singh Sengar v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 411
Ashok Kumar v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 412
NDMC v. Bharat Hotels Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 413
VAIBHAV SINGH v. DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 414
Gurpreet Kaur Maini v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 415
AMAR JAIN AND ANR v. ROPPEN TRANSPORTATION SERVICES PVT LTD (RAPIDO) AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 416
WINNER CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 417
LAXMI DEVI AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 418
State v. Ishrat Jahan 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 419
MOHD.SAQUIB ANSARI v. STATE OF DELHI & Other Connected Matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 420
RM v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 421
RS v. DU 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 422
Yogender Chandolia v. Vishesh Ravi & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 423
Sanjay v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 424
Bina Modi v. State & Anr and other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 425
Lawrence Bishnoi v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 426
Anil Dhupar v. Chintan N Parikh & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 427
Const. Satish Kumar v. State Of Delhi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 428
Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 429
South Asian Forum For People Against Terror v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 430
Rajesh Choudhary v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 431
Sandeep alias Sandy v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 432
M/S Utkarsh Enterprises & Ors. v. Union Of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 433
JSM & Anr v. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Home Affairs & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 434
MS. SAMAIRA KAPUR & ANR v. MRS. PRIYA KAPUR & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 435
BHUVAN BAM & ANR v. INKWYNK & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 436
KAPIL AGARWAL v. CPIO INCOME TAX OFFICER MORADABAD & ANR, 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 437
ANI v. PTI & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 438
Vicky @ Gobind v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 439
Vijay Singh Meena v. Joint Seat Allocation Authority Josaa & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 440
ARJUN KAPOOR v. ARTIST BOOKING COMPANY & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 441
PRAVEZ KHAN v. ED & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 442
Sonia Bansal & Anr. v. State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 443
Toprankers Edtech Solutions Private Limited & Ors. v. Lpt Edtech Private Limited And Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 444
Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 445
NxtQuantum Shift Technologies India Private Limited (Trading As Ai+ Smartphones) & Anr v. John Doe & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 446
Leena Paulose v. State & other connected matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 447
Ram Kripal v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 448
Standard Chartered Bank v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 449
MOHD MUBARAK v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 450
Dr R D Thakur v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 451
Ashish Kalra And Others v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 452
CCL S v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 453
Ms. Anju Chadha & Anr. v. Bhavesh Madan & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 454
Sube Singh v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 455
Monika Aggarwal & Ors. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 456
Rajender Sharma v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 457
Ranjit Mehto v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 458
RK v. PS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 459
NB v. SB 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 460
Shashi Tharoor v. Ashok Kumar & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 461
ANIS AHMED v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 462
State v. Pawan 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 463
Manipal Business Solutions Private Limited v. Aurigain Consultants Private Limited And Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 464
Sunil Sharma v. DRI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 465
DDA v. Manmohan Singh Bedi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 466
Sonu v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 467
Raju v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 468
Sauraj Singh v. M/S Indian Airlines Ltd And Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 469
Arvind And Ors v. Registrar General High Court Of Delhi And Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 470
Indrapal Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 471
Vishwas Patil v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 472
PS v. BS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 473
AMAN GUPTA v. JOHN DOE/ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 474
J & Anr. v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 475
Mrs. Khushnuma Khan And Others v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 476
SANJAY SHARMA AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 477
State v. MK 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 478
BHAVREEN KANDHARI v. VIJAY KUMAR BIDHURI AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 479
Kamlesh Mehta v. TTFI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 480
Rajeshwar Dayal Aggarwal v. M/S Enicar Machine (India) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 481
Allahabad Bank v. RS Saini 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 482
Rajan v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 483
Sabir v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 484
Aakash Goel v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 485
Rubika Thapa v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 486
TUSHAR VERMA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 487
BRIJESH KOTHIA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 488
Vimal Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 489
RIFAT ALI @ DANISH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 490
Azad Saifi v. Akhtar Ali 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 491
RT v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 492
SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 493
KAMAL KAPOOR v. STATE 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 494
CBI v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 495
TRIMURTI FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED v. B62 STUDIOS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 496
DDPL Global Infrastructure Private Limited & Anr. v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 497
ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 498
AMAN BANSAL v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 499
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SHIV NARAYAN SHARMA ADV. AND ORS. DEEPAK SINGH, ADVOCATE AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 500
JAGDEEP SINGH @ JAGGA & ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 501
M/S R. C. Sood & Co. Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Eros Group) v. Shri Sharad Maheshwari & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 502
Varun Arora v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 503
Manisha Pande v. Abhijit Iyer Mitra & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 504
Ashanand Saini@Anand Saini v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 505
Deepak Kumar v. Union of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 506
SH. SATISH KUMAR AGGARWAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 507
M/S Velocis Systems Pvt. Ltd v. National Informatics Centre Services Incorporated (NICSI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 508
Shashank Deo Sudhi v. UOI & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 510
RAJ MAHATO v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 509
LKS v. NS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 511
MOHD. QUASIM v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 512
PARMAL & ANR v. THE STATE & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 513
Saleem Malik v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 514
M/S BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. v. Vinod Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 515
Sarfaraj v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 516
Aishvir Singh (Inspector) v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 517
GAC Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Acer Logistics Pvt. Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 518
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v/s ARVIND KEJRIWAL AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 519
State v. Deepak 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 520
Mr. Dileep Singh v. Smt. Girija Devi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 521
Rajinder Kumar v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 522
AJ v. KS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 523
Manoj Kumar v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 524
VINESH PHOGAT v/s WRESTLING FEDERATION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 525
Sanjay Singh v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 526
Swadeshi Civil Infrastructure Private Limited v. The Executive Engineer And Senior Manager C III Redevelopment Project Division Cpwd & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 527
M/S Progressive Finlease Ltd v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 528
Umar Khalid v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 529
Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital v. Vijender Singh & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 530
Neerja v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 531
Mr. C. Asok Kumar v. Bar Council Of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 532
DPS Vasant Kunj & Ors. v. GNCTD (and batch) 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 533
Prithipal Singh v. Government Of Nct Of Delhi Through Its Secretary And Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 534
UNION OF INDIA & ANR v/s DELHI RACE CLUB (1940) LTD. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 535
ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 536
Ashwini Pal v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 537
Tarannum Begum & Ors. v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 538
SAIF RASHID SAEED V/s UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 539
Vijay Kumar Diwakar v. SDMC 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 540
Ayodhya Devi Alias Jyoti v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 541
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS, GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 542
CPL Sachin Kumar Solanki (Retd) v. Union Of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 543
M/S National Insurance Co Ltd v. Sunita Devi & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 544
Devender Kumar v. CBI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 545
SUBHASH THEEKKADAN@ SUBHASH TM v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 546
Abhijit Dipke v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 547
VARUN DHAWAN v. ARTIST BOOKING COMPANY & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 548
M/S PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD v. THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT, DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 549
Gaura Bhatia v. Samajwadi party Media Cell & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 550
Wahidur Rahman v. ED 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 551
LAKSH VIR SINGH YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 552
SK v. KS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 553
AKKINENI NAGA CHAITANYA v. WWW.SEXVID.XXX & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 554
SANDEEP @ SUNNY v. STATE & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 555
SHEWTA TUTEJA & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 556
Devangana Kalita v. State 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 557
Raman Gandhi v Bar Council of Delhi & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 558
KHURAM PARVEZ v. NIA 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 559
M/s PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt. Ltd. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. and connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 560
NATIONAL STUDENTS' UNION OF INDIA v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 561
Delhi Transport Corporation vs Ram Avtar Sharma 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 562
S v. M & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 563
Md. Rashid Khan v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 564
Rekha Sabharwal v. Management of Saai Memorial Girls School & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 565
Prem Singh v. C.S. Rathore 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 566
Sandeep Goel v. Zavenir Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Connected Matter 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 567
SYED FAYAZUDDIN AND ANR v/s GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 568
Anil Kumar Gupta v. Laxmi Devi & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 569
Anju Dhawan v. M/S. Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 570
NBCC India Limited v. GNC Infra LLP & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 571
Ramesh Chandra Dubey & Anr. v. Nandlal 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 572
M/S Shyam Lal & Sons v. Smt. Mithlesh Devi 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 573
TELEGRAM FZ LLC & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 574
Smt. Khatiza Begam v. Ms. Salma Khan 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 575
R.K. Jain Infra Projects Private Limited v. NHAI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 576
M/S EG Communications Pvt Ltd & Ors v. ECI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 577
S v. S 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 578
Ms. Mamta Chaudhary v. Union Of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 579
Akshay Mahara v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 580
R.S.C. College v. Ms. Sukhgeet Kaur, Member Secretary And Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 581
Badminton Association of India v. Union of India and others 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 582
D v. G 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 583
BSES Rajdhani Power Limited & Anr v. GNCTD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 584
Grew Energy Private Limited v. NTPC Renewable Energy Limited 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 585
AITA v. Somdev Kishore Devvarman & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 586
Minor R (Thr. Her Father R) v. State & Anr 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 587
G v. M 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 588
Maheshwar Narayan Sharma And Ors v. M V Babu Svaminath And Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 589
National Institute Of Electronics And Information Technology (NIELIT) & Ors. v. Sh. Raj Kumar Tripathi & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 590
Bisen Anshul Kumar v. Union of India & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 591
Shri Dhanpat Rai Gupta v. Shri Kashmiri Lal Gupta (Since Deceased) & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 592
A v. V 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 593
Sudipti Hajela v. Equestrian Federation Of India & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 594
State v. Lalit Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 595
Major Jayati Chandra v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 596
Delhi High Court Bar Association v. Dr. Kapil & Ors 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 597
Case title: Sandeepa Virk v. ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 1
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a woman accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), noting that she was neither chargesheeted by the police nor summoned by the Magistrate in the predicate offence.
Case Title: Nippon Steel Corporation v. The Controller Of Patents
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 2
The Delhi High Court has set aside a Patent Office order that refused a patent application filed by Nippon Steel Corporation for a “high-strength steel sheet and its manufacturing method.”
Case title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi M/S TCK Advisers Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 3
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that companies engaged in activities beyond export services cannot be treated as functionally comparable to an assessee providing export-only services.
Delhi High Court Bars Use Of “IGBC” Name Over Similarity With US Green Building Council Mark
Case Title: U.S. Green Building Council v. Deming Certification Services Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 4
The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained Mumbai-based Deming Certification Services Private Limited from using the marks “International Green Building Council,” “IGBC,” or any deceptively similar to the mark of U. S. Green Building Council (USGBC).
Title: TENZIN YOUTEN & ANR v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 5
Calling it unfortunate, the Delhi High Court has observed that every FIR alleging assault or outraging modesty of a woman mentions the expression “haath mara” which is not endorsed by the complainant.
Delhi High Court Rejects Zydus Plea Against Helsinn's Nausea Medication Patent
Case Title: Zydus Healthcare Ltd. v. Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 6
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with the grant of a pharmaceutical patent for a nausea medication dismissing a challenge by Zydus Healthcare Ltd. against Swiss drugmaker Helsinn Healthcare SA
Case title: Triveni v. Home Department Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 7
The Delhi High Court has held that mere brevity of reasons in an order refusing sanction to prosecute public servants is not, by itself, a ground to invoke writ jurisdiction, so long as the record demonstrates due application of mind by the competent authority.
Title: PROFESSOR ALKA ACHARYA v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 8
The Delhi High Court has appointed a wife as legal guardian of her husband who has been in a vegetative or comatose state after suffering from an “Intracranial Haemorrhage” in February, 2025.
Title: YERRAM VENKATA SUBBA REDDY & ANR v. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 9
The Delhi High Court refused interim relief to YSRCP leader Y. V. Subba Reddy, in his defamation suit filed against media reporting of Tirupati laddu adulteration case.
Title: MR KONIDALA PAWAN KALYAN v. ASHOK KUMAR JOHN DOE & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 10
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe interim order protecting the personality rights of Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh Pawan Kalyan.
Delhi High Court Upholds Order Rejecting Ericsson's Data Security Invention Patent
Case Title: Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v. Controller General Of Patents
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 11
The Delhi High Court has upheld a 2019 order of the Patent Office rejecting a patent application filed by Swedish telecom major Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson for a data security invention. The court held that the claimed method did not involve an inventive step and was obvious in light of existing technology.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 12
The Delhi High Court has observed that a husband's foreign income cannot be mechanically converted into Indian currency for granting maintenance to wife.
Delhi High Court Cancels “ACTIVEPUSHPA” Trademark For Similarity With Ayurvedic Brand “HEMPUSHPA”
Case Title: Rajvaidya Shital Prasad And Sons v. Karna Goomar And Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 13
The Delhi High Court has ordered the removal of the trademark “ACTIVEPUSHPA” from the Trade Marks Register, holding that the mark is deceptively similar to “HEMPUSHPA,” a decades-old ayurvedic tonic for women's health, and is likely to confuse consumers.
Title: MOIN AKHTAR QURESHI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 14
The Delhi High Court has ruled that compelling an accused to give voice sample to an investigating agency for comparison with intercepted telephone conversations "does not violate Article 20(3)" of the Constitution of India.
Title: DHEERAJ ARORA v. PARINEY KHANNA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 15
Calling the trend “unfortunate”, the Delhi High Court has observed that a culture of seeking adjournments has developed over a period of time, leading to a misplaced expectation that such requests would be granted as a matter of course.
Title: ANUSHA GUPTA & ANR v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY THROUGH THE DIRECTOR & OTHERS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 16
The Delhi High Court has upheld dismissal of a petition filed by two students challenging the National Testing Agency's (NTA) findings regarding alleged manipulation of their JEE Mains, 2025, examination response sheets, while sparing them of costs but ordering them to do one-month community service instead.
Case Title: Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc & Ors v. animesugez.to & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 17
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex parte ad interim dynamic+ injunction restraining dozens of piracy websites from hosting or making available copyrighted films and television shows owned by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. and other global entertainment companies.
Title: DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE v. KAMAL KISHORE AGGARWAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 18
The Delhi High Court has refused to cancel bail granted to an accused in Goods and Services Tax (GST) evasion case involving alleged tax fraud of Rs. 72 crore more than 5 years ago, while strongly criticising the investigating agency for lapses in the investigation.
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Patent Office Order Rejecting Emitec Emissions Dosing Device
Case Title: Emitec Gesellschaft Fur Emissionstechnologie mbH v. Controller General Of Patents, Designs & Trademarks & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 19
The Delhi High Court has set aside a Patent Office order rejecting a patent application filed by Emitec Gesellschaft für Emissionstechnologie mbH, a Germany-based automotive emissions firm, for a reducing-agent dosing device that helps cut vehicle pollution.
Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Challenging Patiala House Courts Bar Elections 2025
Title: VIPIN KUMAR SHARMA & ORS v. THE RETURNING OFFICER NDBA ELECTIONS, 2025
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 20
The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea seeking to declare the New Delhi Bar Association (NDBA) Elections, 2025, for Patiala House Courts as null and void and for conducting fresh polls.
Delhi High Court Stays Over ₹20 Crore Decrees In Favour Of Philips In DVD Patent Dispute
Case Title: Maj (Retd.) Sukesh Behl Proprietor, M/S Pearl Engineering Company & Anr. v. Koninklijke Philips NV
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 21
The Delhi High Court stayed the execution of money decrees worth over Rs 20 crore passed in favour of Koninklijke Philips N.V., the Netherlands-based electronics company widely known as Philips. The stay is subject to the judgment debtors furnishing unconditional and irrevocable bank guarantees covering the principal amounts of damages.
Title: DHARMENDRA KUMAR v. STATE
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 22
The Delhi High Court has held that making a minor child touch the private part with sexual intent amounts to aggravated sexual assault under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Restrain City Ayurvedic Drug Maker From Using “NOKUF” For Cough Syrup
Case Title: Sana Herbals Private Limited v. Mohsin Dehlvi & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 23
The Delhi High Court has refused to stop Dehlvi Remedies Private Limited, an city based Ayurvedic drug maker, from using the mark “NOKUF” for cough syrups, holding that its use of the mark since 1994 defeats a later claim by Sana Herbals Private Limited, which sells its product as “NOKUFSYRUP.”
Case title: Sumit Vijay & Anr. v. Major League Baseball Properties Inc. & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 24
The Delhi High Court has held that mere global reputation of a trademark, without proof of spillover of goodwill into India, is insufficient to cancel a registered Indian trademark.
No 100% Pension Parity With Army For Pre-2009 Special Frontier Force Personnel: Delhi High Court
Case title: Ex-Servicemen Welfare Union v. Union Of India And Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 25
The Delhi High Court has held that personnel of the Special Frontier Force (SFF) who retired prior to January 1, 2009 are not entitled to claim 100% pension parity with corresponding ranks in the Indian Army, and can only seek restoration of 45% of the commuted value of pension in terms of the earlier directions of the Court.
Case title: Ravinder Singh Gandoak v. State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 26
The Delhi High Court has held that absence of formal arrest does not bar a Magistrate from directing a person to furnish handwriting or signature samples under Section 311A CrPC.
Case title: Manoj Mishra v. State (and connected matter)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 27
The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against security guards accused of wrongful restraint and outraging the modesty of a woman, holding that acts done bonafidely in the course of discharging duties can't be criminalised.
Case Name: Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited v National Highway Authority of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 28
The Vacation Bench of the Delhi High Court presided over by Justice Madhu Jain restrained the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) from acting on its Notice of Intention to Terminate (NITT) against Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited (RSIL) until the next hearing. The Court also protected the RSIL's insurance surety bonds of approx. Rs. 104 Crores from invocation.
Delhi High Court Warns Against 'Chaos' If Witnesses Are Recalled Every Time Counsel Changes
Case title: Sh. Vimal Ghai v. Sh. M. P. Sharma
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 29
The Delhi High Court has refused to recall a complainant for further cross-examination in a cheque bounce case, observing that permitting recall every time a party changes its lawyer would lead to “chaos” and cause unnecessary delay in trials.
Delay Due To Medical Review Can't Justify Ante-Dated Seniority Of BSF Candidates: Delhi High Court
Case title: Jai Mangal Rai v. UoI (and batch)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 30
The Delhi High Court Full Bench has held that candidates appointed to the Border Security Force (BSF) after a delay caused by medical re-examination are not entitled to claim seniority over batchmates who joined the service earlier, even if the delay was not attributable to them.
Case title: CBI v. Kukwant Rai
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 31
The Delhi High Court has set aside the acquittal of an accused in a counterfeit currency case, holding that minor discrepancies in counting fake currency notes are not sufficient to discredit the prosecution case when the recovery and possession are otherwise proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Case Title: Automat Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. And Ors v. Aquestia Limited & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 32
The Delhi High Court stayed an order that had restrained an Indian irrigation equipment maker from selling its “Hydromat Valve”, which was earlier held to prima facie infringe a patent owned by an Israel-based company.
Case title: Avinash Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 33
The Delhi High Court has held that an accused booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act cannot be declared a “Proclaimed Offender” under Section 82 CrPC.
Title: X v. State & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 34
Reaffirming reproductive autonomy of women, the Delhi High Court held that marital discord impacting mental health of a woman is a valid ground to seek abortion under the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act.
MCOCA Can Be Invoked Against Syndicate Members Even Without Prior FIRs: Delhi High Court
Case title: Anuradha @ Chiku v. State (Nct Of Delhi)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 35
The Delhi High Court has held that the provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) can be invoked against an accused alleged to be a member of an organised crime syndicate even if there are no prior FIRs or charge-sheets against such accused in her individual capacity.
Presentation Of Security Cheque On Loan Default Not Criminal Breach Of Trust: Delhi High Court
Case title: China Trust Commercial Bank v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 36
The Delhi High Court has held that presentation of a security cheque by a bank upon default of loan repayment does not constitute the offence of criminal breach of trust under Section 409 IPC.
Use Of Condom, Time Gap Can Explain DNA Mismatch In Rape Cases: Delhi High Court
Case title: Ram Kuber v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 37
The Delhi High Court has held that absence of DNA matching in a rape case is not fatal to the prosecution when surrounding circumstances, including use of condom by the accused and delay in medical examination, reasonably explain such absence.
No Presumption Of Wife's Earning Capacity At Interim Maintenance Stage: Delhi High Court
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 38
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a wife cannot be presumed to be earning or being capable of maintaining herself while considering grant of interim maintenance to her by the husband.
Title: DUSHYANT KUMAR GAUTAM v. URMILA SANA WAR & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 39
The Delhi High Court directed Congress party, Aam Aadmi Party and various others to take down allegedly defamatory publications from social media linking BJP's National General Secretary and former Rajya Sabha MP Dushyant Kumar Gautam to the Ankita Bhandari murder case.
Case Title: Roseland Buildtech Private Limited v. Vihaan 43 Reality Private Limited & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 40
The Delhi High Court has dismissed what it described as “luxury litigation” challenging a debt assignment, saying issues of fraud or the existence of debt must be decided by the insolvency tribunal, not a civil court.
Case title: Smt Sudha Sharma v. State Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 41
The Delhi High Court has held that in criminal cases arising out of a police report, the right to file an appeal against acquittal vests exclusively with the State.
Case title: Renuka Jain v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 42
The Delhi High Court has held that in cases arising out of a police report, only the State or the accused has the locus to seek directions for expeditious disposal of the trial.
Case title: Veena Arora v. Commissioner Income Tax - 12 Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 43
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with reassessment proceedings initiated against a taxpayer after documents seized from real estate group Bhutani Infra allegedly reflected a cash transaction linked to a flat purchase.
Title: UMESH KUMAR & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 44
The Delhi High Court has directed the Special Committee of the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) to decide a representation filed by three lawyers seeking addition of their names in the electoral roll for the ensuing elections.
Case title: Arun Kumar Bagla v. M/S SCJ Plastics Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 45
The Delhi High Court has held that a director's assurance of payment given in the ordinary course of a commercial transaction cannot, by itself, be treated as fraudulent inducement so as to attract the offence of Cheating under Section 420 IPC.
Case title: UoI v. Naresh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 46
The Delhi High Court has held that disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14(2) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965, which are founded on an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) inquiry, stand vitiated where complainants are examined in the absence of the delinquent employee.
Delhi High Court Orders Status Quo On ONGC Takeover Of Vedanta's Gujarat Offshore Oil Block
Case Title: Vedanta Limited v. Union of India and Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 47
The Delhi High Court ordered a status quo on the government's move to take over an offshore oil block in Gujarat operated by Vedanta Ltd., effectively pausing the Centre's direction asking the company to stop operations and hand over the block to ONGC.
Belated Deposit Of TDS Doesn't Extinguish Criminal Liability Under Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Dr Manoj Khanna v. Income Tax Office
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 48
The Delhi High Court has held that the subsequent or belated deposit of tax deducted at source (TDS) does not absolve an assessee or company officials of criminal liability under Section 276B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case title: Birendra Singh Kunwar v. Union Of India Through Secretary (R) And Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 49
The Delhi High Court has held that obtaining diplomatic passports for a live-in partner and children born from such a relationship does not amount to “grave misconduct” warranting withholding of employee's pensionary benefits, where the relationship and family circumstances were consistently disclosed to the department.
Case title: Satish Kumar Gupta v. Sushil Kumar Loomba
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 50
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that its revisional jurisdiction under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act is supervisory in nature and does not permit reappreciation of evidence or revisiting factual findings recorded by the Rent Controller.
Case Title: SJVN Ltd. v. Patel Gammon Joint Venture
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 51
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by SJVN Limited challenging an arbitral award that granted payment to Patel Gammon Joint Venture for transporting excavated material during a hydroelectric project in Himachal Pradesh.
Case title: Sumeet Suri v State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 52
The Delhi High Court has suspended the sentence of a company director convicted for criminal breach of trust under Section 409 IPC, holding that the very substratum of the conviction stood weakened after his acquittal on charges of cheating and forgery.
Case Title: JLT Energy 9 SAS v. Hindustan Cleanenergy Limited & Ors. and connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 53
The Delhi High Court has refused to restrain Hindustan Cleanenergy Limited and its group companies from creating third-party rights in two solar power projects in Tamil Nadu and Bihar, holding that the share purchase agreements signed with a French investor had already come to an end on their own terms.
"Shocking": Delhi HC Pulls Up IT Dept For 8-Year Delay In Processing ₹5.37 Crore Microsoft Refund
Case Title: Microsoft Corporation India Pvt. Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 54
The Delhi High Court has pulled up the Income Tax Department over “shocking” eight years delay in processing Rs 5.37 crore tax refund to Microsoft Corporation India.
Income Tax | Delhi High Court Bars Tax Recovery After Taxpayer Pays 20% Of Disputed Demand
Case Detail: Shree Krishna Steel Traders Through Proprietor Nikhil Sharma vs. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 55
The Delhi High Court restrained the Income Tax Department from taking any recovery action, including adjusting refunds, after it orally observed that the taxpayer had already paid 20% of the disputed tax demand and had the balance stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
Delhi High Court Quashes Higher 3.5% TDS On GE Group Payments, Restores 1.5% Rate
Case Title: GE Energy Parts Inc v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. (and connected matter)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 56
The Delhi High Court has quashed the certificates issued by the Income Tax Department directing deduction of tax at source (TDS) at a higher rate of 3.5% on payments made to two GE group entities, and directed the authorities to issue fresh certificates prescribing deduction at the rate of 1.5%.
Case title: Parvesh Mann @ Sagar Mann v. State Nct Of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 57
The Delhi High Court has held that once final arguments in a criminal trial are concluded and the matter is reserved for judgment, the judge who heard the case is duty-bound to pronounce the verdict even if he or she is subsequently transferred.
Case title: Vinod @ Vinode @ Bhole v. The State (Govt Of Nct) Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 58
The Delhi High Court has held that convictions recorded while a prisoner is continuously incarcerated cannot render the prisoner a “habitual offender” for the purpose of denying furlough under the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018.
Case Title: Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-1 v. Borgwarner Emissions Systems India Private Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 59
While dealing with the Income Tax Department's appeal in a transfer pricing case, the Delhi High Court has flagged that the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) failed to discharge its statutory duty by merely approving the conclusions of the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) without recording independent findings.
Delhi High Court Upholds Validity Of Election Symbols Order, Rejects Plea By Hind Samrajya Party
Title: HIND SAMRAJYA PARTY v. UOI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 60
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking striking down of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
GST | Wrong-State Tax Payment Triggers ₹10.91 Lakh Refund Fight For Vodafone Idea
Case Detail: Vodafone Idea Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Central GST Division Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate (MCIE)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 61
What began as a wrong-State GST payment has snowballed into a Rs 10.91 lakh refund dispute for Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Vi), after the Delhi GST Department rejected its refund claim. On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court declined to intervene, noting that the dispute turned on how the refund period was selected while filing the application.
Case title: Tulip Multispecialty Hospital Private Limited v. Akhil Saxena & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 62
The Delhi High Court has held that a Magistrate does not have the power to discharge an accused at the stage of Section 251 CrPC in a summons case, after cognizance has already been taken and summons issued.
Case title: Koshaliya Devi Rastogi v. Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-27, New Delhi And Anr (and batch)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 63
The Delhi High Court has directed the Income Tax Department to release the jewellery and cash seized from a family's house, after the latter agreed to deposit advance tax towards their probable tax liability arising from a search operation.
Long Pendency No Ground To Avoid Remand Where Core Issues Were Never Decided: Delhi High Court
Case title: Shri Satya Narain, Since Deceased Through LRs v. Chairman Delhi Development Authority Through Its Chairman & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 64
The Delhi High Court has held that the long pendency of a civil suit cannot be a reason to avoid remanding the matter when the trial court has failed to decide the core issues on merits.
Case title: JC v. BS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 65
The Delhi High Court has held that while a parent is entitled to regular and meaningful visitation rights, the same can be regulated at the interim stage if circumstances indicate a risk to child's sense of security, emotional well-being or psychological stability, even without adjudicating disputed allegations between the parents.
Case title: Sh. Sanket Behari Mittal v. Sh. Subhash Chand Gupta
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 66
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that while a landlord is ordinarily considered the “best judge” of his requirements, this principle does not relieve him of the legal burden to prove a bona fide and genuine need with cogent evidence while seeking eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
Title: HARSHIT AGRAWAL v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 67
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the right to pursue higher or professional education is a fundamental right of an individual which cannot be curtailed lightly.
“The right to pursue higher or professional education even though not explicitly spelt out as a fundamental right in part III of the Constitution of India, it is an affirmative obligation on the part of the state to ensure this right and the same cannot be permitted to be curtailed, lightly,” Justice Jasmeet Singh held.
Title: MCDONALDS INDIA LTD v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 68
The Delhi High Court has held that a lawyer cannot be compelled to disclose the source of document given by the client as it falls within privileged communication, without there being any prima facie judicial finding of fraud.
Title: Court On Its Own Motion v. Union Of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 69
The Delhi High Court has taken on record the Delhi Government's decision to enhance the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) income threshold for availing free treatment in government hospitals and private hospitals built on concessional land from Rs. 2.25 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh per annum.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora directed that wide publicity be given to the decision so that eligible persons can avail the benefit.
Title: BHUVAN BAM & ANR v. INKWYNK & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 70
The Delhi High Court passed a john doe order directing take down or removal of images of YouTuber and actor Bhuvan Bam being used by various entities and individuals without his consent.
Justice Jyoti Singh however said that a prima facie finding cannot be given on personality rights on the first day.
Registered Title Of Property Prevails Over Claims Of Oral Family Settlement: Delhi High Court
Case title: Sandeep Sethi & Anr v. Rajinder Kumar Sethi Deceased Through Lrs
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 71
The Delhi High Court has held that a registered conveyance deed confers decisive title, and vague or unsubstantiated claims of an oral family settlement cannot be used to defeat such ownership.
A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar thus dismissed the appeals preferred by a man claiming joint ownership over a residential property on the basis of an alleged family arrangement, and upheld the decree in favour of his brother who held a registered conveyance deed in his name.
Case title: MCD v. M/S Ram Niwas Goel
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 72
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) against a decree of over ₹1.01 crore passed in favour of a contractor, holding that the civic body could not withhold payments when delays were caused by its own lapses.
Delhi High Court Upholds Bar On IFS Probationers Appearing In Civil Services Exam During Training
Title: ABHIMANYU SINGH AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 73
The Delhi High Court upheld bar on Indian Forest Service (IFS) probationers from appearing in the Civil Services Examination (CSE) during their training period.
A division bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan dismissed a batch of petitions filed by various IFS probationers challenging a 2023 amendment prohibiting them from appearing in the CSE or any other open competitive exam during their probationary training.
IFS Cadre Allocation | Home State Must Be First Preference To Claim Insider Cadre: Delhi High Court
Case title: Union Of India v. Shri Raj Priy Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 74
The Delhi High Court has held that an officer seeking allocation to their home State cadre under the All India Services Cadre Allocation Policy must necessarily indicate the home State as their first preference, and that merely expressing willingness to serve in the home State or listing it as a lower preference does not create any enforceable right.
Case title: Mr Gautam Mondal Through His Wife Mrs Ashima Mukherjee Mondal v. Union Of India Through Its Standing Counsel & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 75
The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging preventive detention order under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS), holding that although it possessed territorial jurisdiction, it was not the appropriate forum to adjudicate the dispute.
Title: First Generation Lawyers Association v. GNCTD & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 76
he Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL seeking extension of benefits of the Chief Minister Advocates Welfare Scheme to the eligible lawyers' parents.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that a mandamus cannot be issued in the matter, while citing autonomy to contract between two parties, one of them being the Delhi Government.
Title: Court on its own motion v. State & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 77
The Delhi High Court said that the Delhi Government or its agencies cannot shirk away from their responsibility to provide shelter to patients, attendants and their family members forced to sleep outside city hospitals in the biting winter cold due to lack of shelter.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia issued urgent short term directions, after it recently took suo motu cognizance of the situation.
Case title: P v. A
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 78
The Delhi High Court has held that a husband's legal obligation to pay maintenance to his wife and minor child living with her does not get diluted merely because another child from their marriage is residing with him.
Frame Rules To Ensure Execution Of Delhi School Tribunal Orders: High Court To Delhi Govt
Title: JUSTICE FOR ALL v. HON'BLE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 79
The Delhi High Court asked the Delhi Government to take steps and frame appropriate Rules to ensure that the Delhi School Tribunal is vested with appropriate legal authority to get its orders executed.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Claiming Auto Festival Will Worsen Air Pollution
Title: HEMANT JAIN & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 80
The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL against “Burnout City India” event scheduled to be organized at NSIC Exhibition Ground on January 17, claiming that it will aggravate the existing air pollution.
The event is an automotive and lifestyle festival, involving massive vehicles showcase, drift and stunt zones, and music events.
Case title: Madhu Shudhan Dutto v. State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 81
The Delhi High Court has held that rubbing of a male genital against a child's genital, in the absence of proof of penetration, does not constitute “penetrative sexual assault” under Section 3 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha observed
“The rubbing of the penis of the accused against the private part of PW1 does not apparently come within clauses (a) to (d) of Section 3 of the Act. Therefore, the case of penetrative sexual assault under Section 3 or aggravated penetrative sexual assault as contemplated under Section 5 of the PoCSO Act cannot be held to have been made out from the materials available on record.”
Bar Associations Do Not Perform Public Functions, Not State Under Article 12: Delhi High Court
Title: SANGITA RAI v. NEW DELHI BAR ASSOCIATION & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 82
The Delhi High Court has ruled that Bar Associations do not perform public functions and are not a State or its instrumentality under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
Title: PRATAP CHANDRA v. MR. MANISH SISODIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 83
The Delhi High Court has ruled that mere registration of an FIR does not imply pendency of a criminal case for the purpose of “disclosure” by an election candidate under Section 33A of Representation of Peoples Act.
Case title: Somnath Bharti v. Shri Satish Upadhyay
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 84
The Delhi High Court dismissed an election petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Somnath Bharti, challenging the election of Bharatiya Janata Party's Satish Upadhyay from the Malviya Nagar Assembly constituency.
Title: Prannoy Roy v. Commissioner of Income Tax & other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 85
The Delhi High Court has set aside the income tax reassessment notices issued to New Delhi Television Ltd. (NDTV) founders Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy (petitioners), relating to a transaction involving RRPR Holding Pvt. Ltd, a promoter group of the news network.
Pendency Of Probate Proceedings No Bar To FIR Alleging Forgery Of Registered Will: Delhi High Court
Case title: Babita Chopra v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 86
The Delhi High Court has refused to quash an FIR alleging forgery of a registered Will, holding that the pendency of probate proceedings examining the Will's validity does not bar a parallel criminal investigation into allegations of fabrication and use of forged documents.
Case name: Kuldeep Singh Sengar v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 87
The Delhi High Court rejected Kuldeep Singh Sengar's plea seeking suspension of his 10 years sentence in the custodial death case of Unnao rape victim's father.
Title: Vikas Pawha v. Ashok Kumar (John Doe) & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 88
The Delhi High Court passed an interim order for take down or removal of images of Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa being used on social media for defrauding people.
Tribunal Can't Direct Reinstatement Without Considering Pending Criminal Matters: Delhi High Court
Case Name : Deputy Commissioner of Police v. Ex. Const. Arvind Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 89
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain held that even if dismissal is set aside in departmental proceedings, reinstatement and service benefits must be decided by the competent authority after considering the employee's subsequent criminal conviction on a different charge.
Title: Anand Legal Aid Forum Trust v. High Court & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 90
The Delhi High Court refused to order FIR over a recent incident wherein a 43-year-old differently-abled ahlmad jumped to death and committed suicide at the Saket Courts, allegedly citing “work pressure”.
Calling the incident unfortunate, a division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia remarked that they were conscious of the situation and that steps as warranted are being taken.
Title: DEVYANI SINGH v. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 91
The Delhi High Court rejected a public interest litigation seeking to ban Bangladesh from participating in all cricket tournaments and competitions, citing violence against Hindus there.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia rapped the petitioner, a law student, for filing such a PIL while also repeatedly cautioning pursuing the matter may invite heavy costs.
Title: MS. MUSKAAN AAMIR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 92
The Delhi High Court has allowed a batch of writ petitions filed by various law students of the University of Delhi, holding that shortage of attendance cannot be a valid ground to detain them from appearing in examinations or preventing them from continuing their academic pursuits.
Case title: Sunil Kumar Tiwari And Ors. v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 93
The Delhi High Court has upheld the validity of the All India Council for Technical Education's (AICTE) prescription of a PhD degree as an eligibility condition for granting a higher Academic Grade Pay (AGP) of ₹10,000 to lecturers in government polytechnic institutions.
Title: RAM SWAROOP GUPTA & ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 94
The Delhi High Court has held that calling upon an accused to cross-examine a prosecution witness in the absence of legal assistance strikes at the very core of fair trial and vitiates the entire proceedings.
Justice Girish Kathpalia said that presence of legal assistance for the accused facing trial is the core element of fair trial.
Mere Averments In Pleadings To Prosecute Or Defend Case Not Defamation: Delhi High Court
Title: HARKIRAT SINGH SODHI v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 95
The Delhi High Court has ruled that mere averments made in the pleadings, either to prosecute or defend oneself, does not tantamount to an offence of defamation.
Case title: UoI v. 627281 EX MWO (HFO) Tejpal Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 96
The Delhi High Court has held that merely branding a disability like hypertension as a "lifestyle disorder" is insufficient to deny disability pension to an Air Force personnel, particularly when the medical opinion rejecting the claim is unsupported by cogent reasons.
Title: DRY v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 97
The Delhi High Court has held that a father who rapes his daughter cannot be shown any relaxation in POCSO cases.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain upheld the conviction of a father for repeatedly raping his minor daughter studying in 6th standard in July 2021.
Case title: National Institute Of Tuberculosis And Respiratory Diseases v. Ms. Shweta & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 98
The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which had directed the appointment of a candidate on the basis of an erroneous recruitment advertisement where no actual vacancy existed for the reserved category.
Case title: North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Shri Darshan Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 99
The Delhi High Court has dismissed cross-petitions filed by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (MCD) and a Safai Karamchari and thus, upheld an Industrial Tribunal award granting ₹1 lakh retrenchment compensation for illegal termination. The HC, however, declined the workman's plea for reinstatement with back wages.
Title: DR AVADESH KUMAR v. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 100
The Delhi High Court has ruled that adults cannot use rape law as a tool to criminalize breakups when the relationship was consensual between two individuals.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that failed relationships cannot be given a criminal colour, also warning against the misuse of rape charges invoked in broken romantic relationships.
Title: PHYSICSWALLAH LIMITED v. NIKHIL KUMAR SINGH & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 101
The Delhi High Court directed removal or take down of abusive and derogatory social media posts made against online education platform PhysicsWallah, by a former employee.
Justice Jyoti Singh passed the interim injunction order in a defamation suit filed by PhysicsWallah against Nikhil Kumar Singh and social media platforms.
Tile: MAHUA MOITRA v. LOKPAL OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 102
The Delhi High Court has allowed an application filed by Lokpal of India seeking more time to decide on granting sanction to the CBI, to file chargesheet against Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra in relation to the cash for query row.
A division bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar granted two months' time to Lokpal and clarified that no further time shall be granted.
Title: JUSTICE FOR ALL v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 103
The Delhi High Court permitted the Delhi Government to provide school uniform assistance to Economically Weaker Section (EWS) and Disadvantaged Group (DG) students in private schools through Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT), instead of supplying uniforms strictly in kind.
Case Name : Ashok Kumar v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 104
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain held that once a disciplinary authority has imposed a penalty based on a conviction, it cannot reopen the same incident to impose a harsher punishment merely because the criminal appeal results in a reduced sentence, as this violates the principle against double jeopardy.
Case title: Narender Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 105
The Delhi High Court has discharged a process server who was accused of fabricating a false service report to facilitate an ex parte divorce, holding that the material on record did not disclose "grave suspicion" against him to justify framing of charges.
The Court ruled that findings in departmental proceedings cannot be elevated to substantive evidence in a criminal case, nor can prosecution be founded on oral assertions regarding a document that was never seized or produced before the Court.
Delhi High Court Upholds Rule Allowing Childless Widow To Continue Family Pension After Remarriage
Title: SMT. LAKSHMI DEVI AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 106
The Delhi High Court upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 54 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, entitling a childless widow to continue to receive family pension after remarriage.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan dismissed a writ petition filed by the parents of a deceased CRPF personnel seeking grant of family pension to them after the remarriage of their son's widow.
Delhi High Court Directs MCD To Clear Hawkers From Anand Vihar ISBT, Orders Beautification Plan
Title: MAHILA HAWKER WELFARE ASSOCIATION v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SHAHDRA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 107
The Delhi High Court has directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to remove all hawkers and vendors from the congested area around the Anand Vihar ISBT, while permitting only 105 vendors, who were found eligible to vend through mobile carts and without any permanent structures.
Case title: Karan Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 108
The Delhi High Court has held that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra (2025), which mandates the furnishing of written grounds of arrest to an accused before remand in all offences, will operate prospectively and cannot be applied to arrests made prior to the date of the ruling.
Case title: Harsh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 109
The Delhi High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application after finding that the accused had filed parallel anticipatory bail pleas before two different courts, which were being heard on the same day, terming the conduct a "clear abuse of process in the name of liberty".
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 110
The Delhi High Court has held that mere registration of marriage between two individuals cannot determine matrimonial harmony or their intention to cohabit together.
“Registration of marriage is merely a statutory mandate, and by itself, cannot be determinative of matrimonial harmony, intention to cohabit, or the viability of the marital relationship,” a division bench comprising Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Renu Bhatnagar observed.
Case title: SSB v. DBC
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 111
The Delhi High Court has held that the long-standing "Tender Years Doctrine", which presumes that custody of young children should ordinarily vest with the mother, is rooted in "highly stereotypical" premises and is "no longer apposite" to contemporary custody adjudication.
Case Title: NARENDRA SHARMA V/s GNCTD & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 112
The Delhi High Court disposed of a PIL seeking adequate medical facilities in city's District Court Complexes, to provide emergency healthcare to stakeholders including lawyers, litigants and security personnel.
A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia emphasized on the importance of issue raised and asked the Petitioner to approach the High Court on administrative side.
Case title: ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH VS. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 113
The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal preferred by jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Engineer Rashid challenging an order framing charges against him in a UAPA case, stating that it is an interlocutory order against which appeal is not maintainable.
In doing so, the court referred to a coordinate bench's decision in December 2025 which had held that a charge order cannot be challenged in appeal under NIA Act as it is interlocutory in nature.
High Court Asks Delhi Govt To Bridge Digital Gap In Access To Online Welfare Schemes
Case Title: Aduram v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 114
The Delhi High Court asked the Delhi government to take steps for enhanced accessibility of online government facilities, such as registration for housing welfare schemes, so as to ensure that services can be easily availed by persons not adept with technology, senior citizens, persons of disadvantaged groups, etc.
A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia orally suggested State counsel Sameer Vashishth to consider establishing e-kiosk facility/ help desks which assist citizens with accessing online government services, irrespective of the Department offering them.
Case Title: CHANDANI CHOWK SARV VYAPAR MANDAL (REGD.) V/s GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 115
The Delhi High Court said that it will form an Oversight Committee to monitor and remove the deficiencies and illegal activities in city's Chandni Chowk and surrounding areas.
A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia orally observed, "...authorities are also not moving as they ought to...as we had proposed earlier, we'll form a Committee...what we propose is, we'll form a Committee and all the Departments, including the MCD shall report to the Committee...we'll call for reports from the Committee...and perhaps let's hope things will start moving now...otherwise it becomes difficult for the court to monitor all this."
Case title: Sarita Tiwari v. M/S Deccan Charters Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 116
The Delhi High Court has held that while a probationary employee falls within the definition of a 'workman' under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the termination of a probationer without a full-scale formal departmental inquiry is legally valid if the order is one of termination simpliciter and non-stigmatic.
Case Title: SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENTS PVT. LTD. & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 117
The Delhi High Court rejected the suit filed by IRS officer Sameer Wankhede over his allegedly defamatory portrayal in the Netflix series “Ba***ds of Bollywood” directed by Aryan Khan.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav refused to entertain the suit on grounds of jurisdiction and returned the plaint to Wankhede in order to approach the court of competent jurisdiction.
30 Years On, Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction Of Police ASI For Accepting ₹5,000 Bribe
Case title: Baldev Singh v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 118
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence of a police Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) in a corruption case dating back nearly three decades.
A bench of Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha held that minor inconsistencies in witness testimony cannot eclipse clear proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.
Title: VIJAY GUPTA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 119
The Delhi High Court set aside an order passed by a trial court dismissing a bail application solely on the ground that it was “too voluminous and bulky.”
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that judicial discipline requires that matters be decided on substance rather than rejected on form, and that liberty of an accused cannot be made to hinge upon the perceived 'bulk' of the papers placed before the Court.
Title: CBI v. I M QUDDUSI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 120
The Delhi High Court, has held unsustainable a notice issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) under Section 91 CrPC, to a retired judge of the Chhattisgarh High Court, Justice Ishrat Masroor Qureshi, holding that such a notice could not be used to "compel the accused" to furnish information requiring disclosure of facts based on personal knowledge.
Title: MANJEET v. INDIAN OLYMPIC ASSOCIATION (IOA) AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 121
The Delhi High Court held that the exclusion of cross-country skier Manjeet from India's Olympic contingent for the XXV Winter Olympic Games, Milano Cortina 2026, is manifestly arbitrary, unfair and contrary to the governing international qualification framework.
Case title: Jamia Millia Islamia v. Roshan Ara & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 122
The Delhi High Court has held that the executive decision of the University cannot override existing Recruitment Rules unless formally amended.
The division bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Vimal Kumar Yadav thus dismissed an appeal filed by Jamia Millia Islamia, against a Single Judge order directing it to consider eligible Assistant Librarians for promotion to the post of Deputy Librarian.
Case title: State v. Sunil @ Pahalwan & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 123
The Delhi High Court has held that the benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 can't be extended to persons convicted for the offence of dacoity under Section 395 IPC, as the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life.
Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act empowers Courts to release certain offenders, not guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, on probation of good conduct.
Case title: The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Haazari Singh Rawat & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 124
The Delhi High Court has held that an allegation that the pillion rider on a two-wheeler was under the influence of alcohol cannot justify a finding of contributory negligence unless a clear causal link is established between the alleged intoxication and the occurrence of the accident.
Title: KUSUM SEHGAL v. HERITAGE CONSERVATION COMMITTEE & ORS & Other Connected Matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 125
The Delhi High Court has directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to conduct a comprehensive survey of buildings located in the vicinity of notified heritage properties in the national capital to check if there are any illegal constructions.
Labour Code Rules To Be Finalized By February End: Centre Tells Delhi High Court
Title: NA Sebastian & Anr v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 126
The Central Government told the Delhi High Court that the Rules under the new Industrial Relations Code, 2020, will be finalised by the end of February.
Noting the said development, the Court closed a PIL filed by one NA Sebastian challenging the notification issued by the Central Government on November 21 bringing the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, into force.
PMLA Bail Requires Delicate Balance, Not Final Verdict On Guilt Or Innocence: Delhi High Court
Title: BHASKAR YADAV v. ED & Other Connected Matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 127
The Delhi High Court has ruled that under the PMLA, a delicate balance has to be maintained between the final judgment of acquittal or conviction and an order granting or denying bail.
Title: MRS. AJIT INDER SINGH v. MR. SIMRANJIT SINGH GREWAL & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 128
The Delhi High Court has held that the duty to maintain an unmarried minor daughter of a pre-deceased son may constitute a “pre-existing right” capable of enlarging her limited estate into absolute ownership under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Case title: Shivam v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 129
The Delhi High Court has denied bail to a man accused of stealing high-voltage cables from Delhi Metro infrastructure, observing that such acts amount to “playing with the lives of the general public” and have serious implications for public safety.
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Administrative Order Barring Execution Petitions Below ₹2 Crore
Title: ASIAN PATENT ATTONRNEYS ASSOCIATION (INDIAN GROUP) v. REGISTRAR GENERAL DELHI HIGH COURT
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 130
The Delhi High Court has held that no litigant can be barred at the threshold from filing execution petitions before the Registry, even in cases where the decree amount is Rs. 2 crore or below.
Case Title: SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENTS PVT. LTD. & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 131
The Delhi High Court allowed IRS officer Sameer Wankhede to approach the City Civil & Sessions Court, Dindoshi, Mumbai to file a suit over his allegedly defamatory portrayal in the Netflix series “Ba***ds of Bollywood” directed by Aryan Khan.
Case title: Rahul Singh Tolia v. Union Of India & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 132
The Delhi High Court has refused to reopen the Indian Forest Service (IFS) cadre allocation of an officer, holding that even an admitted error in vacancy calculation cannot justify unsettling cadre allocations after a long lapse of time, given the serious cascading consequences such a move would entail.
Title: SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 133
The Delhi High Court directed Bollywood actor Rajpal Naurang Yadav to surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent by February 04, after coming down heavily on him for repeatedly breaching undertakings given to the Court regarding payment of settlement amounts in cheque dishonour cases.
Case title: Okoli Anayo Franklin v. The State NCT Of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 134
The Delhi High Court has held that the presence of an absconding co-accused can be a relevant factor while considering bail under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Case title: Meet Bhadresh Shah v. All India Institute Of Medical Sciences & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 135
The Delhi High Court has quashed a decision of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) cancelling the candidature of a top-rank holder for admission to the DM (Critical Care Medicine) course, holding that postgraduate residency of 1,095 days can be cumulative across institutions when the prospectus does not mandate training from a single institute.
Title: HARPREET SINGH v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 137
Citing writer Franz Kafka, the Delhi High Court has ordered premature release of a former President's Bodyguard, who is serving life sentence for the 2003 robbery and gang rape of a young woman.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that the authorities, including the Sentence Review Board (SRB) acted arbitrarily in repeatedly denying him premature release despite over two decades of incident‑free custody and consistent positive reform reports.
Title: ALL INDIA PICKLEBALL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 138
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the All India Pickleball Association (AIPA) challenging the Union Government's decision to recognise the Indian Pickleball Association (IPA) as the National Sports Federation (NSF) for the sport in the country.
Title: MS. YANGCHEN DRAKMARGYAPON v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 139
The Delhi High Court has declared a Tibetan-origin woman born in Dharamshala in 1966 as an Indian citizen by birth under Section 3(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, and directed that she be issued an Indian passport.
Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction Of Police Sub-Inspector In 1995 CBI Bribery Trap Case
Case title: Manoj Kumar v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 140
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence awarded to a Delhi Police Sub-Inspector in a 1995 corruption case investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Title: SONU @ SONU SINGH @ GOPAL v. STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 141
The Delhi High Court has strongly deprecated a 13-year delay in securing the custody of a life convict whose criminal appeal had already been dismissed, calling it a serious systemic failure that corrodes the credibility of the criminal justice system.
Elective Nature Of Surgery Doesn't Bar Interim Bail On Medical Grounds: Delhi High Court
Case title: Amit Gulia v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 142
The Delhi High Court has held that the elective or non-emergency nature of a medical procedure cannot by itself be ground to deny interim bail to an accused, particularly where the ailment causes continuing pain and requires timely surgical intervention.
Title: VARUN KUMAR SINGH v. STATE (SHO RAJINDER NAGAR)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 143
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man accused in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, observing that while consent of a minor has no legal value, the romantic nature of the relationship and the prosecutrix's age being close to 18 years are relevant considerations at the stage of bail.
Case title: Pramod @ Parmal v. State (Nct Of Delhi)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 144
The Delhi High Court has held that the fact that an accused is not named in the FIR is not decisive at the stage of bail if the investigation reveals financial transactions establishing active coordination and involvement in an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Title: VICKY KASHYAP v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 145
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Police to ensure that name, parentage or address of victim of sexual assault are not disclosed in the status reports or documents filed in the Court.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma requested the Commissioner of Police to reiterate appropriate instructions to all SHOs and Investigating Officers, in strict compliance with law.
Case title: Delhi Medical Technical Employees Association (Regd.) And Anr v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 146
The Delhi High Court has held that the principle of “equal pay for equal work” is not automatic and cannot be invoked merely on the basis of similarity in job designation or duties, particularly when educational qualifications and recruitment rules differ.
Title: SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 147
The Delhi High Court refused to extend the deadline granted to Bollywood actor Rajpal Naurang Yadav to surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent in relation to his conviction in cheque dishonour cases.
Case title: CAG v. Manoj Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 148
The Delhi High Court has held that a government employee who furnishes a false medical certificate to justify unauthorised absence commits grave misconduct, warranting the penalty of dismissal from service.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Decriminalise 'Ganja', Asks Centre To Review NDPS Act
Case title: Great Legislation Movement India Trust v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 149
The Delhi High Court has asked the Central Government to review whether the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and the NDPS Rules relating to the use of cannabis (ganja) require dilution.
Case title: Amardeep Sharma v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 150
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to two directors of a private company accused of fraudulently procuring and misusing bulk mobile SIM connections for activities linked to cybercrime.
Case title: Mr Raj Kumar Gupta Sole Proprietor Of M/S Kanwarji Raj Kumar v. Delhi Pollution Control Committee & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 151
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a Chandni Chowk-based sweet manufacturing unit for discharging untreated effluent into public sewers leading to the Yamuna river.
Title: SAHIL ARSH v. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 152
The Delhi High Court has quashed Regulation 18 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023, which imposed a complete prohibition on migration of MBBS students from one medical college to another.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 153
The Delhi High Court has held that mere allegations of adultery, unsupported by proof, cannot be a ground to deny interim maintenance to a wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act).
Title: HANUMANT LAL PATEL & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 154
The Delhi High Court has rejected challenge to Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination, 2023, particularly Paper-II (CSAT), observing that judicial review in competitive examinations is extremely limited.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 155
The Delhi High Court has held that a mother's right to personal development, dignity and autonomy, including the pursuit of higher education abroad, is an intrinsic facet of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, and cannot be curtailed merely because custody and visitation proceedings are pending.
Title: SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 156
The Delhi High Court refused to recall its order directing Bollywood actor Rajpal Naurang Yadav to surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent in relation to his conviction in cheque dishonour cases.
Title: DEVYANSHU SURYAVANSHI & ORS v. STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ANR & Other Connected Matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 157
The Delhi High Court has asked the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) to adopt a more systematic and rigorous approach in framing, vetting and finalising question papers and answer keys in the recruitment examinations.
Title: PRABHROOP KAUR KAPOOR & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 158
The Delhi High Court has quashed two CBSE notifications which had withdrawn the facility for Class XII pass-outs of the year 2025 to appear in an “Additional Subject” as private candidates, holding that the decision was arbitrary, retrospectively applied, and violative of the doctrine of legitimate expectation .
Title: SHLOK BHARDWAJ v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 159
The Delhi High Court has permitted a JEE 2026 aspirant to reappear in the Main Session-I examination who faced repeated biometric authentication failures, observing that the prejudice suffered cannot be dismissed as insignificant.
Title: LAXMI DEVI & ANR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 160
The Delhi High Court has held that consenting adults do not need societal approval for choosing their respective life partners and that society or their parents cannot interfere in such matters.
'Half-Baked Petition': Delhi High Court Dismisses Centre's Plea With ₹25,000 Costs
Title: UNION OF INDIA v. INDER PAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 161
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Union Government challenging orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), observing that it was filed after an inordinate delay of three years and was a “half-baked” attempt lacking the complete record.
Title: SURESH SHARMA v. KRISHAN LAL THUKRAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 162
The Delhi High Court has issued detailed practice directions to all the district courts in the national capital to ensure that every judicial order clearly reflects the numbers of applications decided, as well as the appearance of parties or their counsel.
Title: PARVEEN TANEJA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 163
The Delhi High Court has called for integration of data of complaint cases which do not result in FIRs as also cases which are pending or decided by the competent Courts on the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) portal.
Title: AYUSHMAN INITIATIVE FOR CHILD RIGHTS & ANR v. HIGH COURT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 164
The Delhi High Court asked a PIL petitioner, who sought the formulation of structured 'Child Access and Custody Guidelines' and a 'Parenting Plan', to approach the HC on its Administrative Side for policy formulation regarding the issue.
Title: PRERNA GUPTA v. REGISTRAR GENERAL OF DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 165
The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea seeking revision of the final result of Delhi Judicial Services Examination, 2023, observing that judicial interference may open floodgates, leading to cascading consequences and rendering the process unworkable.
Title: MALABAR GOLD AND DIAMOND LIMITED & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 166
The Delhi High Court has held that blanket and disproportionate freezing of bank accounts, especially where the account holder is neither an accused nor even a suspect, is “manifestly arbitrary” and violates Articles 21 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Title: SURJEET KUMAR @ KALU v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 167
The Delhi High Court has directed all trial courts in the national capital to ensure that testimony of witnesses already being examined should be recorded on day-to-day basis till its conclusion, in order to minimise the possibility of pressurising witnesses .
Title: AMAN PRATAP SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 168
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a probationary officer of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (DHJS) challenging the termination of his services following circulation of a viral courtroom video, holding that the decision was a termination simpliciter based on overall unsuitability, and not a punitive or stigmatic action.
Title: Vivek Anand Oberoi v. Collector Bazar & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 169
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe interim order protecting the personality rights of actor and entrepreneur Vivek Oberoi.
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela granted an ex-parte ad-interim dynamic injunction in favour of the actor, while restraining multiple defendants and unidentified (John Doe) entities from misappropriating and exploiting his personality and publicity rights, including his name, image, voice, likeness and other distinctive attributes, through artificial intelligence and other digital technologies.
Case title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v/s GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 171
The Delhi High Court directed the Police to provide round-the-clock security to a lawyer who has alleged that he was beaten up inside a court room in Tis Hazari courts in front of the presiding judge last week.
Title: THE FORUM OF MINORITY SCHOOLS v. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 172
The Delhi High Court directed that schools in the national capital which have not yet constituted the School-Level Fee Regulation Committee (SLFRC) shall not be compelled to do so until February 20, while it considers challenges to the Delhi School Education (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2026.
Case title: GBL Chemicals Limited & Ors. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 173
The Delhi High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings in a cheque dishonour case, holding that dropping the cheque signatory from the array of accused does not invalidate prosecution against the company and its directors under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Film 'Ghooskhor Pandat' Will Be Renamed: Netflix Tells Delhi High Court
Title: Mahender Chaturvedi v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 174
Netflix told the Delhi High Court that the Manoj Bajpayee-starrer film “Ghooskhor Pandat” will be renamed.
The statement was made before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav who was hearing the plea challenging the proposed release of the film.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the plea, noting that nothing more was required to be adjudicated.
Case title: Rohit Lamba & Anr. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 176
The Delhi High Court has expressed “extreme shock” at the conduct of parties and their advocate misleading a Family Court into passing a divorce decree in respect of a void marriage.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 177
The Delhi High Court has held that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 does not confer an indefeasible right upon an aggrieved woman to insist on residence in a particular property which was abandoned by her, when suitable alternate accommodation is available.
Title: VIKAS PUNDHIR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 178
The Delhi High Court has observed that the right to associate with political parties and being actively involved in politics is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Title: SH. SUNIL KUMAR v. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 179
The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no fundamental right to possess firearms under the Constitution of India, holding that the grant of an arms licence is a matter falling squarely within the domain of executive discretion under the Arms Act, 1959 and the Arms Rules, 2016.
Delhi High Court Upholds Rule Barring Doctors From Holding Administrative Posts After 62 Years
Title: DR. VINOD KUMAR JAIN AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & Other Connected Matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 180
The Delhi High Court has upheld the Union government's 2018 amendment to Fundamental Rule (FR) 56(bb), which allows doctors of the Central Health Service and other allied services to serve up to 65 years only in non‑administrative roles, while treating 62 years as the normal age of superannuation.
Delhi High Court Directs Police Commissioner To Address Lapses In Filing Motor Accident Reports
Title: ANUP KUMAR RAMPAL v. DELHI POLICE THROUGH JOINT COMMISSIONER
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 181
The Delhi High Court has directed the Commissioner of Police to take appropriate decision and steps to ensure that monitoring mechanism for motor accident cases is appropriately implemented.
Title: SARVESH SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 182
The Delhi High Court has asked the Commissioner of Delhi Police to take corrective measures to ensure that investigating officers brief the prosecutors before hearing in bail matters commences.
Case Title: Life Insurance Corporation of India v. G.K. Nijhawan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 183
The Delhi High Court has held that a workman is not entitled to wages under Section 17(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, after attaining the age of superannuation, as the provision operates only during the period when the employer–employee relationship subsists.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 184
The Delhi High Court has cautioned against casual appearances by proxy counsel and urged the young lawyers to read case briefs.
Case title: M/S CSAT System (P) Ltd v. Appellant Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 185
The Delhi High Court has held that State-appointed authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 lack jurisdiction to adjudicate gratuity claims where the establishment has branches in more than one State, as in such cases the Central Government is the “appropriate government” under the Act.
Title: VIKAS YADAV v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 186
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition moved by Vikas Yadav, serving a 25-year jail term without remission for the murder of business executive Nitish Katara in 2002, seeking release on furlough.
Case title: Madanjit Kumar v. Central Electronics Limited
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 187
The Delhi High Court has held that tweeting or publicly disseminating allegations of corruption against one's employer can amount to misconduct under applicable service rules.
Title: MARIA RAMESH v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 188
The Delhi High Court has observed that mere pendency of investigation or registration of a criminal case cannot justify the prolonged operation of a look out circular against an accused.
Case title: Rohit Gagerna v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 189
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant bail to an accused in a cyber fraud case involving a fake trading application, observing that the material on record prima facie indicated money laundering of approximately ₹43.33 crore through circular and layered transactions.
Case title: Aman@ Prince @ Bhura v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 190
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused in a murder case while directing action against police officials for filing a misleading status report by concealing vital evidence from the Court.
Case title: Dr. Bahubali N. Shetti v. AIIMS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 191
The Delhi High Court has held that the remuneration received by a doctor during Junior Residency constitutes “income” for the purpose of determining eligibility under the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) category.
Will Challenge Arvind Kejriwal's Acquittal In Cases Over Skipping Summons: ED Tells Delhi High Court
Title: Arvind Kejriwal v. ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 192
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) informed the Delhi High Court that it will challenge the acquittal of former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party supremo Arvind Kejriwal in cases concerning non compliance of its summons in relation to the alleged liquor policy scam.
This was after Kejriwal's counsel sought withdrawal of the plea challenging the summons issued to the AAP leader by the ED.
The Court thereafter allowed the withdrawal of the plea. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn, it said.
Case title: Mohan @ Akkar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 193
The Delhi High Court has upheld the life sentence of a murder convict nearly 24 years after the crime, while analysing how police officers performing para-police functions perceive and respond to emergencies.
Case title: Savitri v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 194
The Delhi High Court denied anticipatory bail to a woman accused of trafficking and using a minor child for the purpose of carrying out illicit liquor trade, observing that the exploitation of children as instruments to commit crimes has become a growing menace.
Case title: Feroz Ahmad v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 195
The Delhi High Court has acquitted a man convicted in a robbery case nearly 23 years after the trial court convicted him, holding that the prosecution failed to establish his identity beyond reasonable doubt and that the test identification parade (TIP) was unreliable.
Case Name : Union of India & Anr. vs. Raj Kumar Manocha
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 196
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that chronic degenerative diseases like osteoarthritis qualify as “severe illness” under Railway Board circulars, entitling an employee to regularization of retained government accommodation and it exempts from penal or special licence fee.
Title: DEEPANSHU SAHU v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 197
The Delhi High Court has asked the Union Government to decide a plea seeking mandatory disclosure of cryptocurrencies and other virtual digital assets by election candidates in their nomination affidavits.
Disqualification For Public Employment Is Removed When Offender Is Released On Probation: Delhi HC
Case Name : Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajesh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 198
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held that release on probation under Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act removes the disqualification attached to a conviction for purposes of public employment, even though the conviction itself is not wiped out.
Cheque Bounce Cases: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Suspension Of Sentence To Actor Rajpal Yadav
Title: SH. RAJPAL NAURANG YADAV & ANR v. M/S. MURLI PROJECTS PVT. LTD & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 199
The Delhi High Court suspended for the interim, the sentence imposed on Bollywood actor Rajpal Naurang Yadav in relation to his conviction in cheque dishonour cases.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma granted interim suspension of sentence till March 18.
Case Name : Dinesh & Anr. v. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research through its Director General & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 200
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that recruitment authorities can prescribe minimum qualifying marks after the recruitment process begins but before the relevant stage of examination, if such discretion is reserved in the advertisement.
NEET-PG 2025: Delhi High Court Upholds Cut-Off Reduction, Says No Arbitrariness In Policy Decision
Title: SANCHIT SETH v. NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATION IN MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 201
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the decision of the National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) reducing the qualifying cut-off percentile for NEET-PG 2025 examination after commencement of the admission process.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that the decision to reduce the eligibility criteria was taken after due deliberations and the eligibility criteria was recalibrated to ensure the optimal utilisation of the vacant seats.
Title: Mrs. Priya S. Kapur v. Mandhira Kapur Smith & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 202
The Delhi High Court restrained late industrialist Sunjay Kapur's wife Priya Kapur and her sister in law Mandhira Kapur Smith from making defamatory statements against each other.
Justice Mini Pushkarna said that the Kapurs should conduct themselves with dignity and must not defame each other publicly.
Leadership Role In PFI Before It Was Banned Doesn't By Itself Attract PMLA: Delhi High Court
Case title: Moideen Kutty K @ M. K. Faizy v. ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 203
The Delhi High Court has held that merely holding a leadership position in the Popular Front of India (PFI) at a time when the organisation was lawful does not, by itself, constitute an offence of money laundering under PMLA.
Case title: Sunita Rani v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 204
The Delhi High Court has held that a candidate who was over-age on the cut-off date cannot claim appointment to a regular post merely because she had rendered long years of service as a part-time librarian.
Justice Sanjeev Narula thus dismissed the challenge to a selection process for the post of Librarian in a Delhi Government-aided school.
Title: MAHESH CHAND v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 205
The Delhi High Court has observed that the right to operate and run a bar or pub must be balanced with the citizens' and children's right to a noise-free, peaceful, and orderly environment.
“The age old proverb given to ordinary citizens is “don't take the law into your own hand”, the rationale obviously being that is for the authorities to wield the proverbial stick of the law, and enforce the same,” Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said.
Case title: M/S Dhanvine Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. DJB
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 206
The Delhi High Court has upheld the Delhi Jal Board's tender condition disqualifying bidders if they are facing FIRs, charge sheets or criminal proceedings relating to corruption, fraud or economic offences, even in the absence of a conviction.
Case title: UoI v. B Srinivasa Rao & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 207
The Delhi High Court has held that transfer and posting are matters of administrative discretion, and the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) cannot interdict such decisions through ad-interim orders, especially at a preliminary stage of proceedings.
Case title: Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 208
The Delhi High Court is examining whether the requirement of mandatory vegetarian/ non-vegetarian labelling through red, brown or green dots on toothpaste and other toiletry packaging can be enforced under existing law, amid conflicting positions taken by regulatory authorities.
Accordingly, the Court has directed that a joint meeting shall be held between the Director, Drug Controller General of India as also the Director, Legal Metrology and a comprehensive joint decision shall be arrived at as to the implementation of incorporation of the Red, Brown and Green dot on packaging of various products.
Case title: Palika Bazar Shopkeepers Welfare Association v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 209
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi government to hear representatives of shopkeepers and street vendors before taking a final decision on the Town Vending Plan proposed for Connaught Place and Palika Bazar, which were designated as no-vending zones by the Supreme Court in Sudhir Madan & Ors. v. MCD & Ors (2007).
Title: MS A v. STATE & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 210
The Delhi High Court has ruled that consent given by a woman cannot be retrospectively withdrawn so as to convert a consensual relationship into a criminal offence merely because the relationship has broken down.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that while law must remain vigilant in protecting women from genuine sexual exploitation, coercion, and abuse, it must equally guard against the misuse of its process.
Case title: Vikas Garg & Anr. v. State through CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 211
The Delhi High Court has refused to quash the criminal charges framed against a due diligence firm and its authorised signatory in a ₹600 lakh bank loan fraud case, holding that the material on record discloses grave suspicion warranting a full-fledged trial.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed, “in view of the positive Report submitted by the Petitioners despite the glaring irregularities and contradictions, there arises grave suspicion regarding involvement of the Petitioners in the alleged offence and which can be only tested in trial.”
Case title: Gaurav Verma & Ors. v. AAI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 212
The Delhi High Court has held that ex-servicemen who avail age relaxation in recruitment cannot claim consideration against unreserved (UR) posts, even if they secure higher marks than candidates shortlisted in the unreserved category.
Justice Sanjeev Narula thus dismissed a writ petition filed by ex-servicemen candidates against the Airport Authority of India (AAI), for recruitment to Non-Executive Cadres under the UR category.
Title: Shivmani Yadav v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 213
The Delhi High Court directed the Union Government on Wednesday to take a decision on issuing a notification for appointment of a presiding officer to head the Appellate Tribunal under Section 253 of the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia directed the Government of India to take a decision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four weeks.
Title: Anand Legal Aid Trust v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 214
The Delhi High Court rejected a public interest litigation seeking “omnibus” prayers over the recent issue of persons being missing from the national capital.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia rapped the petitioner- Anand Legal Aid Forum Trust, noting that the PIL did not contain specific instances or details on the issue.
Delhi High Court Urges More Judicial Appointments For MCOCA Cases, Calls For Administrative Action
Title: DEEPA SINGH v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & Other Connected Matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 215
The Delhi High Court has called for more judicial appointments to deal with cases under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha said that a sessions judge or an additional sessions judge would be qualified to be appointed as a judge of the Special Court under Section 5(3) of the MCOCA.
Title: KAJOL VISHAL DEVGAN v. KASH COLLECTIVE
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 216
The Delhi High Court passed an interim order protecting the personality rights of Bollywood actress Kajol Devgan.
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained various defendant entities from using the actress' image and likeness while selling commercial merchandise as well as ordered takedown of obscene material.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 217
The Delhi High Court has observed that a homemaker does not sit idle and the law must recognise the economic value of her contribution to the domestic relationship.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the assumption that a non-earning spouse is “idle” reflects a misunderstanding of domestic contribution, as describing non-employment as idleness is easy but to recognise the labour involved in sustaining a household is far more difficult.
Ancestral Or Inherited Properties Can Be Attached Under PMLA: Delhi High Court
Title: ARUN SURI v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 218
The Delhi High Court has held that ancestral or inherited properties can be attached under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
“The statute does not carve out an exception for ancestral or inherited properties, and thus, they are not immune from attachment,” a division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja said.
Presence Of Public Urinal, Open Garbage Bin Next To Residence Violates Article 21: Delhi High Court
Title: RACHIT GUPTA v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 219
The Delhi High Court has held that presence of a public urinal and an open garbage bin right next to an individual's residence violates the right to live with dignity in a clean and healthy environment under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Justice Amit Bansal underscored that one of the integral aspects of a healthy life is hygienic environment, absence of which will affect an individual's right to live with dignity.
Title: NARENDER KUMAR SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 220
The Delhi High Court ordered non disclosure of the identity of the 17 year old minor accused in relation to the recent SUV accident in Dwarka which claimed the life of a 23 year old.
“The respondents no. 1, 2 and 4 (Union of India, Press Council of India and Press Trust of India) and those under them are restrained from disclosing the record of the child for the purpose of character certificate or otherwise of the juvenile accused in relation to the FIR till the next date of hearing,” Justice Saurabh Banerjee directed.
Delhi High Court Fines Lawyer For Failing To Inform Opposite Side's Counsel While Seeking Adjournmen
Title: OM PRAKSH MALHOTRA & ANR v. SACHIN MALHOTRA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 221
The Delhi High Court has fined a lawyer for failing to inform the opposite side's counsel while seeking an adjournment.
Justice Anish Dayal imposed costs of Rs. 15,000 on the lawyer appearing for the respondent side in a plea filed under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Title: RAJ KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 222
The Delhi High Court closed a plea seeking to stop the continued streaming of the film Lady Chatterley's Lover in India on OTT platform Netflix on the grounds of containing “excessively graphic sexual scenes and frontal nudity.”
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav granted liberty to the litigant, Raj Kumar, to approach Digital Publisher Content Grievances Council which is a tier-two body under Information Technology Rules 2021 to resolve viewer complaints.
Case title: Heritage Foods Limited v. Jagati Publications Limited & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 223
The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to a Hyderabad-based dairy company in a defamation suit filed against a media house, television channel and digital platforms over reports allegedly linking it to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) ghee/laddus adulteration.
The suit has been instituted by Heritage Foods Limited alleging that a series of newspaper reports, television broadcasts and online publications falsely associated it with the supply of adulterated ghee to the Tirupati temple.
Case title: Asif @ Naeem v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 224
The Delhi High Court has ordered premature release of a Bangladeshi national, sentenced to life in a dacoity and murder case, holding that the gravity of the offence by itself cannot be the sole ground to deny premature release once the eligibility threshold under the applicable policy has been crossed.
Justice Sanjeev Narula thus set aside the decision of the Sentence Review Board (SRB) which had rejected his plea for premature release despite prolonged incarceration and satisfactory prison conduct.
Title: JAYANT VATS v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 225
The Delhi High Court has observed that refusing marriage citing kundli mismatch after establishing physical relations and repeated assurances of marriage attracts Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Section 69 BNS criminalizes sexual intercourse achieved through deceitful means.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma refused to grant regular bail to a man accused of establishing sexual relations with a woman on the false promise of marriage and later refusing to marry her on the ground of non-matching of kundalis.
Case title: Save India Foundation v. MCD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 226
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation challenging a 46 years old Wakf notification listing certain mosques in the city's Jahangirpuri area, holding that the plea was an “unnecessary attempt to rake up the past” by reopening settled issues after several decades.
Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order Protecting Personality Rights Of Singer Jubin Nautiyal
Title: JUBIN NAUTIYAL v. JAMMABLE LIMITED & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 227
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of singer Jubin Nautiyal.
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of the singer restraining multiple AI platforms, websites and e-commerce intermediaries from unauthorized use and commercial exploitation of his personality and publicity rights.
Case title: Mujeeb Khan For And On Behalf Of Aftab Khan Missing v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 228
The Delhi High Court has directed the Central government to grant consular access and legal assistance to the family of an Indian worker who allegedly went missing after being swept away by strong sea currents while snorkelling in the Republic of Maldives.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia passed the direction while disposing of a Letters Patent Appeal filed by the brother of the worker, Aftab Khan, who was employed as a Chef at a resort in Maldives.
Mere Breaking Up Of Relationship Not 'Instigation' For Abetment Of Suicide: Delhi High Court
Title: NOOR MOHAMMAD v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 229
The Delhi High Court has ruled that mere breaking up of a relationship does not constitute “instigation” to constitute the offence of abetment of suicide under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
“Though, broken relationship and heartbreaks have become common these days, mere breaking-up of relationship may not per se constitute instigation so as to make it to be a case of abetment under Section 108 BNS (corresponding Section 306 IPC),” Justice Manoj Jain said.
Title: UJJWAL v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 230
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of abetting the suicide of his former partner, observing that mere refusal to marry or failure to respond to messages does not constitute instigation or abetment under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that a suicide note, by itself, is not sufficient to deny bail in the absence of any clear, proximate act of instigation.
Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Swami Ramdev, Orders Take Down Of Deepfake Content
Title: SWAMI RAMDEV v. JOHN DOE (S) AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 231
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of Yoga guru and Patanjali Ayurved founder Ramdev.
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained various individuals, including unknown entities, from misusing his name, image, voice and other personality attributes through AI-generated deepfakes and unauthorised commercial listings.
Case title: Sakshi Sharma v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 232
The Delhi High Court has upheld the removal of an officer from the Bank of Baroda, holding that the maker–checker system is only a risk-control mechanism and does not confer immunity on an officer who initiates unauthorised or self-serving transactions.
Case title: Neeraj Kumar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 233
The Delhi High Court has clarified that only the period during which an accused is in actual custody can be counted for the purpose of computing the maximum permissible period of police remand under Section 187 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), and that time spent on interim bail cannot be treated as custody.
Title: SURESH CHAND SHRIVASTVA v. AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BUREAU
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 234
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking “reading down” of the preliminary investigation report on the Air India plane crash that took place in Ahmedabad on June 12 last year, claiming 270 lives.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that the prayer was “highly misconceived” as the doctrine of reading down is applied by superior courts while interpreting provisions of some statute.
Case title: Himanshu Gupta v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 235
The Delhi High Court has refused anticipatory bail to contractors accused in a case where a young man lost his life after falling into a 20-foot-deep pit dug on a public road without any caution boards, barricading, or safety measures, observing that “public roads can't be turned into death traps.”
Case title: R. Usha @ G. Usha v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 236
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a woman accused in a ₹2 crore fraud case, while criticising the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its failure to apprehend her for nearly 13 years.
Justice Girish Kathpalia remarked,
“The fact that it took 13 years for a premier central investigating agency to even apprehend a Proclaimed Offender speaks volumes about their interest or lack thereof in arresting the accused/applicant.”
Title: PRATAP CHANDRA v. MR. MANISH SISODIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 237
The Delhi High Court refused to entertain an appeal challenging a single judge order rejecting the challenge to election of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia from Patparganj constituency in the 2020 Assembly polls.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the appeal was not maintainable before the High Court and has to be filed before the Supreme Court, under Section 116A of Representation of People Act.
Title: VIDYA DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 238
The Delhi High Court has held that a woman whose marriage was solemnised during the subsistence of her husband's first marriage is not entitled to family pension under the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, even if the first wife subsequently passes away.
A Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora underscored that Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act clearly stipulates that marriage between a Hindu man and woman is void if the marriage took place during the subsistence of his first marriage.
Case title: Master Athrava Tripathi & Anr. v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 239
The Delhi High Court has held that wards of such armed forces personnel who suffered disability during military operations but were retained in service and completed their tenure are not entitled to Priority-II reservation under the Defence quota.
Case title: Master Athrava Tripathi & Anr. v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 23
The Delhi High Court has held that wards of such armed forces personnel who suffered disability during military operations but were retained in service and completed their tenure are not entitled to Priority-II reservation under the Defence quota.
Case title: MTNL v. Shri Ram Ratan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 241
The Delhi High Court has held that once a Labour Court upholds the fairness and validity of a domestic enquiry, it cannot thereafter re-appreciate evidence or act as an appellate authority to substitute the findings of the Enquiry Officer.
Case title: Ms. X v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 242
The Delhi High Court has refused to condone a 281-day delay in filing a criminal revision petition, holding that a litigant cannot claim the benefit of an earlier filing date after allowing a petition to remain under objections for months and later withdrawing it on technical grounds.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was dealing with a criminal revision petition filed against a trial court order setting aside the summoning of the accused in a forgery case.
Title: RAMBIR SINGH.GOLA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 243
The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a petition filed by a husband seeking Rs. 100 crore compensation, a judicial enquiry and fixation of accountability over the death of his wife, an Indian citizen, during violent civil unrest in Kathmandu, Nepal, in September 2025.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav was informed by the husband's counsel that he was restricting the relief to seeking a declaration on the violation of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and that the Union Government must formulate a protocol for Indians travelling to sensitive nations.
Case title: Bachu Singh v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 244
The Delhi High Court has held that the period of limitation under Section 469 CrPC begins from the date on which the police officer acquires knowledge of the commission of an offence, and not from a later date when the FIR is formally registered.
Title: Union of India v. Sameer Wankhede
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 245
The Delhi High Court set aside an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) quashing the disciplinary proceedings against IRS officer Sameer Wankhede in the 2021 Cordelia cruise drug bust case.
A division bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan allowed the plea filed by the Central Government challenging the order passed by the Tribunal on January 19.
Case title: UoI v. Brijendra Kumar Sharma & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 246
The Delhi High Court has refused to restore a writ petition filed by the Union of India, holding that government departments are not entitled to any preferential or lenient treatment in matters of delay and procedural defaults.
Justice Renu Bhatnagar also dismissed the Centre's application seeking condonation of a 395-days delay and restoration of a writ petition that had been dismissed for non-prosecution on three separate occasions.
Case title: NS v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 247
The Delhi High Court has held that a wife cannot be permitted to continue criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC in India after having accepted a divorce decree and monetary settlement passed by a competent court in the United States.
Case title: Aviation Services LLC v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 248
The Delhi High Court has held that the subsequent denial of bail to co-accused persons cannot, by itself, be treated as a “supervening circumstance” warranting cancellation of bail already granted to an accused, in the absence of any allegation that the accused has misused the liberty granted by the court.
Title: THE FORUM OF MINORITY SCHOOLS v. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 249
The Delhi High Court deferred implementation of Delhi government's mandate to private schools to constitute a school level fee regulation committee (SLFRC) for the upcoming academic session.
A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia was dealing with a petitions filed by various school associations, including the Forum of Minority Schools and the Forum for Promotion of Quality Education for All, assailing the notification issued by the Delhi Government on February 01.
Case title: Mohan Tanksale v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 250
The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal proceedings initiated against the Central Bank of India and its senior officials, holding that a bank can adjust the amount deposited under a One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme if the borrower defaults on the settlement terms.
Title: Uday Chib v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 251
In granting interim relief to Uday Bhanu Chib, President of the Indian Youth Congress, the Delhi High Court stayed a Sessions Court order which had put on hold the bail granted to him by a Magistrate in connection with the shirtless protest at the recent India AI Impact Summit, observing that the impugned order reflected no application of mind.
Title: KARTIK & ANR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 252
The Delhi High Court has held that two consenting adults in a live-in relationship are entitled to police protection against threats and interference from family members, reiterating that the right to choose a partner flows from Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Employee Governed By CCS Pension Rules Can't Claim Gratuity Under Payment Of Gratuity Act : Delhi HC
Case Name : Vimla Singh EX PGT History v. Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 253
The Delhi High Court has held that an employee governed by statutory rules providing for gratuity (such as CCS (Pension) Rules) is excluded from the definition of “employee” under Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and therefore cannot claim gratuity under the 1972 Act. Further it was held that resignation results in forfeiture of past service hence, employee will be disentitled from pension and gratuity.
Case title: Ram Kumar Pathak v. Shashi Devi & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 254
The Delhi High Court has held that a mere allegation that a person was involved in the “day-to-day business activities” of a company is not sufficient to attract vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) in cheque dishonour cases.
Case title: Sanyogita Gupta & Ors v. Ashok Kumar Gupta
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 255
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that interim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC should ordinarily be awarded from the date of filing of the application, and not from a later date, unless the court records cogent reasons for deviating from the general rule.
Title: RAVJEET SINGH v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 256
The Delhi High Court has observed that merely because an accused is smart in responding to the questions of the interrogator cannot mean that he is not cooperating in the interrogation.
Setting Aside Or Modifying Trial Court Order Not Reflection On Judge's Integrity: Delhi High Court
Title: SANJAY KUMAR SAIN v. STATE
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 257
The Delhi High Court has observed that merely because an order passed by a trial court is set aside or modified by a higher court, no inference can be drawn regarding the competence, integrity, or ability of the judicial officer concerned, unless specific adverse observations to that effect are recorded.
Title: MINOR CHILD K & ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 258
The Delhi High Court has emphasised that child victims and other vulnerable witnesses must not be repeatedly summoned during trial proceedings, observing that the criminal process itself should not become a source of further trauma for victims of sexual offences.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that while the victim must be given an opportunity to present her objections to the grant of bail, her presence should not be insisted upon repeatedly once her views, in respect of bail plea of the accused, have been recorded.
Title: SHRI BALAJI v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 259
The Delhi High Court has ruled that mere good conduct of an individual after conviction is no ground to reduce the electoral disqualification period prescribed under Section 8 of Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Justice Amit Bansal said if such a stand is accepted, it would dilute the mandate of the provision which prescribes for disqualification of a person for certain offences.
Title: DIMPY CHUGH v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 260
The Delhi High Court has observed that subsequent bail applications arising from the same FIR should ordinarily be listed before the same judge who had rejected an earlier bail plea, in order to avoid conflicting or inconsistent orders.
“…. the Registry of this Court is bound to act in accordance with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is in compliance with the aforesaid position of law that matters arising out of the same FIR, particularly applications seeking bail, whether anticipatory or regular, are ordinarily listed before the same Bench/Judge who had earlier decided the previous bail application of the accused and who continues to hold the criminal roster,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.
Case title: ED v. M/S Mahanivesh Oils & Foods Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 261
The Delhi High Court has held that property purchased from the proceeds of crime prior to the coming into force of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) can still be attached under the Act if the accused continues to remain in possession of the property after the law came into effect.
Case title: State v. Shiv Shanker
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 262
The Delhi High Court has convicted a truck driver for causing the death of a two-year-old child in a road accident, invoking the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and holding that the circumstances of the accident themselves indicated negligence.
Title: HIMAYANI PURI v. KUNAL SHUKLA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 263
The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to Himayani Puri, Union Minister Hardeep Puri's daughter, seeking a global take down of posts linking her to American financier and child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Justice Mini Pushkarna ordered social media platforms like Twitter, Google, YouTube, Meta and LinkedIn and other john doe entities to take down the allegedly defamatory content against the Cabinet Minister's daughter.
Case Name : Ghunna Ram v. Union of India and Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 264
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that where eligibility rules are ambiguous, they must be interpreted in favour of the candidate, and the one-year discharge period for Ex-Servicemen should be counted from the date of exam results, not the last date of application for exam.
Case title: SSC v. Yashpal Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 265
The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) directing a fresh medical examination of a candidate who had been declared medically unfit during the recruitment process for the post of Constable (Executive) conducted by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC).
Case title: Padmaja Kumari Parmar v. Lakshyaraj Singh Mewar And Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 266
Marking a significant development in the ongoing succession dispute within the Mewar royal family, the Delhi High Court has declined a plea filed by Mewar princess Padmaja Kumari Parmar seeking Letters of Administration over the estate of her late father, Arvind Singh Mewar.
Asking Wife To Assist Family Or Stay With In-Laws Not Cruelty Under S.498A IPC: Delhi High Court
Case title: SP v. LT
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 267
The Delhi High Court has held that asking a wife to assist in caring for family members or to stay with in-laws cannot, by itself, amount to “cruelty” under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
Case title: Hindustan Scouts And Guides Association Through Its National Secretary Champat Singh & Anr. v. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Railways
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 268
The Delhi High Court has directed the Ministry of Railways to extend the benefit of recruitment under the Scouts and Guides quota to the Hindustan Scouts and Guides Association, holding that denial of such benefit was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Delhi High Court Stays Trial Against Bina Modi In Case Over Alleged Assault On Samir Modi
Title: Bina Modi v. State & Anr and other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 269
The Delhi High Court stayed the trial court proceedings initiated against industrialist Bina Modi and senior lawyer Lalit Bhasin in connection with an alleged assault of Godfrey Philips India (GPI) executive director Samir Modi during a board meeting in 2024.
Title: SB TRIPATHI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 270
The Delhi High Court has directed the authorities to ensure that video conferencing facilities for hybrid hearings are made functional in all District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions across the national capital within eight weeks.
Case title: Veer Pal v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 271
The Delhi High Court has observed that suicide is increasingly a “problem of the civilised world”, often driven by stress, social pressures and breakdown of support systems, while convicting a man for abetting the suicide of his wife.
Case title: Ajay @ Shantu v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 272
More than two decades after a “daredevil attack” on a police officer, the Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence of a man who stabbed a head constable in retaliation for being intercepted during a prior police operation.
Case title: Rajinder Kumar v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 273
The Delhi High Court has acquitted a former clerk of the Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (DESU) in a corruption case dating back to 1994, holding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had demanded or accepted a bribe.
Title: Isha Foundation v. Google LLC & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 274
The Delhi High Court directed Tamil media outlet Nakkheeran Publications to delete and take down defamatory content against Sadhguru's Isha Foundation.
Justice Subramonium Prasad also dismissed the application filed by the publication under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC for rejection of the defamation suit filed by Isha Foundation.
Title: ASSOCIATION FOR PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS (APCR) v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 275
The Delhi High Court directed the Delhi Police to take all necessary action to ensure that public life is not disrupted during Eid Festivities, in connection with an incident which took place in Uttam Nagar following the killing of a 26-year-old man in a clash during Holi.
The court further directed the Police to make arrangements which should "instil essence of security and safety to all" and further directed the authorities to ensure that "no one" from any section of society is permitted to cause "mischief having the potential of creating any untoward situation".
Title: KANWARJEET SINGH BATTH v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 276
The Delhi High Court has quashed an order recommending extradition of a Punjab-based man to the United Kingdom in a murder case, holding that the “critical link” that he stabbed the deceased with knife remained a matter of “inference and conjecture”, with no direct evidence.
Title: PROF SUJATA ASHWARYA v. JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 277
The Delhi High Court has observed that a safe and secure environment for women at the workplace is not to be understood in a narrow sense and includes conditions that enable them to work with dignity, decency and due respect.
Title: Newslaundry v. TV Today Network Pvt Ltd & Other Connected Matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 278
The Delhi High Court directed digital platform Newslaundry to remove and take down its statements containing disparaging content against TV Today, which owns news channels India Today and Aaj Tak.
A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla said that Newslaundry's remarks calling TV Today's content as “shit show” and “high on weed or opium” constituted disparagement.
Delhi High Court Quashes CBI Look Out Circulars Against NDTV Founders Prannoy Roy, Radhika Roy
Title: DR PRANNOY ROY & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 279
The Delhi High Court on Friday quashed the Look Out Circulars (LOC) opened by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against NDTV's former directors and promoters Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy in 2019.
Title: HARIS NISAR LANGOO v. NIA and ZAMIN ADIL BHAT v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 280
The Delhi High Court granted bail to two accused in a terror conspiracy case investigated by the National Investigation Agency, observing that their prolonged incarceration of over four years and the limited role attributed to them justified conditional release pending trial.
Title: GULAM NABI v. STATE (THROUGH SHO PS KHAJURI KHAS)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 281
The Delhi High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to an accused booked in a case involving allegations of sexual assault, cruelty and domestic violence, while also expressing serious concern over the failure of the Delhi Police to file a status report despite repeated opportunities.
Title: WASIM AKHTAR v. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 282
The Delhi High Court refused to grant regular bail to an accused booked in a case registered under the POCSO Act, observing that a girl being friendly with a boy on Valentines Day is no licence to establish forceful sexual relations with her.
Case title: Habibur Molla @ Sonu v. State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 283
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused in a POCSO case, holding that failure to inform the grounds of arrest to the accused vitiates the arrest as well as the subsequent remand proceedings.
Victim's Negligence No Ground To Deny Compensation In Railway Accident: Delhi High Court
Case title: Dharamawati v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 284
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that negligence on the part of a victim is not a ground to deny compensation in cases of railway accidents, holding that once an “untoward incident” is established, the liability of the Railways is strict under the Railways Act, 1989.
Case title: Manjay Kumar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 285
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to two accused booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), observing that the quantity of contraband could not be precisely determined as the seized contraband was weighed along with dried leaves, branches and grass-like substances, which may not fall within the statutory definition of “ganja”.
Case title: Rajnesh Singh v. MCD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 286
The Delhi High Court has observed that street vendors have a “bounden duty” to maintain cleanliness around their vending sites and ensure that they do not encroach upon public spaces or obstruct pedestrian movement.
Encashment Of Cheque In Lieu Of Notice Bars Challenge To Termination Of Services: Delhi High Court
Case title: Pankaj Vaid v. ICICI Bank
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 287
The Delhi High Court has held that an employee who accepts and encashes payment made in lieu of the notice period cannot subsequently challenge the termination of their services.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed an appeal filed by a former employee of ICICI Bank, who had sought reinstatement and damages alleging that his termination was arbitrary and illegal.
Case title: Aam Janata Unnayan Party v. ECI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 288
The Delhi High Court has directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to consider a representation seeking reduction of the 30-day notice period prescribed for registration of a political party, in a plea filed by a party floated by expelled Trinamool Congress leader Humayun Kabir.
Case title: Pawan Kumar Goel v. Jyoti Sikka
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 289
The Delhi High Court has held that legal heirs of a deceased tenant who were not financially dependent on the tenant cannot claim continued protection under the Delhi Rent Control Act beyond a period of one year from the tenant's death.
'Public Land Can't Be Held Hostage': Delhi High Court In UNI News Agency Case
Case title: United News of India v. Union Of India Through Land And Development Officer Ministry Of Housing And Urban Affairs & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 290
The Delhi High Court while upholding the cancellation of land allotted to United News of India (UNI) in the city's prominent Central Delhi area, observed that public land cannot be “held hostage” by a defaulting licensee who failed to fulfil the very purpose for which the allotment was granted.
Case title: PJ v. N
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 291
The Delhi High Court has held that a marriage which was neither consummated nor involved any meaningful cohabitation cannot be said to have taken shape in any real sense, and in such circumstances, insisting on the statutory waiting period for divorce would serve no purpose.
Case title: Manish Yadav v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 292
The Delhi High Court has granted anticipatory bail to an accused in a Cheating FIR, observing that while a mediation settlement does not absolve criminal liability, it remains a relevant factor while considering bail.
Title: SONAKSHI SINHA v. CHARACTER TECHNOLOGIES INC & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 293
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of Bollywood actress Sonakshi Sinha.
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained several artificial intelligence platforms and online retailers from unauthorisedly using her name, likeness, voice and other personality attributes.
Title: PRESIDENT, INDIAN OLYMPIC ASSOCIATION & ANR v. SKI AND SNOWBOARD INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 294
The Delhi High Court upheld a Single Judge's decision quashing the Indian Olympic Association's (IOA) move to appoint an ad-hoc committee to manage the affairs of Ski and Snowboard India.
Universities Must Foster Free Thought And Expression, Not Suppress Dissent: Delhi High Court
Title: NADIA v. DR B R AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 295
The Delhi High Court has observed that a University cannot restrict speech and peaceful expression of ideas merely because the views expressed by a group of students do not align with the ideology of the management.
Title: JUDICIAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF DELHI v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 296
The Delhi High Court called for a meeting between the authorities on the aspect of providing adequate security arrangements for judicial officers in the national capital.
Justice Manoj Jain directed that senior competent officials of the Delhi Government, Delhi Police and Ministry of Home Affairs hold a meeting in this regard within a week.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Quash CBI FIR Against RJD Chief Lalu Prasad Yadav In Land For Jobs Scam
Title: SHRI LALU PRASAD YADAV v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 297
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plea moved by RJD Chief Lalu Prasad Yadav seeking to quash the corruption case related to the alleged land for jobs scam case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Case title: Dr Rita Bakshi v. Seema Bajaj & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 298
The Delhi High Court has referred to a larger bench the issue relating to the stage of taking cognizance under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and the timing of issuance of notice to the accused under its first proviso.
For context, Section 223 pertains to examination of the complainant. The provision states that a magistrate having jurisdiction while taking cognizance of an offence on complaint shall examine upon oath the complainant and the witnesses present, if any. It adds that the substance of such examination shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant and the witnesses as well as by the Magistrate. The first proviso states that no cognizance of an offence shall be taken by the Magistrate without giving the accused an opportunity of being heard.
Case title: Rohan Book Company Private Limited v. Sachin Tyagi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 299
The Delhi High Court has held that allegations of disclosure of confidential business information by an employee, even if assumed to be true, would at best constitute a breach of contractual obligations and not amount to defamation in the absence of any defamatory imputation made to third parties.
Delhi High Court Acquits Sonu Punjaban In Trafficking Case, Finds Prosecutrix's Testimony Unreliable
Case title: Geeta Arora @ Sonu Punjaban v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 300
The Delhi High Court has set aside the conviction of Geeta Arora, popularly known as Sonu Punjaban, in a case involving allegations of trafficking and sexual exploitation of a minor, holding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt due to serious inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecutrix.
Delhi High Court Passes Interim Order Protecting Personality Rights Of Gautam Gambhir
Title: GAUTAM GAMBHIR v. ASHOK KUMAR/JOHN DOE & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 301
The Delhi High Court passed an interim order protecting the personality rights Indian cricket team head coach Gautam Gambhir.
Justice Jyoti Singh said that as one of the “most decorated cricketers of this country”, he has the right to “protect his name, likeness and all other attributes of his personality and no third party has a right to use these attributes without his consent/authorisation”.
Delhi High Court Upholds Summoning Of Sanctioning Authority Before Charge Stage In Corruption Case
Case title: State v. Vikram Singh Meena
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 302
The Delhi High Court has upheld the summoning of the sanctioning authority at the pre-charge stage in a corruption case, holding that courts are not barred from examining the validity of sanction before the commencement of trial where the facts so warrant.
Case title: Amit Goel & Anr. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 303
The Delhi High Court has held that once a Magistrate accepts a cancellation or untraced report filed by the police, the court becomes functus officio and cannot thereafter proceed to examine alleged lapses in investigation or direct action against police officials.
Case title: Pradeep Batra v. Kuldip Singh Verma
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 304
The Delhi High Court, while refusing to grant specific performance of an alleged agreement to sell, observed that rising property prices make adherence to timelines crucial in property transactions.
Illegal Termination Doesn't Automatically Warrant Reinstatement Or Back Wages: Delhi High Court
Case title: M/S.Thermoking v. P.O.& Rashtriya Gen.Maz.Union
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 305
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a finding of illegal termination does not automatically entitle a workman to reinstatement or back wages.
Justice Shail Jain thus refused to grant reinstatement and back wages to workmen illegally terminated by a proprietorship firm, citing lapse of time particularly when several workmen had already reached the age of superannuation and had not diligently pursued the proceedings.
Case title: Manish Popli v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 306
The Delhi High Court has quashed a proclamation order declaring an Australian citizen as a “proclaimed person” along with the Look-Out Circular (LOC) issued against him, holding that no proper effort was made to serve him while he was residing abroad.
Case title: Preeti Singh v. Principal Judge
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 307
The Delhi High Court has disposed of a public interest litigation (PIL) raising concerns over the practice of judges in Family Courts conducting in-chamber mediation and thereafter adjudicating the same disputes.
Case title: Ms Shalu Pruthi v. KVS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 308
The Delhi High Court, while upholding the transfer of a Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) teacher, has held that bipolar disorder, in the absence of certification of benchmark disability, does not qualify under the medical disability clause of the applicable transfer policy.
Case title: Hanuman Prasad Sharma @ H.P. Sharma v. J. Mithyleshwar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 309
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that an objection to territorial jurisdiction is deemed to be waived if it is not raised at the earliest stage, particularly before the framing of issues, setting aside a trial court order that had returned the plaint on such grounds.
Case title: PK Varun v. PNB
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 310
The Delhi High Court has held that the absence of management witnesses in a banking disciplinary enquiry does not, by itself, vitiate the proceedings if the findings are supported by documentary records.
Case title: Shravan Gupta v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 312
The Delhi High Court has set aside a Single Judge's order refusing to entertain a writ petition challenging the impounding of a passport, holding that the matter warranted consideration in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Woman Gets 10-Year Jail For Facilitating Rape, Delhi High Court Cites Continued Criminal Conduct
Case title: State v. Sweety
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 313
The Delhi High Court has sentenced a woman to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for facilitating the commission of rape, while emphasising her continued involvement in criminal activities as a key factor in denying leniency.
Case title: Rajat Verma v. HP Suman
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 314
The Delhi High Court has held that a tenant cannot evade legal liability by claiming that he is not personally residing in the rented premises, holding that occupation by family members continues to constitute juridical possession of the tenant.
No Deemed Continuity Of Expired Driving Licence After 2019 MV Act Amendment: Delhi High Court
Case title: Delhi Police & Anr. v. Sudheer Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 315
The Delhi High Court has clarified that there is no deemed continuity of a driving licence after its expiry under the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019, and that a licence holder becomes legally incompetent to drive from the very next day of expiry unless the licence is renewed.
Case title: Tulsi Das v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 316
The Delhi High Court has upheld the rejection of a railway accident compensation claim, holding that even the grievous injury of losing both hands cannot substitute proof of an “untoward incident” under the Railways Act, 1989.
Case title: Smt. Bindu Sharma v. Kapil Sud And Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 317
The Delhi High Court has held that an amendment of pleadings cannot be permitted to retract clear admissions that confer valuable rights on the opposite party, thereby setting aside an order which had allowed a defendant to substantially alter his written statement after more than four years.
Case title: Rajeev Miglani v. Urmil Gujral & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 318
The Delhi High Court has held that a buyer under an earlier transaction is entitled to challenge and seek cancellation of a subsequent sale of the same property by the same seller, affirming that such later deals cannot override prior rights.
Case Name : Jaideep Kumar V. Commissioner of Police & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 319
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that in departmental proceedings, the guilt of an employee can be established on the basis of circumstantial evidence and initial statements made during a preliminary inquiry, even if the key witnesses subsequently turn hostile during the departmental enquiry.
Delhi High Court Acquits Life Convicts In Decade-Old Murder Case, Flags Unreliable Eyewitness
Case title: Virender Alias Bablu v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 320
The Delhi High Court has set aside the conviction and life sentence of two men in a 2016 murder case, holding that the prosecution's case rested on an unreliable eyewitness whose testimony did not inspire confidence.
Case title: Nisha Chandola & Anr v. Manoj Sharma And Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 321
The Delhi High Court has cautioned against the growing misuse of perjury proceedings, observing that applications under Section 340 CrPC are increasingly being filed to “arm-twist” opponents and delay trials, rather than to address genuine instances of false evidence.
Title: ABUBACKER E v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 322
The Delhi High Court has refused to pass an order shifting former Popular Front of India (PFI) Chief E Abubacker to a private multi specialty hospital of his choice for his medical treatment.
Title: PREM SHEELA KUMARI v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 323
The Delhi High Court has set aside the Delhi Government's decision denying ex-gratia compensation to the kin of a government school Vice Principal who succumbed to COVID-19 during the second wave.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav allowed the plea filed by the widow of late Dr. Raja Ram Singh and directed the authorities to release ₹Rs. 1 crore compensation under the Delhi Government's COVID relief scheme within six weeks.
Title: VISHWAJYOTI v. VIRENDER KUMAR SARDANA & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 324
The Delhi High Court has held that a recognised private school cannot be treated as “closed in law” merely because it stopped functioning without obtaining prior approval from the Directorate of Education (DoE), and that such unilateral cessation does not extinguish employees' salary and service rights.
Driving Licence Not Fake Merely Because It Was Not Converted To Smart Card: Delhi High Court
Case title: The New India Assurance Company Ltd v. M/S Kapoor Diesels Garage Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 325
The Delhi High Court has held that a driving licence cannot be treated as fake merely because it was in a booklet form and had not been converted into a smart card.
Case title: International Visa Services Pvt Ltd Formerly Known As Ivs Lanka Pvt Ltd v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 326
The Delhi High Court has upheld the disqualification of a bidder from a tender process for outsourcing consular, passport and visa (CPV) services in Sri Lanka, holding that the bidder failed to demonstrate the requisite independent contractual experience as mandated under the tender conditions.
Writ Petition Not Maintainable Before Final Order In Court Martial Process: Delhi High Court
Case title: Ajit Kumar Singh Through Smt. Poonam Singh Wife And Pairokar v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 327
The Delhi High Court has held that a writ petition challenging disciplinary and court martial proceedings is not maintainable before the passing of a final order.
Title: MR. NIDISH GOPALKRISHNAN NAIR v. X & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 328
The Delhi High Court pulled up various media platforms including a journalist and actress Richa Chadha for their social media posts labelling a man a “molester” over allegations of sexual harassment arising out of an in-flight incident.
Justice Vikas Mahajan said that the narratives set by the media houses and digital platforms clearly breached the contours of the FIR, and that the publications did not merely report the allegations in the FIR but they prematurely adjudicate the matter.
Title: UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. PADMA JAISWAL IAS (AGMUT:2003) & Other Connected Matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 329
The Delhi High Court held that the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), acting as a delegatee of the Joint Cadre Authority (JCA), is legally competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings and impose penalty upon IAS officers borne on the AGMUT (Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram and Union Territories) cadre.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SK
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 330
The Delhi High Court recently charges of criminal contempt against a woman advocate for allegedly making scandalous allegations against a judicial officer, both in court and through a social media post on LinkedIn.
Title: ANIL KUMAR TIWARI ANIRUDHACHARYA v. JOHN DOE ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 331
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of spiritual preacher Aniruddhacharya, restraining unauthorised use of his persona through AI-generated content, deepfakes and meme-based material across digital platforms.
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the john doe order while hearing a suit filed by the preacher, who alleged large-scale misuse of his identity, voice, likeness and teachings by various defendants, including unknown entities.
Title: ANUSHKAA ARORA & ORS v. BCD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 332
The Delhi High Court clarified that the results of Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) elections 2026, shall be declared only after the reconciliation of votes and ballots is concluded.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 333
The Delhi High Court directed the Delhi Police to continue and regularly review the security arrangements put in place in all the district courts in the national capital in consultation with the respective Principal District & Sessions Judges.
A full bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre closed a suo motu case initiated over an incident where a lawyer was allegedly beaten up by opposing counsel and other individuals inside a Tis Hazari court courtroom on February 07.
Title: HINDU SHAKTI DAL & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 334
The Delhi High Court ordered immediate take down and removal of a controversial song sung by singers Honey Singh and Badshah from 2000s titled “Volume 1” which was released under the name of “Mafia Mundeer” group.
Associate Of Lawyer Who Was Allotted Chamber Cannot Claim Vested Right To Use It : Delhi High Court
Title: ANJU TANWAR v. LAWYERS CHAMBERS ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 335
The Delhi High Court has observed that an advocate using a chamber merely as an associate of the original allottee does not acquire any vested right over the said premises being “mere permissive user.”
Title: POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR v. AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 336
The Delhi High Court has held that the right to education does not translate to the right to select a particular school of choice once an academic year ends, in the absence of any interim protection.
Title: SANDEEP @ KALA @ KALE @ SONU @ SINOTHIA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 337
The Delhi High Court has observed that bail conditions cannot extend to invasion of privacy of the family members of an accused or a convict.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani set aside conditions that required police to monitor and collect personal data of wife of an accused during his interim bail.
June 30 Retirement No Bar To July 1 Annual Increment- Delhi High Court
Case Name : Union of India & Ors. v. Naresh Kumar Gupta
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 338
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that a government employee retiring on 30 June is entitled to increment due on 1 July, as the increment is earned for the completed year of service preceding retirement and cannot be denied merely because it becomes payable after retirement.
Case Name : ITGOA & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 339
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that pay parity cannot be claimed solely on basis of historical parity, common recruitment, or similar designation and overlap in functional duties, when the Pay Commission has maintained a distinction between different service cadres i.e. Secretariat and non-Secretariat.
Title: HAJI MOHD. ALTAF v. STATE & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 340
The Delhi High Court has upheld conviction of a lawyer and a cop for extortion and falsely implicating a man, now deceased, in a false gang rape case who was later on beaten up and tortured in police custody.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha said that a strong message must be sent to the people occupying positions like a lawyer or a police officer that Courts would not treat such crimes lightly or turn a blind eye to such blatant misuse of their position and authority.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 341
The Delhi High Court has held that the absence of identifiable child victims or conclusive proof of their age cannot be a ground to discharge accused persons under POCSO Act in cases involving child sexual abuse material (CSEM).
Title: MOHANLAL VISWANATHAN NAIR v. JOHN DOE/ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 342
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of veteran Malayalam actor Mohanlal.
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained multiple entities, including unknown entities, from unauthorized commercial exploitation of his personality attributes, including through AI-generated content.
Legal Research, Understanding Impugned Order No Ground To Condone Delay: Delhi High Court
Title: AJIT KUMAR GOLA v. STATE (GNCTD) AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 343
The Delhi High Court has held that conducting legal research or understanding the impugned order cannot be a ground for condoning the delay.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that if such a ground were to be accepted as a sufficient explanation, it would render the law of limitation and the principles of delay and laches largely otiose.
Combatised BSF Person Retire At 57, Can't Claim Civilian Retirement Age Of 60 - Delhi High Court
Case Name : UOI & Ors. Vs B.N. Chaubey & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 344
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that a re-employed ex-serviceman appointed to a combatised post in the Border Security Force, who enjoys the benefits of that combatised cadre, is governed by the BSF's statutory superannuation age of 57 years and not by the 60-year retirement age applicable to civilian posts.
CPF Option Exercised Can't Be Reversed To Claim Pension Under CCS Rules: Delhi HC
Title: Debasis Das Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 345
A Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Narula held that an employee who has exercised an option to remain under the CPF scheme cannot later claim pension benefits under the CCS Pension Rules, as deemed conversion applies only where no option was exercised.
Case Title: GNCTD vs Najma & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 346
The Delhi High Court set aside a single judge directive making promises extended by former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal for payment of rent on behalf of poor tenants in 2020 “legally enforceable.”
A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla modified the single judge ruling and rejected the prayer in the petition seeking a direction to hold statement made by Kejriwal in the press conference as an assurance, by calling it “misconceived.”
Title: Kunal Shukla v. Himayani Puri & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 347
The Delhi High Court asked the single judge to expeditiously decide an application filed by Kunal Shukla, a Raipur based social activist, seeking stay or vacation of the injunction order directing him to take down posts linking Himayani Puri, Union Minister Hardeep Puri's daughter, to American financier and child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
A division bench comprising Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Renu Bhatnagar has directed the single judge to hear both the sides and decide the application as expeditiously as possible.
Delhi High Court Directs Immediate Restoration Of X Accounts 'Dr Nimo Yadav', 'Nehr Who'
Case Title: Prateek Sharma v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 348
The Delhi High Court ordered immediate restoration of the parody account “Dr. Nimo Yadav”, operated by petitioner Prateek Sharma on X.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the order while hearing a plea filed by Prateek Sharma against blocking of his parody account “Dr. Nimo Yadav”.
The court also passed similar direction with respect to a petition filed by Kumar Nayan, who operates the account Nehr Who— one of the 12 X accounts blocked under MeiTY's directives.
Title: RAJAB ALI v. STATE & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 349
The Delhi High Court has directed the premature release of a life convict who had undergone over 22 years of actual imprisonment, holding that repeated rejection of remission by the Sentence Review Board (SRB) on the sole ground of the “heinousness” of the offence was arbitrary and contrary to settled principles of reformative justice.
Title: GODREJ AGROVET LTD v. FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARDS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 350
The Delhi High Court held that the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) cannot regulate animal or cattle feed under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, as the legislation is confined to food meant for human consumption.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia allowed a plea filed by Godrej Agrovet Ltd. and struck down Note (c) appended to Regulation 2.5.2 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011, as amended in 2021.
Case title: Shri Shashi Shekhar Prasad v. Lokpal of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 351
The Delhi High Court has quashed an order of the Lokpal of India directing CBI probe against a Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officer, holding that such a decision cannot be taken without recording clear reasons, especially when a prior inquiry has exonerated the officer.
Case title: Reepak Kansal v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 352
The Delhi High Court has disposed of a batch of petitions concerning the banning of WhatsApp accounts, directing the petitioners to avail the statutory remedy under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that an efficacious grievance redressal mechanism is available under Rule 3A of the IT Rules, which provides for an appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee.
Case title: Madan Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 353
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a man in a rape case, while underscoring how financial hardships can render migrant women particularly vulnerable to exploitation.
A single judge bench of Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav remarked, “Constraints and restrictions so also the facilities have immense potential to change the life drastically. The financial constraints coupled with the lack of proper education, skills and training brought the victim herein, as many other such individuals land up in the big metropolitan cities, as this metropolis…Somehow, the victim could not save herself and she was raped.”
AgustaWestland Case: Delhi High Court Dismisses Christian Michel's Plea For Release From Jail
Title: Christian Michel James v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 354
The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea filed by AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam accused Christian Michel, challenging Article 17 of the India-UAE extradition treaty, executed back in the year 1999.
A division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja also upheld a trial court order rejecting his application seeking release from prison on the ground that he had undergone the maximum punishment of seven years.
Case title: Meena Akhilesh Yadav & Anr. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 355
The Delhi High Court has granted police protection to a couple in a live-in relationship, holding that their right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be denied merely because they are already married to other individuals.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed,
“Since the petitioners are both Indian national citizens, they are well and truly entitled to the protection as available to them in the form of the guarantees and fundamental right(s), enshrined under Article(s) 19 and 21 of the Constitution. For this, the status of the citizens, whether they are (un)married or are in a Live-In relationship, is not a germane factor for consideration “
Title: AMITA SACHDEVA v. UOI & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 356
The Delhi High Court called for action on posts made by journalist Rana Ayyub on 'X' (formerly Twitter) platform allegedly insulting Hindu deities and spreading anti-India sentiment.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav was hearing a plea filed by Amita Sachdeva seeking deletion of the tweets alleging that they are derogatory, inflammatory and communally sensitive.
Child's Welfare Paramount, Not Foreign Court Orders: Delhi High Court Dismisses Cross-Custody Pleas
Case title: Aman Kathpal v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 357
The Delhi High Court has dismissed cross petitions filed by estranged parents seeking custody of their US-born daughter, reiterating that the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration and that orders of foreign courts are not conclusive.
A division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja observed, “the Court while giving adequate importance, acknowledgment and respect to the orders passed by the Courts of competent jurisdiction albeit of a foreign country, at the same time, gives paramountcy to the welfare of the child.”
Case title: Rahul Chauhan v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 358
The Delhi High Court has transferred the investigation into an alleged custodial death at Police Station Pul Prahladpur to the Crime Branch, directing that the probe be conducted by an officer not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) under the supervision of the Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime).
Delhi High Court Acquits Govt Engineers Accused Of Taking ₹900 Bribe In 1991
Case title: Dinesh Garg v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 359
The Delhi High Court has acquitted two former engineers of the Flood Control Department accused of accepting a bribe of ₹900 each in 1991, bringing to an end their 35-year-old long legal battle under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Allowing the appeals filed by the accused, Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha set aside the trial court's 2002 conviction, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the foundational requirement of “demand” of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt.
Case title: Indian Professional Nurses Association v. Union Of India Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 360
The Delhi High Court has asked the Indian Nursing Council to consider establishing a grievance redressal mechanism for nurses, while disposing of a public interest litigation highlighting the absence of an effective system to address complaints within the profession.
Part Cause Of Action Arises Where Authority Passes Order: Delhi High Court Restores Plea Against PNB
Case title: Subodh Chandra Saha v. Punjab National Bank And Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 361
The Delhi High Court has held that a part of the cause of action arises at the place where the impugned order is passed, restoring a writ petition filed against Punjab National Bank (PNB) after setting aside a Single Judge's order that had declined to entertain it on jurisdictional grounds.
Title: Sanjay Bhandari v. ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 362
The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea filed by UK-based arms consultant Sanjay Bhandari challenging a trial court order declaring him as a “fugitive economic offender”.
“Appeal dismissed,” Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said while pronouncing the verdict.
Title: NB SUB RAMAKANT SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 363
The Delhi High Court has closed a plea filed by a Junior Commissioned Officer challenging denial of service extension, after the Army acknowledged “procedural lapses” in the screening process and agreed to conduct a fresh firing test.
A division bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetrapal and Justice Amit Mahajan was hearing a plea by Nai. Subedar Ramakant Singh, who had contested his non-recommendation for extension of service on the ground that he had not participated in the firing tests purportedly conducted in Jammu & Kashmir.
Delhi High Court Directs Reissue Of Minor's Passport Without Father's Name After He Gave Up Custody
Case title: Ms. Parul Daware & Anr. v. Regional Passport Officer & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 364
The Delhi High Court has directed the reissue of a minor's passport without mentioning her father's name, noting that the father had relinquished all custodial and visitation rights pursuant to a court-approved settlement.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the order while allowing a plea filed by a mother seeking reissuance of her minor daughter's passport without including the father's name.
Case title: Ambika Gupta v. CPIO LIC
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 365
The Delhi High Court has held that while an individual can seek details of Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) policies under the Right to Information (RTI) Act without furnishing the policy number, such requests must be supported by basic identifying particulars to enable retrieval of information.
Loss Of Confidence In Employees Handling Funds Justifies Termination: Delhi High Court
Case title: Uma Shankar Sharma v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 366
The Delhi High Court has held that the doctrine of “loss of confidence” assumes heightened significance in cases involving employees entrusted with financial responsibilities, holding that once such trust is shaken due to proven misconduct, the employer cannot be compelled to continue the relationship.
Title: SAROJ (WIDOW OF KHEMCHAND) v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 367
The Delhi High Court has permitted the widening of a public road in Shalimar Bagh, holding the interest of private occupants encroaching upon public land must yield to the broader public interest.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain ruled that the proposed 30-metre road expansion is necessary for ensuring access to essential services such as hospitals, schools, and emergency vehicles.
Case title: Ranjit Kaur v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 368
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that mere ill-treatment of a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste is not sufficient to attract the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, unless there is a clear and specific intent to humiliate the victim on the basis of caste.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed, “For an offence to be made out under Section 3 of SC/ST Act, it is essential that the alleged act must have been committed with the intent to humiliate the victim, specifically on account of her caste identity. It is not sufficient that the Complainant belongs to a Scheduled Caste and that she was subjected to ill-treatment or a physical altercation.”
Title: Perch A Unit of Sunrise F and B Restaurant Pvt Ltd v. NDMC & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 369
Granting relief to various restaurants in city's Khan Market, the Delhi High Court said that the outlets shall not be denied operation only on account of lack of fire NOC, as long as they maintain occupation of less than 50 guests at a given point of time.
Calling the area “shaan of Delhi”, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav took on record an undertaking given by the restaurants that they will abide by any other possible mechanism to ensure safety measures as may be directed by the civic authorities.
Delhi High Court Flags Delays In Compliance Of Parole Orders, Directs SOP To Address Bottlenecks
Title: NANDU @ RAM KISHORE v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 370
The Delhi High Court has expressed concern over recurring delays in compliance with judicial directions in parole matters, while directing Delhi Government's Principal Secretary (Home) to frame a standard operating procedure (SOP) on the issue.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani passed the order while granting four weeks' parole to a convict whose elder brother had passed away.
Unfavourable Order No Ground To Allege Bias Against Judge, Seek Case Transfer: Delhi High Court
Title: JASPREET KAUR v. JAGJEET SINGH & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 371
The Delhi High Court has observed that mere passing of an unfavourable order cannot, by itself, be a ground to allege prejudice and bias against a judge and seek transfer of the case.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee dismissed a petition filed by a woman seeking transfer of a criminal matrimonial case from a Mahila Court to another court on allegations of bias against the judge.
Title: RISHABH GEHLOT v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 372
The Delhi High Court ordered strict compliance with Supreme Court directions regarding release of undertrial prisoners who have completed one-third or one-half of their maximum sentence.
Justice Girish Kathpalia directed that a copy of the order be circulated to Principal District & Sessions Judges, Director General (Prisons), Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC) and Delhi State Legal Services Authority (D
Title: BALBIR CHAND TIWARI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS and other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 373
The Delhi High Court has held that a case cannot be transferred depending upon a “hypersensitive” litigant's imaginary apprehension of bias who jumped to unwarranted conclusion.
Delhi High Court Declines Plea For Daily Grievance Hearing By Union Ministers Via Video Conferencing
Title: ONKAR SHARMA v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 374
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking directions to the Union Government to formulate a policy mandating all Union Ministers to interact with citizens and hear their grievances for at least two hours daily through video conferencing.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that the relief sought squarely falls within the executive domain and cannot be enforced through a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Title: SUMIT v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 375
Emphasising the grave and irreversible impact of circulating obscene content online, the Delhi High Court has refused bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting a minor and uploading her explicit photographs and videos on social media platforms.
Case title: Gayassudin v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 376
The Delhi High Court has held that marriage between an accused and the prosecutrix after she attains majority cannot absolve the accused of criminal liability for acts of rape allegedly committed when she was a minor.
Case title: Mujabil v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 377
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused in a drugs case, observing that cannabis leaves and stalks cannot be treated as “ganja” for the purpose of determining commercial quantity contraband, thereby raising doubt over whether the alleged recovery fell within the stringent bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Case title: VK Sood PIL JV v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation And Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 378
The Delhi High Court has referred to a larger bench an issue concerning the filing of written statements under the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
Justice Subramonium Prasad has framed the following question for reference:
“whether the filing of a Written Statement within the statutory period prescribed under the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, but without being accompanied by an affidavit of admission/denial of documents, renders such filing non-est in law or whether the absence of such affidavit constitutes a curable defect, permitting the Written Statement to be taken on record upon subsequent compliance of filing an affidavit of admission/denial of documents.”
Case title: UA v. IPA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 379
The Delhi High Court has held that no adverse inference can be drawn against a party for refusing to provide a handwriting sample, if the Court has not disclosed that such sample is being sought for comparison under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Case title: Manish Kumar Gupta v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 380
The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi government to initiate steps for framing appropriate rules and regulations to prevent persons with criminal antecedents from holding managerial positions in cooperative societies.
Title: Justice on Trial v. BBC
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 381
The Delhi High Court imposed costs of Rs. 20,000 on a Gujarat-based NGO for seeking repeated adjournments in its defamation suit against British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) over its documentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Justice Mini Pushkarna fined NGO 'Justice On Trial', noting that despite final opportunity granted in December last year, the NGO sought an accommodation even today citing engagement of an arguing counsel.
Delhi High Court Permits Sperm Retrieval Of Soldier In Coma, Holds Prior IVF Consent Sufficient
Title: Ms X v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 382
The Delhi High Court has permitted the extraction and cryopreservation of sperm of an Indian Army soldier in a persistent vegetative state, holding that his prior consent to undergo IVF treatment with his wife constituted valid consent under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021.
Title: MAHESH KUMAR YADAV v. MANISH KUMAR GUPTA AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 383
The Delhi High Court has expressed displeasure with the Delhi Government over its failure to constitute the Grievance Redressal and Dispute Resolution Committee under the Streets Vendors Act, despite earlier directions passed in 2024.
Title: TEHSIN RAZA RAFIULLAH SHAIKH ALIS BAPU v. State & other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 384
The Delhi High Court refused to stay trial court proceedings against two men accused of attacking Chief Minister Rekha Gupta at her Civil Lines residence during a public hearing in August last year.
Case title: Rohit v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 385
The Delhi High Court has held that an accused cannot rely on the plea that he was “not legally married” but only in a live-in relationship with another woman to rebut allegations of false promise of marriage.
Title: CHINMOYJIT SEN v. LOKPAL OF INDIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 386
The Delhi High Court has observed that the Lokpal of India must form a prima facie opinion regarding the existence of a case before issuing a show-cause notice following a preliminary inquiry report.
Case title: DK v. N
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 387
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a husband cannot evade obligation to pay maintenance by claiming a low income while withholding material details about his financial status.
Case title: Mohd Aman Rana v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 388
The Delhi High Court has clarified that an accused facing charges under rape and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cannot be declared a “proclaimed offender” under Section 82 CrPC, as such offences do not fall within the category specified under Section 82(4).
Title: HARMEET SINGH v. STATE OF GNCT DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 389
The Delhi High Court laid down various principles for quashing of cases registered under the POCSO Act where the de-juré victim denies actual harm to her.
Citing Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that while the law treats a minor as a victim (de-juré victim), Courts must assess whether any actual (de-facto) victim exists before allowing prosecution to continue.
Case title: Sudarshan v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 390
The Delhi High Court has held that an accused cannot be convicted for a completed offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act if the charge framed against him was only for an attempt to commit the offence.
Title: KIRTI AND ANR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 391
The Delhi High Court has observed that consenting adults who take “cerebral vow of marriage” are entitled to live with liberty and dignity and deserve protection from threats by their family.
Case title: Mr. Sunil Malhotra & Ors. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 392
The Delhi High Court has held that the custody of animals cannot be treated on par with inanimate property, emphasising that the emotional bond between pets and their caregivers must be given due consideration while deciding such disputes.
Title: X & Anr v. X CORP AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 393
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order restraining the circulation of allegedly defamatory and communally provocative social media posts against two advocates, observing that such material affects their dignity and personal lives.
Title: ANISH ARUN & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 394
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking age relaxation and additional attempts for candidates belonging to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in direct recruitments and employment under the Central Government.
Title: CHARANJIT LAL AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 395
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by retired personnel of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), holding that those who had already crossed the age of 60 years as on January 31, 2019 are not entitled to consequential pensionary benefits arising from the enhancement of retirement age.
Break In Service Bars Regularisation Claim Of Daily Wager: Delhi High Court Dismisses Appeal
Case title: Shri Mohkam Singh v. Delhi Jal Board
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 396
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by a daily wage worker seeking regularisation, holding that a break in service disentitles a workman from claiming parity with others who were regularised under an existing scheme.
Title: CBI v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 397
The Delhi High Court rejected the applications filed by Aam Aadmi Party supremo Arvind Kejriwal and other accused seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the liquor policy case.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that merely because her children are central government panel counsel, it cannot be presumed that she carries any bias against Kejriwal.
Case title: Rajkiran Yadav v. State Bank Of India Through Its Chief General Manager And Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 398
The Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of a bank guard for suppressing information about a pending criminal case at the time of recruitment, observing that the nature of the post requires strict and truthful disclosure of antecedents.
CARA Must Secure Foreign Clearances For Inter-Country Adoption Before Issuing NOC: Delhi High Court
Case title: Gur Kaur Minor & Ors. v. Union Of India & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 399
The Delhi High Court has held that the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) is obligated to secure necessary foreign clearances in inter-country adoption cases and cannot discharge its duty by merely issuing a “support letter” instead of a No Objection Certificate (NOC).
Title: ALLU ARJUN v. FRANKLY RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 400
The Delhi High Court has passed an ex parte ad-interim order protecting the personality rights of Telugu actor Allu Arjun, restraining multiple entities from unauthorised commercial exploitation of his personality, including misuse through artificial intelligence tools, deepfakes and sale of infringing merchandise.
Case title: Gaurav Bhardwaj v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 401
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a Road Transport Authority (RTA) clerk accused of being part of a pan-India syndicate involved in fraudulent vehicle registrations using fake documents and tampered chassis numbers.
Case title: Rihan Khan @ Dulare v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 402
The Delhi High Court has granted 15 days' interim bail to an accused in a dowry death case to enable him to secure his daughter's school admission.
Justice Girish Kathpalia allowed the plea filed by the accused, Rihan Khan @ Dulare, who is facing charges under Sections 498A, 304B, 120B, 313, and 511 of the IPC along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case title: Md. Karimunnisa v. National Highways Authority Of India Through Its Chairman & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 403
The Delhi High Court has called upon the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to put in place an automated, technology-driven monitoring system to track toll collections in real time and promptly identify “windfall gain” situations, stressing the need to prevent loss to the public exchequer.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SHIV NARAYAN SHARMA ADV. AND ORS and other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 404
The Delhi High Court has observed that criticism aimed at judges must be responsible and backed by cogent evidence as they cannot defend themselves publicly when faced with attacks, especially on a social media platform.
Case title: NG Dev v. State & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 405
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that financial transactions, particularly those involving large sums, must be supported by cogent evidence and cannot rest solely on claims of trust between parties.
Case title: J L Wali & Others v. Union Of India & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 406
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by contractors who migrated from Jammu & Kashmir during the late 1980s unrest, seeking payment of dues for works allegedly executed prior to their displacement.
Case title: M/S Kaushik Medical Store v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 407
The Delhi High Court has held that the mere existence of subsisting contracts does not bar the State from initiating a fresh tender process for a future period.
The division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan added that merely because the Petitioner-contractor apprehended that the fresh tender may “overlap” contractual arrangements, would not be grounds to entertain a writ petition.
Case title: Syeed Asima Ali v. Hockey India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 408
The Delhi High Court has held officials of Hockey India guilty of contempt for willfully disobeying its directions to provide a duly elected Executive Board member access to meetings.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Over LPG Shortage, Says Issue Lies In Executive Domain
Title: Rakesh Kumar Mittal v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 409
The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL over acute shortage of LPG in the national capital, observing that the issue lies completely in realm of the Executive.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that no such mandamus can be issued when the Government of India has already and is taking action to meet the exigencies.
Case title: Vikram Kumar Jha v. Union Of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 410
The Delhi High Court has upheld the requirement of possessing a valid Light Motor Vehicle (LMV) driving licence for male candidates seeking appointment as Sub-Inspectors (SI) in Delhi Police, ruling that the absence of a similar requirement for female candidates does not amount to discrimination.
Title: Kuldeep Singh Sengar v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 411
The Delhi High Court rejected a plea filed by victim of Unnao rape case to lead further evidence against former Uttar Pradesh MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar, who was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in the case.
Case title: Ashok Kumar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 412
The Delhi High Court has denied bail to four accused persons in a ₹22 crore “digital arrest” cyber fraud case involving a senior citizen, observing that such offences have a massive societal impact and require a strict approach.
Case title: NDMC v. Bharat Hotels Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 413
The Delhi High Court has allowed the appeals filed by the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and restored a demand of over ₹1,063 crore raised against Bharat Hotels Ltd. in a long-standing licence fee dispute, observing that any transaction involving scarce public land that results in loss of public revenue cannot be permitted to burden taxpayers.
Title: VAIBHAV SINGH v. DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 414
The Delhi High Court directed taken down of social media posts containing videos of court proceedings wherein AAP Supremo Arvind Kejriwal and others had sought recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
Case title: Gurpreet Kaur Maini v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 415
The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no legal embargo under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) on granting “total support” to a person with disability requiring such assistance, and that the absence of framed rules cannot be a ground to refuse exercise of statutory powers.
Delhi High Court Directs Rapido To Ensure Continued Accessibility For Visually Impaired Users
Title: AMAR JAIN AND ANR v. ROPPEN TRANSPORTATION SERVICES PVT LTD (RAPIDO) AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 416
The Delhi High Court has directed Indian ride-hailing service Rapido to ensure that its application continues to be 'disabled friendly' for its users in all respects, for as long as it remains in operation.
Title: WINNER CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 417
The Delhi High Court set aside debarment of a contractor by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in connection with structural defects in the Signature View Apartments project, holding that the decision-making process was vitiated due to violation of principles of natural justice.
Uttam Nagar Holi Violence: Delhi High Court Grants Police Protection To Deceased's Family
Title: LAXMI DEVI AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 418
The Delhi High Court has ordered police protection for the family members of 27-year old Tarun Butolia, who died in a violent clash during Holi celebrations at Uttam Nagar this year.
Justice Girish Kathpalia requested the Additional DCP to direct the concerned SHO to provide his personal mobile phone number to the family so that they may contact him at the time of distress.
Case Title: State v. Ishrat Jahan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 419
The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the Delhi Police challenging the bail granted to former Congress Councillor Ishrat Jahan in FIR 59/2020 which alleges a larger conspiracy in the Delhi Riots that happened in 2020.
Title: MOHD.SAQUIB ANSARI v. STATE OF DELHI & Other Connected Matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 420
The Delhi High Court denied bail to two men accused in a UAPA case, observing that they were in touch with Indian Mujahideen not only in India but also in Pakistan and spread jihadi material.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain observed that despite being in custody for almost 12 years, they were not entitled to be released as there existed a continuing threat that they were likely to indulge in similar behaviour if granted bail.
Case title: RM v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 421
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and 15-years rigorous sentence of a man for raping his minor stepdaughters, noting that minor contradictions in prosecutirx testimony do not affect the prosecution case.
Case title: RS v. DU
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 422
The Delhi High Court has held that even though the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (PoSH Act) does not expressly provide for suspension, an employer retains the inherent power to suspend an employee facing inquiry under the Act.
Case title: Yogender Chandolia v. Vishesh Ravi & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 423
The Delhi High Court has held that a false declaration regarding one's own educational qualification in the nomination affidavit does not amount to a “corrupt practice” under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Case title: Sanjay v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 424
The Delhi High Court has granted interim bail to an advocate who is in judicial custody in a cheating case investigated by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police, to enable him to arrange funds for the school admission of his children.
Title: Bina Modi v. State & Anr and other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 425
The Delhi High Court quashed a case registered against industrialist Bina Modi and senior lawyer Lalit Bhasin in connection with an alleged assault of former Godfrey Philips India (GPI) executive director Samir Modi during a board meeting in 2024.
Title: Lawrence Bishnoi v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 426
The Delhi High Court closed a petition filed against the release of upcoming web series “Lawrence of Punjab” on OTT platform ZEE5, owned by Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav disposed of the plea filed by gangster Lawrence Bishnoi opposing the release, after Zee5 said that it is in the process of challenging the advisories issued by the Union Government asking it not to release the show.
Case title: Anil Dhupar v. Chintan N Parikh & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 427
The Delhi High Court has allowed the declaration of the All India Tennis Association (AITA) election results held in September 2024, permitting the newly elected body to function as an interim arrangement to manage the day-to-day affairs of the federation, while directing that fresh elections be conducted in accordance with the National Sports Governance Act, 2025 and the Sports Governance Rules, 2026.
Delhi High Court Upholds Police Constable's Conviction For Accepting ₹1,000 Bribe 32 Years Ago
Case title: Const. Satish Kumar v. State Of Delhi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 428
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a police constable under the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹1,000 in 1994, holding that the prosecution had successfully proved both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha dismissed the appeal preferred by the accused challenging his conviction and sentence under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Delhi High Court Grants Interim Bail To Jailed MP Engineer Rashid To Visit Ailing Father
Title: Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 429
The Delhi High Court granted one weeks' interim bail to jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Engineer Rashid to visit his ailing father.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain allowed Rashid to either remain in the hospital or residence where his father is located, in presence of atleast two police officials in plain clothes.
Title: South Asian Forum For People Against Terror v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 430
The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a public interest litigation seeking compensation and public employment benefits to the families and kin of victims killed in terror attacks in the national capital.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the prayers made fall in the realm of policy decision and cannot be entertained in a writ petition.
Case title: Rajesh Choudhary v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 431
The Delhi High Court has held that mere receipt of money by a public servant, even if unexplained, cannot be treated as bribery in the absence of a clear evidentiary link between the payment and any unlawful official favour.
Case title: Sandeep alias Sandy v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 432
The Delhi High Court has clarified that there is no absolute prohibition on the simultaneous grant of parole or furlough to co-convicts, holding that such release can be permitted in appropriate cases subject to stricter scrutiny by the competent authority.
Case title: M/S Utkarsh Enterprises & Ors. v. Union Of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 433
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with multiple tender processes initiated by the Directorate of Education for procurement of sports and outdoor gym equipment, holding that a belated challenge by non-participating bidders is not maintainable.
Case title: JSM & Anr v. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Home Affairs & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 434
The Delhi High Court has declined to entertain a habeas corpus petition filed by a father seeking production of his minor son currently residing in the United States with his ex-wife.
Case Title: MS. SAMAIRA KAPUR & ANR v. MRS. PRIYA KAPUR & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 435
The Delhi High Court restrained Priya Kapur, wife of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, from dissipating the assets left behind by him, while granting interim relief to Bollywood actress Karisma Kapoor's children- Samaira Kapur and her brother in their suit seeking a share in their late father's personal assets.
Title: BHUVAN BAM & ANR v. INKWYNK & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 436
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order directing take down of deepfake content misusing the personality rights of YouTuber Bhuvan Bam.
Justice Jyoti Singh passed the order while hearing a suit filed by Bam against various entities, including john does, e-commerce platforms and social media intermediaries.
Title: KAPIL AGARWAL v. CPIO INCOME TAX OFFICER MORADABAD & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 437
The Delhi High Court has held that income tax details of a husband cannot be disclosed under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in relation to the matrimonial disputes with the wife.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that such information does not fall under the exception of “larger public interest” under the enactment.
The Court made the observations while setting aside an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) which had directed disclosure of a husband's net taxable income to his wife in connection with ongoing maintenance proceedings.
Delhi High Court Closes ANI's ₹2 Crore Copyright Infringement Suit Against PTI After Settlement
Title: ANI v. PTI & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 438
The Delhi High Court has closed a copyright infringement suit filed by news agency ANI Media Private Limited against Press Trust of India (PTI) alleging that its content was plagiarised by the latter.
Justice Jyoti Singh disposed of the suit in light of a Settlement Agreement reached between the parties and allowed ANI to withdraw the matter.
Case title: Vicky @ Gobind v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 439
The Delhi High Court has held that the fact that a co-convict is already out on parole cannot be a ground to deny furlough to another convict. It thus directed the release of a life convict to enable him to assist in his daughter's school admission.
Case title: Vijay Singh Meena v. Joint Seat Allocation Authority Josaa & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 440
The Delhi High Court has permitted a student to provisionally appear in JEE (Advanced) 2026, in a case raising questions over his eligibility— arising from prior allotment of a seat at an Indian Institute of Technology (IIT).
Title: ARJUN KAPOOR v. ARTIST BOOKING COMPANY & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 441
The Delhi High Court has passed an ad-interim injunction in favour of Bollywood actor Arjun Kapoor, restraining multiple entities from unauthorized exploitation of his personality and publicity rights, including through AI-generated deepfake content and obscene material.
Title: PRAVEZ KHAN v. ED & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 442
While granting bail to five accused in a money laundering case related to alleged spurious anti-cancer drugs racket, the Delhi High Court took exception to a series of reports published by The Indian Express during the course of bail hearings.
Justice Girish Kathpalia described the publications as “deeply disturbing”, noting that the articles, published on four consecutive days on front page, appeared to not only report on the case but also anticipate and respond to queries posed by the Court to the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Case title: Sonia Bansal & Anr. v. State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 443
The Delhi High Court has flagged serious procedural lapses in the issuance of a notice by the Investigating Officer (IO), observing that an undated notice calling an accused to join investigation could be misused to later allege non-cooperation.
Case title: Toprankers Edtech Solutions Private Limited & Ors. v. Lpt Edtech Private Limited And Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 444
The Delhi High Court has cautioned against an over-expansive interpretation of the doctrine of “personality rights”, observing that not every success or individual achievement can be elevated to the level of a legally enforceable personality right.
Title: Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 445
The Delhi High Court modified its earlier order granting one-week interim bail to jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Engineer Rashid to visit his ailing father.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain permitted Rashid to meet his father from 8 AM to 8 PM daily till May 10 at AIIMS, New Delhi, where he is admitted.
Case title: NxtQuantum Shift Technologies India Private Limited (Trading As Ai+ Smartphones) & Anr v. John Doe & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 446
The Delhi High Court has passed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining certain YouTubers and unknown defendants from publishing or circulating allegedly disparaging content against 'AI+ Smartphones' and its founder.
Title: Leena Paulose v. State & other connected matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 447
The Delhi High Court denied bail to Leena Paulose, wife of alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar, in the Rs 200-crore extortion case; but granted bail in a money laundering case.
Justice Prateek Jalan denied bail to Paulose in the MCOCA case but allowed her bail plea in a case probed by the Enforcement Directorate.
Case title: Ram Kripal v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 448
The Delhi High Court has permitted a 100% visually impaired adult woman to reside with her partner of choice, reiterating that a major is free to decide her residence, irrespective of parental objections.
Case title: Standard Chartered Bank v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 449
The Delhi High Court has set aside a decision of the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board in proceedings concerning Standard Chartered Bank, holding that the Board failed to adjudicate a key jurisdictional objection and did not provide reasons for its decision.
Title: MOHD MUBARAK v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 450
The Delhi High Court denied bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl under the pretext of performing spiritual healing to rid her of a “jinn”.
Delhi High Court Rejects Plea To Increase Retirement Age Of BRO Medical Officers From 60 To 65 Years
Case title: Dr R D Thakur v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 451
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea seeking enhancement of the retirement age of doctors working in the General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF)/Border Roads Organisation (BRO) from 60 to 65 years, holding that the issue falls within the domain of executive policy.
Case title: Ashish Kalra And Others v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 452
The Delhi High Court has refused to quash an FIR arising out of a matrimonial dispute despite a settlement between the parties, observing that serious allegations of sexual misconduct cannot be brushed aside in the name of compromise.
Case title: CCL S v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 453
The Delhi High Court has observed that organised crime syndicates are increasingly using juveniles to commit heinous offences, including crimes under special laws such as the NDPS Act and the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
Case title: Ms. Anju Chadha & Anr. v. Bhavesh Madan & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 454
The Delhi High Court has held that mere use of a property by family members does not create ownership rights in the absence of a challenge to the registered sale deed establishing title.
Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction Of Ex-Cop In 33-Year-Old Fake Passport Verification Case
Case title: Sube Singh v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 455
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a former Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector in a 33-year-old fake passport verification case involving forged documents and false police reports submitted for obtaining passports.
Case title: Monika Aggarwal & Ors. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 456
The Delhi High Court has upheld the acquittal of a lawyer accused of criminal intimidation for allegedly telling a woman litigant that she “won't be spared” if she came to court again.
Rupture Of Hymen Not Necessary To Prove Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Act: Delhi High Court
Case title: Rajender Sharma v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 457
While upholding the conviction of a man for sexually assaulting a six-year-old girl, the Delhi High Court has observed that rupture of the hymen is not necessary to establish the offence of penetrative sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Case title: Ranjit Mehto v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 458
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man accused in an abduction-for-ransom and murder case, observing that prolonged pre-trial incarceration in a case resting on circumstantial evidence militates against the constitutional guarantee of speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Case title: RK v. PS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 459
The Delhi High Court has upheld a Family Court order granting maintenance to a woman from her second marriage despite the absence of a formal divorce decree from her first husband, observing that the expression “wife” under Section 125 CrPC must receive a liberal interpretation to further the provision's social justice objective.
Case title: NB v. SB
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 460
The Delhi High Court has held that a husband cannot seek to strike off his wife's defence in matrimonial proceedings for delay in filing a written statement after himself failing to comply with the Family Court's direction to pay litigation expenses.
Delhi High Court Passes Order Protecting Personality Rights Of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor
Case Title: Shashi Tharoor v. Ashok Kumar & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 461
passed an interim order protecting the personality rights of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor.
Delhi High Court Denies Interim Bail To PFI Leader Seeking Release To Meet Family Before Haj
Title: ANIS AHMED v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 462
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant interim bail to Popular Front of India leader Anis Ahmed in a UAPA case, observing that his release even for meeting family members travelling for Haj pilgrimage could pose a security threat.
Case title: State v. Pawan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 463
The Delhi High Court has refused to condone State's delay of 541 days in filing an appeal seeking conviction of an accused under graver charges of penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act and rape under the IPC, terming the explanation offered by the prosecution as “a lame excuse.”
Case title: Manipal Business Solutions Private Limited v. Aurigain Consultants Private Limited And Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 464
The Delhi High Court has directed initiation of perjury proceedings against a company after finding prima facie that it had made false averments and relied on fabricated Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) in a civil suit filed against a rival company and former employees.
Case title: Sunil Sharma v. DRI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 465
The Delhi High Court has acquitted a man convicted in a 2012 heroin recovery case involving commercial quantity narcotics, while strongly criticising the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) for what it termed an “extreme carelessness” and “lackadaisical approach” in handling the prosecution.
Case title: DDA v. Manmohan Singh Bedi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 466
The Delhi High Court has refused to condone a delay of 1600 days by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in filing an appeal against a trial court decree, holding that “administrative lethargy and laxity” cannot constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay.
Case title: Sonu v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 467
The Delhi High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings under the POCSO Act despite the accused and the prosecutrix having married each other and having a child together, holding that such cases require a “careful and sensitive consideration” and that marriage cannot automatically justify closure of prosecution.
Case title: Raju v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 468
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a husband, his mother and brother in a case involving an attempt to set a pregnant woman on fire over dowry demands, but reduced their sentence to the period already undergone after noting that the victim had reconciled with her husband and resumed family life with him.
Case title: Sauraj Singh v. M/S Indian Airlines Ltd And Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 469
The Delhi High Court has held that writ petitions challenging awards passed by Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals remain maintainable even after Air India's privatization.
Candidates Not Entitled To 'Free Marks' For Dropped Out-Of-Syllabus Questions: Delhi High Court
Case title: Arvind And Ors v. Registrar General High Court Of Delhi And Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 470
The Delhi High Court has upheld the evaluation mechanism adopted in its Junior Judicial Assistant (JJA)/Restorer departmental examination, holding that candidates were not entitled to “free marks” for out-of-syllabus questions that were subsequently dropped from the paper.
Case title: Indrapal Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 471
The Delhi High Court refused to quash an FIR registered under the Arms Act against a builder accused of threatening a man with a revolver and firing in the air at a busy public place, holding that such “brazen acts of lawlessness” cannot be wiped out merely because the parties have entered into a compromise.
Case title: Vishwas Patil v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 472
The Delhi High Court rejected a bail applicant's contention that his arrest was illegal because his family members were not informed, observing that it is for the accused himself to indicate the person whom he wishes to be informed about his arrest.
Case title: PS v. BS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 473
The Delhi High Court has held that a second wife is neither a necessary nor a proper party in maintenance proceedings initiated by the first wife and children under Section 125 CrPC, observing that such proceedings cannot be unnecessarily widened by impleading every person claiming dependence on the husband.
Title: AMAN GUPTA v. JOHN DOE/ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 474
In a first for entrepreneurs, the Delhi High Court has passed an interim order protecting personality rights of Shark Tank India judge Aman Gupta against alleged misuse of his name, image, voice, catchphrases and personality attributes across multiple online platforms, including AI-generated deepfake and obscene content.
Case title: J & Anr. v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 475
The Delhi High Court has held that while a man has a legal and moral obligation to maintain his elderly parents, however, such parents receiving regular pension cannot be treated as “fully dependent” on him so as to substantially reduce the maintenance payable to his wife and minor child.
Case title: Mrs. Khushnuma Khan And Others v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 476
The Delhi High Court has held that mere eviction of jhuggi dwellers and their rehabilitation at an alternative site would not violate their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, so long as the safeguards prescribed under the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB) Policy and Protocol are complied with.
Title: SANJAY SHARMA AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 477
The Delhi High Court has ordered restoration of YouTube channel “4PM”, which was blocked pursuant to directions issued by the Centre citing concerns of national security, sovereignty and public order, subject to temporary suspension of 26 allegedly objectionable videos.
Case title: State v. MK
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 478
The Delhi High Court has held that repeated taunts directed at a woman over allegedly bringing insufficient dowry, including remarks about a “small car” and lesser quantity of gold, prima facie amount to cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
High Court Stays Delhi Government's SOP Allowing Tree Pruning Without Prior Permission
Title: BHAVREEN KANDHARI v. VIJAY KUMAR BIDHURI AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 479
The Delhi High Court has stayed the operation of a Standard Operating Procedure (SoP) issued by the Delhi Government last year permitting “general tending and light pruning” of tree branches having girth less than 15.7 cm without prior permission from the Tree Officer.
Case title: Kamlesh Mehta v. TTFI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 480
The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Table Tennis Federation of India (TTFI) suspending its Secretary General Kamlesh Mehta — described by the Court as an “illustrious veteran” of Indian table tennis.
Case title: Rajeshwar Dayal Aggarwal v. M/S Enicar Machine (India)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 481
The Delhi High Court has held that the situs of employment and the place where termination takes effect are the determinative factors for identifying the “appropriate Government” in industrial disputes.
Case title: Allahabad Bank v. RS Saini
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 482
The Delhi High Court has held that Labour Courts exercising jurisdiction under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 cannot adjudicate disputed service entitlements and are confined only to computation or recovery of pre-existing rights.
Case title: Rajan v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 483
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an interim bail plea moved by a gang rape convict seeking temporary suspension of sentence on the ground that his mother required gallbladder surgery, while observing that the repeated filing of similar applications amounted to an abuse of the judicial process.
Case title: Sabir v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 484
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a gym trainer accused in a rape case while observing that “morality has to be kept separate from the offence” when deciding questions concerning personal liberty.
'Highly Misconceived': Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL To Impose Tax On Agricultural Income
Title: Aakash Goel v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 485
The Delhi High Court dismissed a public interest litigation seeking imposition of tax on agricultural income of citizens in the national capital. A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia rejected the plea calling it “highly misconceived.”
Title: Rubika Thapa v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 486
The Delhi High Court asked Google LLC and Apple Inc to take strict action to ensure that dissemination of obscene and pornographic content through mobile applications on their play-stores is immediately checked.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that the intermediaries not only have the responsibility to act when they receive any complaint but they also need to exercise due diligence while permitting applications displaying obscene and vulgar content at the time of getting uploaded.
Title: TUSHAR VERMA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 487
The Delhi High Court has directed the HDFC Bank to immediately defreeze bank account of a man whose account had been frozen following a complaint from the Cyber Police Station in Vadodara, Gujarat, observing that continued seizure of the account without any FIR, accusation or material connecting him to an offence was wholly arbitrary and unsustainable in law.
Title: BRIJESH KOTHIA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 488
The Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused booked under the NDPS Act, holding that arrest memo containing mere reasons for arrest cannot substitute “grounds of arrest” which are personal and specific to the accused.
Case title: Vimal Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 489
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man for murdering his wife and teenage daughter, relying on his extra-judicial confession, PCR call and recovery of a blood-stained hammer used in the crime.
Title: RIFAT ALI @ DANISH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 490
The Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused booked under the NDPS Act, while strongly criticising the approach of the Delhi Police in handling matters concerning personal liberty.
Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that despite repeated judicial directions, the approach of the police towards bail matters had not improved.
Case title: Azad Saifi v. Akhtar Ali
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 491
The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of ₹50,000 on an accused for repeatedly attempting to stall a criminal trial pending since 2016, describing the case as a “classic case of abuse of the procedural law.”
Case title: RT v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 492
The Delhi High Court has upheld the eviction of a daughter-in-law and her son from her in-laws' house under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, holding that the senior citizens' right to peaceful residence must prevail in the facts of the case.
Title: SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 493
The Delhi High Court said that The Wire's Founding Editor Siddharth Varadarajan is prima facie guilty of “suppressing material facts”, regarding bail conditions imposed upon him by the Allahabad High Court, in his plea seeking OCI card.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked Varadarajan to file an affidavit explaining his conduct, while also recalling its earlier order setting aside Central Government's decision rejecting his request for conversion of his PIO card to OCI card.
Recalling the earlier orders passed in the matter, the Court restored the petitioner to its original number.
Title: KAMAL KAPOOR v. STATE
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 494
The Delhi High Court has acquitted a man convicted for adultery, holding that the conviction could not survive after Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Joseph Shine v. Union of India judgment.
Case Title: CBI v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 495
Delhi High Court's Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings against AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Vinay Mishra, Durgesh Pathak and Saurabh Bharadwaj in the excise policy case noting that they had posted defamatory, contemptuous and vilifying things against her.
Justice Sharma passed the order after taking note of note various social media posts and videos shared by the respondents in connection with the recusal proceedings.
Title: TRIMURTI FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED v. B62 STUDIOS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 496
The Delhi High Court refused to grant interim relief to Trimurti Films Private Limited in its copyright infringement suit concerning the alleged unauthorized use of the iconic song “Tirchi Topiwale” from the film Tridev in the movie Dhurandhar: The Revenge.
Delhi High Court Quashes ED Attachment Orders In PACL Case, Refers Matter To Justice Lodha Committee
Case title: DDPL Global Infrastructure Private Limited & Anr. v. ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 497
The Delhi High Court has set aside provisional attachment orders issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with PACL-linked properties, holding that the matter ought to be dealt with under the Supreme Court-monitored framework headed by the Justice R.M. Lodha Committee.
Delhi High Court Grants Interim Bail To Jailed MP Engineer Rashid Following Father's Demise
Title: ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 498
The Delhi High Court granted interim bail to jailed Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh in a terror funding case registered by the National Investigation Agency, following the demise of his father.
A division bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain passed the order after noting that Rashid's father passed away at AIIMS, New Delhi, in the intervening night of May 17 and 18.
Students With 0% Attendance Cannot Seek Promotion To Next Semester: Delhi High Court
Title: AMAN BANSAL v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 499
The Delhi High Court has upheld refusal to grant direct admission to Semester-IV to a law student of Delhi University who had neither attended classes nor appeared in Semester-III examinations.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that students with 0% attendance cannot claim parity with those suffering from mere shortage of attendance.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SHIV NARAYAN SHARMA ADV. AND ORS. DEEPAK SINGH, ADVOCATE AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 500
The Delhi High Court has sentenced a YouTuber Gulshan Pahuja to six months' simple imprisonment in two criminal contempt cases for scandalising the judiciary and lowering the authority of courts through his videos targeting judicial officers.
Title: JAGDEEP SINGH @ JAGGA & ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 501
The Delhi High Court has observed that violence in the guise of protest “cannot be acceptable to any tenet of demosprudence” while refusing to discharge several persons accused of throwing a burning effigy at the official bungalow of a prominent political leader in 2022.
Builder Can't Forfeit Homebuyer's Money Without Proving Actual Loss: Delhi High Court
Case title: M/S R. C. Sood & Co. Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Eros Group) v. Shri Sharad Maheshwari & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 502
The Delhi High Court has held that a builder cannot forfeit money paid by a homebuyer unless it proves actual loss arising from the alleged breach of contract.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made the observation while dismissing an appeal filed by Eros Group against a trial court decree directing refund of ₹18 lakh to homebuyers.
Case title: Varun Arora v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 503
The Delhi High Court has denied bail to a finance company employee accused of fraudulently transferring shares belonging to 18 clients into his own DMAT account, observing that “professional services cannot extend to granting any benefit to the concerned professional himself.”
Title: Manisha Pande v. Abhijit Iyer Mitra & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 504
The Delhi High Court has set aside a sessions court order staying a magisterial order directing registration of FIR against commentator Abhijit Iyer Mitra on a complaint case filed by digital news platform Newslaundry's Editorial Director Manisha Pande, accusing him of abusing her and other women employees on social media.
Case title: Ashanand Saini@Anand Saini v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 505
The Delhi High Court has criticized a lawyer for filing a criminal writ petition seeking registration of an FIR without examining the settled legal position governing such reliefs.
Title: Deepak Kumar v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 506
The Delhi High Court directed the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as well as the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to decide a plea claiming that “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” movie scenes have potential of revealing information related to the armed forces which is not in the interest of security of the nation, even though it is claimed as a work of fiction.
Title: SH. SATISH KUMAR AGGARWAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 507
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking disqualification of AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak from contesting any elections in view of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma's order initiating criminal contempt against them.
Case title: M/S Velocis Systems Pvt. Ltd v. National Informatics Centre Services Incorporated (NICSI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 508
The Delhi High Court has held that interim protection granted against a blacklisting order does not dispense with a bidder's obligation to make complete and candid disclosure about pending action in a tender process.
Title: Shashank Deo Sudhi v. UOI & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 510
The Delhi High Court asked the authorities, including the Central Government, University Grants Commission (UGC) and Delhi Government to indicate the steps taken by them against mushrooming of fake higher educational institutions.
Calling for action against such varsities, the Court requested ASG Chetan Sharma to draw attention of authorities of education departments about the issue raised in the petition and to impress upon them to take necessary action.
Title: RAJ MAHATO v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 509
The Delhi High Court has observed that though consent is legally irrelevant under the POCSO Act, relationships among young adults involving “de facto approval” for a sexual relationship must be viewed differently while considering bail pleas.
Case title: LKS v. NS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 511
The Delhi High Court has held that a husband cannot evade his obligation to maintain his wife and children merely by claiming that he does not have a regular source of income.
Title: MOHD. QUASIM v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 512
The Delhi High Court acquitted a man convicted for kidnapping and rape in a 2004 case, observing that the prosecutrix had voluntarily accompanied him, married him under the Special Marriage Act and later appeared to have changed her stand due to “social and family pressure”.
Title: PARMAL & ANR v. THE STATE & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 513
The Delhi High Court has held that neither the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, nor the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, contemplates grant of “permanent accommodation” to a daughter-in-law, but onlyrecognizes right of shared-household.
UAPA | High Court Grants Bail To Accused Salim Malik In Delhi Riots Larger Conspiracy Case
Title: Saleem Malik v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 514
The Delhi High Court granted bail to Salim Malik, accused in relation to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain passed the order after hearing Malik's counsel as well as the prosecutor appearing for the Delhi Police.
Compassionate Appointment Cannot Become Alternate Mode Of Public Employment: Delhi High Court
Case title: M/S BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. v. Vinod Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 515
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that compassionate appointment cannot be treated as an alternate mode of public employment or a mechanism for long-term financial rehabilitation of a deceased employee's family.
Case title: Sarfaraj v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 516
The Delhi High Court has observed that absence of public witnesses and lack of videography or photography of contraband recovery are relevant considerations while deciding bail applications in cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Case title: Aishvir Singh (Inspector) v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 517
The Delhi High Court has held that once a trial court disposes of a bail application, it becomes functus officio and cannot continue to monitor the matter by directing departmental inquiries or passing adverse remarks against police officials over alleged delay in investigation.
Case title: GAC Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Acer Logistics Pvt. Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 518
The Delhi High Court has held that mere mention of a Mumbai administrative office address on freight invoices and airway bills would not oust the territorial jurisdiction of Delhi courts when the defendant company's registered office is situated in Delhi and part of the cause of action arose within the capital.
Case title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v/s ARVIND KEJRIWAL AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 519
The Delhi High Court has appointed senior advocate Rajdipa Behura as amicus curiae in the suo motu criminal contempt proceedings initiated against AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Vinay Mishra, Durgesh Pathak and Saurabh Bharadwaj for their posts 'scandalizing' Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
Case title: State v. Deepak
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 520
The Delhi High Court has held that the benefit of probation cannot be granted in serious offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act which are punishable with imprisonment for life.
Case title: Mr. Dileep Singh v. Smt. Girija Devi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 521
The Delhi High Court has held that once probate is granted in respect of a Will, the document need not be proved afresh in subsequent civil proceedings under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Having Public Witnesses Who Turn Hostile May Do More Harm Than Good: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Rajinder Kumar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 522
The Delhi High Court has observed that while independent public witnesses lend credibility to criminal investigations, their absence is not always fatal to the prosecution case, particularly when the witnesses produced are otherwise truthful and reliable.
Case title: AJ v. KS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 523
The Delhi High Court has held that ownership disputes between in-laws and a daughter-in-law over a self-acquired property do not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Family Courts merely because the parties are related through marriage.
Case title: Manoj Kumar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 524
The Delhi High Court has observed that courts must remain conscious of the social stigma, fear of ostracisation and societal pressure faced by women while assessing their testimony in sexual assault cases, particularly that took place decades ago.
Case title: VINESH PHOGAT v/s WRESTLING FEDERATION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 525
The Delhi High Court permitted wrestler Vinesh Phogat to participate in the selection trials for the 2026 Asian Games which are scheduled for May 30 and 31.
In doing so the court observed that Wrestling Federation of India's (WFI) selection policy was "clearly exclusionary in nature" as it does not give any discretion to WFI to consider iconic players like Phogat in view of the sabbatical taken on account of her maternity leave, as a woman cannot be prejudiced for taking maternity leave.
Case title: Sanjay Singh v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 526
In a case involving a drunken altercation between two friends over liquor payment, the Delhi High Court has converted murder conviction into culpable homicide not amounting to murder, holding that the incident occurred in the heat of passion without premeditation.
Case title: Swadeshi Civil Infrastructure Private Limited v. The Executive Engineer And Senior Manager C III Redevelopment Project Division Cpwd & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 527
The Delhi High Court has held that courts cannot supply a “deeming fiction” absent from tender conditions, while examining eligibility disputes in public contracts.
Case Title: M/S Progressive Finlease Ltd v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 528
The Delhi High Court has held that even where a Magistrate declines to order registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) CrPC, the complainant must ordinarily be given an opportunity to lead pre-summoning evidence before the complaint is dismissed as being “purely civil” in nature.
Delhi High Court Grants 3 Days Interim Bail To Umar Khalid Ahead Of Mother's Surgery
Title: Umar Khalid v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 529
The Delhi High Court granted three days interim bail to Umar Khalid in the UAPA case alleging larger conspiracy in commission of 2020 North East Delhi riots.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain ordered that he be released between June 01 till June 03, on strict conditions.
Case title: Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital v. Vijender Singh & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 530
The Delhi High Court has held that minimum wages payable to a workman under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act during the pendency of litigation cannot remain frozen and must reflect periodic statutory revisions notified by the Government.
Case title: Neerja v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 531
The Delhi High Court has directed the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) to examine a petitioner's allegation that the web copy of an order uploaded on its portal differed from the certified copy later supplied to him.
Case title: Mr. C. Asok Kumar v. Bar Council Of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 532
The Delhi High Court has held that an appeal under Section 37 of the Advocates Act, 1961 is maintainable only against orders passed by the Disciplinary Committee of a State Bar Council under Section 35 of the Act, and not against resolutions or orders passed by the State Bar Council itself.
Case title: DPS Vasant Kunj & Ors. v. GNCTD (and batch)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 533
The Delhi High Court has held that private unaided schools are not required to obtain prior approval from the Directorate of Education (DoE) for increasing fees at the commencement of an academic session, provided they have filed their statement of fees with the DoE in terms of Section 17(3) of the Delhi School Education Act.
Case title: Prithipal Singh v. Government Of Nct Of Delhi Through Its Secretary And Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 534
The Delhi High Court has held that mere registration under the Chief Minister's Advocates Welfare Scheme does not entitle an advocate to insurance benefits unless the advocate's Voter ID (EPIC) details are duly verified.
Case title: UNION OF INDIA & ANR v/s DELHI RACE CLUB (1940) LTD.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 535
The Delhi High Court allowed Centre's appeal against the single judge's interim order staying proceedings before the Estate Officer pursuant to a April 17 show cause notice ssued to Delhi Race Club under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Ac after the Club's lease had expired.
Title: ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 536
The Delhi High Court granted interim bail to jailed Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh (Engineer Rashid) in a terror funding case registered by the National Investigation Agency, to attend the rituals and 40th day ceremony of his late father in Kashmir.
Case title: Ashwini Pal v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 537
The Delhi High Court has held that a rape FIR quashed on the basis of settlement and subsequent marriage between the parties cannot be revived merely because the marriage later breaks down or the husband allegedly abandons the wife.
Justice Amit Mahajan observed that subsequent matrimonial disputes or allegations arising after quashing of the FIR cannot, by themselves, invalidate a judicial order that had attained finality.
Case Title: Tarannum Begum & Ors. v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 538
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Police to proactively assist in tracing employers who have gone untraceable, in order to ensure recovery of back wages owed to rescued child labourers.
Exam For Law Students Celebrating Bakrid Will Be Held After July 4: DU Tells Delhi High Court
Case title: SAIF RASHID SAEED V/s UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 539
Delhi University told the Delhi High Court (May 26) that examination for those students of Faculty of Law, who are celebrating Eid-ul-Zuha (Bakrid) on May 28, shall be rescheduled to after July 4.
The submission was made by the varsity's counsel before Justice Jasmeet Singh as it disposed of a student's plea challenging the varsity's decision to hold the exam on May 28, the date on which Centre has declared a holiday for Eid-ul-Zuha (Bakrid).
Case title: Vijay Kumar Diwakar v. SDMC
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 540
The Delhi High Court has observed that residential colonies in Delhi's Yamuna floodplain area, classified as Zone 'O', are “completely impermissible”, while noting that 91 unauthorised colonies in the area continue to enjoy temporary protection from punitive action till December 31, 2026 under the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2011.
Case Title: Ayodhya Devi Alias Jyoti v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 541
The Delhi High Court has observed that courts must exercise “heightened vigilance” while considering bail in cases where young brides die under suspicious circumstances within a short span of marriage.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS, GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 542
The Delhi High Court has observed that delay in accepting bail bonds defeat the very purpose of bail orders, while directing all Jail Superintendents across the national capital to use Aadhaar QR code-based verification to expedite release of prisoners.
Case title: CPL Sachin Kumar Solanki (Retd) v. Union Of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 543
The Delhi High Court has upheld the removal of an Indian Air Force airman from service for uploading a social media video while in uniform, holding that public airing of service-related grievances by uniformed personnel amounts to serious misconduct prejudicial to military discipline.
Case title: M/S National Insurance Co Ltd v. Sunita Devi & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 544
The Delhi High Court has upheld compensation awarded to the family of a truck driver who was murdered by unknown assailants while on duty, holding that the incident amounted to an “accidental death” arising out of and during the course of employment under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923.
Case title: Devender Kumar v. CBI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 545
The Delhi High Court has set aside an order framing charges in a CBI corruption case after finding that the trial court proceeded without hearing audio recordings that it had itself summoned to examine allegations relating to demand of bribe.
Title: SUBHASH THEEKKADAN@ SUBHASH TM v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 546
The Delhi High Court dismissed a public interest litigation filed against nomination of veteran BJP leader C Sadanandan Master to the Rajya Sabha, alleging that he lacks demonstrable special knowledge or practical experience as required in law.
Title: Abhijit Dipke v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 547
The Delhi High Court issued notice on a plea by Abhijit Dipke–founder of 'Cockroach Janata Party', challenging the blocking of the party's X account, while directing Review Committee of Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to examine Dipke's case granting him liberty to appear virtually.
"The courts attention is drawn to Rule 14 of IT Rules which provides review committee to meet once in two months and records its findings. And if it is of opinion, it may set aside directions and order unblocking….Rule 14 clearly empower review committee to examine all aspects which are sought to be put forth by petitioner. If committee is satisfied that directions are to be set aside and unblocking order can be passed. It is directed that before next date of hearing, the review committee examine all those aspects. Decision be taken on record. Petitioner is granted liberty to appear virtually. Let the request for authorisizing someone can be seen by review committee," the Court said.
Delhi High Court Passes Interim Order Protecting Personality Rights Of Actor Varun Dhawan
Title: VARUN DHAWAN v. ARTIST BOOKING COMPANY & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 548
The Delhi High Court passed an interim order protecting the personality rights of Bollywood actor Varun Dhawan.
Justice Jyoti Singh said that the infringing links of defendants relating to unauthorized sale of merchandise, pornographic content and material using likeness of the actor will be ordered to be taken down.
Delhi High Court Dismisses Pernod Ricard's Plea Against Rejection Of Liquor License Applications
Title: M/S PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD v. THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT, DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 549
The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea filed by multinational company Pernod Ricard against rejection of its L-1 liquor license applications solely on account of pending criminal prosecution by Directorate of Enforcement (ED).
Title: Gaura Bhatia v. Samajwadi party Media Cell & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 550
The Delhi High Court directed an X user to delete or takedown a tweet posted by her against Senior Advocate and BJP leader Gaurav Bhatia over his appearance on a TV debate, which went viral on social media.
Participation In Protest No Ground To Deny Bail In PMLA Case: Delhi High Court
Title: WAHIDUR RAHMAN v. ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 551
The Delhi High Court held that participation on protests is no ground to deny bail to an accused in a money laundering case under PMLA.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani made the observation while granting bail to an accused in a PMLA case linked to the alleged activities of the banned outfit Popular Front of India and its political affiliate Social Democratic Party of India.
Title: LAKSH VIR SINGH YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 552
The Delhi High Court has held that the right to be forgotten is a constitutionally protected facet of informational privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Justice Sachin Datta laid down the framework governing de-indexing and masking of personal information from judicial records available online.
Justice Datta decided a batch of petitions filed by various individuals who had been acquitted, discharged, parties to matrimonial disputes, or whose names appeared incidentally in judicial records, seeking removal of links, masking of identities, or de-indexing of judicial records from internet search results.
Title: SK v. KS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 553
The Delhi High Court has held that the statutory one-year waiting period for filing a divorce petition under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, can be waived in exceptional circumstances where continuation of the marriage would only prolong the parties' hardship.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Renu Bhatnagar allowed an appeal filed by a husband challenging a family court order rejecting his plea seeking waiver of the statutory period prescribed under Section 29 read with Section 28(2) of the Special Marriage Act.
Title: AKKINENI NAGA CHAITANYA v. WWW.SEXVID.XXX & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 554
The Delhi High Court passed an ex parte ad interim order protecting the personality rights of Telugu actor Akkineni Naga Chaitanya.
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained several websites, online sellers and unidentified persons from exploiting the actor's name, image, voice, likeness and other personality attributes through pornographic content, AI-generated deepfakes and unauthorised merchandise.
Title: SANDEEP @ SUNNY v. STATE & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 555
The Delhi High Court has expressed concern over delays in registration of FIRs in cases involving the unnatural death of young married women.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma urged the courts to give greater urgency to pleas seeking registration of FIRs where allegations of dowry-related harassment are raised and the police fail to act within time.
“This Court hopes that, in future, applications seeking directions for registration of FIR, concerning the unnatural death of a young woman within a short period of marriage, particularly where allegations of dowry-related harassment are raised and the police fail to register an FIR, shall be taken up with greater urgency by the Courts and be listed on shorter dates so that the issue of registration of FIR and commencement of investigation is not left unresolved for months together,” the Court said.
ART Act Is Regulatory, Not Meant To Create Insurmountable Barriers To Parenthood: Delhi High Court
Title: SHEWTA TUTEJA & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 556
The Delhi High Court has observed that the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, is fundamentally regulatory in character and is not meant to create insurmountable barriers defeating legitimate continuation of treatment processes already lawfully undertaken.
“This Court is also conscious of the fact that reproductive rights and access to parenthood in the contemporary constitutional jurisprudence cannot be reduced to purely technical or pedantic application of statutory conditions divorced from factual context in which such rights are asserted,” Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said.
Case Title: Devangana Kalita v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 557
The Delhi High Court vacated its 2024 interim order restraining the trial court from passing any final order on framing of charges against the accused persons in relation to the UAPA case alleging a larger conspiracy into 2020 North East Delhi riots.
For context, the trial court is at the final stages of reserving the matter on framing of charges in the larger conspiracy case. While all the accused have concluded their arguments, the Delhi Police has to make its rejoinder submissions.
However, the Court allowed another plea filed by Kalita seeking permission to inspect unrelied documents stored in the malkhana.
Case : Raman Gandhi v Bar Council of Delhi & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 558
The Delhi High Court has refused to order a fresh election to the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD), holding that the discovery of tampered ballot papers during counting did not vitiate the entire electoral process and therefore did not warrant a re-poll.
The Court upheld the decision of the High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee (HPESC), which had directed that counting recommence from the stage of second-preference vote counting after the ballot-tampering incident came to light.
UAPA | Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Activist Khurram Parvez In Alleged Terror Funding Case
Title: KHURAM PARVEZ v. NIA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 559
The Delhi High Court granted bail to Kashmiri human rights activist Khurram Parvez in an alleged terror funding case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under UAPA.
Case Title: M/s PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt. Ltd. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. and connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 560
The Delhi High Court has quashed EOW's FIR as well as Enforcement Directorate (ED) ECIR against news portal NewsClick and its editor-in-Chief Prabir Purkayastha registered over allegations of foreign funding.
Title: NATIONAL STUDENTS' UNION OF INDIA v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 561
The Delhi High Court refused to pass any urgent directions for reopening of CBSE's verification portal for now for the purposes of reevaluation of answer sheets of aggrieved Class XII students.
Case Name : Delhi Transport Corporation vs Ram Avtar Sharma
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 562
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held that the failure to supply relevant documents (like the Log Book and past service record) and the absence of cash verification to prove misappropriation vitiates the disciplinary enquiry, entitling the conductor to reinstatement with continuity of service.
Wife Cannot Continue To Occupy Sister-In-Law's Property After Husband Vacates: Delhi High Court
Case Title: S v. M & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 563
The Delhi High Court has held that a woman cannot continue to occupy a property owned by her sister-in-law after her husband, who was residing there as a permissive occupant, vacates the premises.
Case title: Md. Rashid Khan v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 564
The Delhi High Court has ordered the premature release of Md. Rashid Khan, a life convict in the 1993 Bowbazar blast case, citing reformative approach to punishment.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that Indian criminal jurisprudence has moved away from retributive theory of punishment and has embraced a reformative approach.
Case Name : Rekha Sabharwal v. Management of Saai Memorial Girls School & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 565
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that the dismissal order is void for violating Section 8(2) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973, which requires prior approval of the Director of Education before imposing penalty of removal from service on an employee of a private unaided school.
Case Title: Prem Singh v. C.S. Rathore
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 566
The Delhi High Court has held that where a client and advocate had agreed that professional fees would be adjusted from the compensation amount recovered in litigation, the advocate would be entitled to such adjustment if the client failed to prove payment of the agreed fees.
Case Title: Sandeep Goel v. Zavenir Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Connected Matter
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 567
The Delhi High Court has held that a confirmation of accounts signed by a debtor acknowledging a loan transaction and the applicable interest terms constitutes a written contract and can form the basis of a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC.
Case title: SYED FAYAZUDDIN AND ANR v/s GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 568
The Delhi High Court refused to relax 30-day notice period under the Special Marriage Act for a couple, observing that mere personal hardship or individual inconvenience, however genuine it may be cannot be a ground to dilute or bypass mandatory statutory compliance.
Can An Oral Gift Of Immovable Property Confer Ownership Rights? Delhi High Court Answers
Case Title: Anil Kumar Gupta v. Laxmi Devi & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 569
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that ownership rights in an immovable property cannot be transferred through an oral gift, holding that a valid gift of immovable property can be effected only through a registered instrument executed in accordance with law.
Case title: Anju Dhawan v. M/S. Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 570
The Delhi High Court has held that internal management correspondence cannot override the express terms of a signed salary restructuring letter, while dismissing a former employee's appeal seeking recovery of alleged deferred salary and compensation bonus from her erstwhile employer.
Case Title: NBCC India Limited v. GNC Infra LLP & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 571
The Delhi High Court has held that a court cannot direct a third party to deposit money in court in the absence of an admitted or crystallised liability, reiterating that garnishee orders can ordinarily be passed only after a decree is obtained and the debt sought to be attached is established as due and payable.
Tenant Cannot Claim Ownership On Basis Of Unexecuted Agreement To Sell: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Ramesh Chandra Dubey & Anr. v. Nandlal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 572
The Delhi High Court has held that a person who enters a property as a tenant cannot subsequently claim ownership rights on the basis of an unexecuted or unconcluded agreement to sell, particularly when the landlord-tenant relationship stands admitted on record.
Case title: M/S Shyam Lal & Sons v. Smt. Mithlesh Devi
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 573
The Delhi High Court has held that payment of pagri (one-time upfront amount to secure long-term tenancy rights) by a tenant does not make a tenancy non-terminable and does not alter the fundamental landlord-tenant relationship.
Delhi High Court Upholds Centre's Temporary Ban Of Telegram App Ahead Of NEET-UG Exam
Case Title: TELEGRAM FZ LLC & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 574
The Delhi High Court rejected the petition filed by Telegram challenging the Centre's decision to block the messaging platform till June 22, to prevent misinformation regarding paper-leak ahead of NEET 2026 Re-Examination, which is scheduled on June 21.
Case title: Smt. Khatiza Begam v. Ms. Salma Khan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 575
The Delhi High Court has held that a plaintiff who establishes a better possessory title over a property is entitled to recover possession from an occupant who fails to prove any superior or lawful right to remain in occupation.
Case Title: R.K. Jain Infra Projects Private Limited v. NHAI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 576
The Delhi High Court has held that a bidder debarred from participating in tenders cannot be permitted to submit a bid merely because the contract under the tender would commence after the debarment period expires.
Case title: M/S EG Communications Pvt Ltd & Ors v. ECI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 577
The Delhi High Court has upheld the Election Commission of India's (ECI) directions prohibiting political advertisements in Delhi Metro trains and stations during the operation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that the restriction is reasonable, serves the larger public interest of free and fair elections and does not violate the advertisers' fundamental rights.
Case title: S v. S
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 578
The Delhi High Court has modified a Family Court order permitting a minor child residing in the United States to be brought to India for summer visitation, holding that the child's welfare would be better served if the father exercised his visitation rights in the US itself in view of uncertainties surrounding the child's immigration status.
Case title: Ms. Mamta Chaudhary v. Union Of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 579
The Delhi High Court has upheld the dismissal of a CISF Sub-Inspector, holding that a delinquent employee who deliberately abstains from participating in departmental proceedings cannot subsequently challenge an ex parte punishment order on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.
Case title: Akshay Mahara v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 580
The Delhi High Court has observed that Indian karate athletes cannot be made to suffer or lose opportunities to participate in international events because of unresolved governance disputes and the absence of a recognised National Sports Federation (NSF) for the sport.
Case title: R.S.C. College v. Ms. Sukhgeet Kaur, Member Secretary And Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 581
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that the validity or correctness of an administrative decision taken in compliance with a court's direction cannot be examined in contempt proceedings.
Case : Badminton Association of India v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 582
The Delhi High Court has directed the Union Government to take down online fake news content which claimed that the Chief Justice of India, Supreme Court and High Court judges, and Union Law Ministers participated in a Badminton Championship held in London on June 7, 2026, holding that the material was "ex-facie false, malicious and derogatory" to the judiciary and other institutions.
Case title: D v. G
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 583
The Delhi High Court has set aside a Family Court order granting a father overnight custody of his minor son, observing that the child needs more time to acclimatise before staying overnight with his father.
A Division Bench of Justices Tejas Karia and Madhu Jain modified the Family Court's interim custody arrangement after finding that its operative direction granting overnight custody was inconsistent with its own reasoning that the child had never stayed overnight with the father and required more time to adjust.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Quash Show Cause Notice Proposing CAG Audit Of BSES Discoms
Case title: BSES Rajdhani Power Limited & Anr v. GNCTD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 584
The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a show cause notice issued by the Delhi government proposing CAG audit of power distribution companies BSES Rajdhani Power Limited (BRPL) and BSES Yamuna Power Limited (BYPL).
Justice Tejas Karia held that a writ petition challenging a show cause notice is ordinarily not maintainable.
Case title: Grew Energy Private Limited v. NTPC Renewable Energy Limited
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 585
The Delhi High Court has held that an order suspending a company from participating in future tenders, which is in the nature of debarment, cannot be passed without complying with the principles of natural justice.
A Division Bench of Justice Tejas Karia and Justice Madhu Jain thus set aside a suspension order issued by NTPC Renewable Energy against solar module manufacturer Grew Energy Pvt. Ltd.
Case title: AITA v. Somdev Kishore Devvarman & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 586
The Delhi High Court has directed the All India Tennis Association (AITA) to complete amendments to its Constitution and hold fresh elections by September 30, 2026.
A Division Bench of Justices Tejas Karia and Madhu Jain modified an earlier Single Judge order which allowed the declaration of results for the election held in September 2024.
issued the interim directions while hearing cross-appeals filed by the AITA and former Indian tennis player Somdev Kishore Devvarman against the Single Judge's judgment concerning the governance of the federation.
Delhi High Court Allows Minor Rape Victim To Terminate 26-Week Pregnancy, AIIMS To Bear Expenses
Title: Minor R (Thr. Her Father R) v. State & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 587
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday allowed a 15 year old rape victim to undergo medical termination of pregnancy with over 26 weeks of gestational period, noting that the medical board had given an opinion that the minor is fit to undergo the procedure.
Vacation judge Justice Mini Pushkarna directed All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) to bear the cost of the procedure.
Delay In Deciding Custody Matters Causes Prejudice To Child: Delhi High Court
Case title: G v. M
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 588
The Delhi High Court has observed that delay in deciding child custody disputes itself causes prejudice to the child, while cautioning against a recurring pattern of approaching courts to stall handover of child to the spouse.
A Division Bench of Justices Tejas Karia and Madhu Jain made the observation while dismissing a mother's appeal against a Family Court order granting the father interim custody of their minor daughter during the summer vacations.
Case title: Maheshwar Narayan Sharma And Ors v. M V Babu Svaminath And Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 589
The Delhi High Court has upheld an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) refusing to transfer a service dispute from its Ernakulam Bench to the Principal Bench in Delhi, holding that the principle of forum conveniens cannot override the statutory scheme under the CAT (Procedure) Rules, which accords primacy to the applicant's place of posting.
A Division Bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla observed that under Rule 6(1) of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, an original application is ordinarily to be filed before the Bench within whose jurisdiction the applicant is posted or where the cause of action arises.
Case title: National Institute Of Electronics And Information Technology (NIELIT) & Ors. v. Sh. Raj Kumar Tripathi & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 590
The Delhi High Court recently declined to entertain a writ petition filed by the National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (NIELIT) challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order that merely adjourned a service dispute while continuing interim protection, observing that such petitions unnecessarily burden the Court's docket.
A Division Bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla remarked:
"We fail to understand why, when the Tribunal has specifically listed the matter on 30 June 2026, with a further direction that the matter would not be adjourned on the said date and that the interim relief would only be continued till then, the petitioner has approached this Court."
Case Title: Bisen Anshul Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 591
The Delhi High Court has held that a challenge to the correctness of a public exam's official answer key cannot be equated with a plea for re-evaluation of answer sheets, observing that courts are empowered to interfere where the suggested answers in an answer key are patently incorrect.
A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla made the observation while setting aside an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had dismissed a UPSC Forest Service Examination aspirant's challenge to the official answer key without examining it on merits.
Case title: Shri Dhanpat Rai Gupta v. Shri Kashmiri Lal Gupta (Since Deceased) & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 592
The Delhi High Court has held that a memorandum merely recording an earlier oral family settlement does not require compulsory registration if it does not itself create or extinguish rights in immovable property, but only evidences a past arrangement already acted upon by the parties.
Case title: A v. V
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 593
The Delhi High Court has held that the source from which a parent proposes to incur expenses of a vacation for his children is not a relevant consideration while determining interim custody of minor children.
Case title: Sudipti Hajela v. Equestrian Federation Of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 594
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with the selection of the Indian Dressage team for the upcoming Asian Games 2026, holding that the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) had adhered to its notified selection criteria and that courts cannot substitute the opinion of expert bodies in sports selection matters unless the decision-making process is shown to be arbitrary, capricious or perverse.
Case title: State v. Lalit Kumar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 595
The Delhi High Court has cancelled the bail granted to a school caretaker accused of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a three-year-old nursery student, holding that the trial court failed to adequately consider the child's consistent version of events.
Case Title: Major Jayati Chandra v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 596
The Delhi High Court has refused interim relief to two Army doctors seeking permission to apply for and appear in the NEET PG 2026 examination while their challenge to the revised eligibility criteria under the Training and Professional Progression Rules for Medical/Non-Technical Officers of the Armed Forces Medical Services, 2025 is pending before the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT).
Title: Delhi High Court Bar Association v. Dr. Kapil & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 597
The Delhi High Court has observed that while social media enables instant dissemination of information, it cannot be permitted to become a tool for undermining judicial institutions, interfering with the administration of justice or maligning judges through scandalous allegations.