Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 250 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 324NOMINAL INDEXMohan 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...
Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 250 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 324
NOMINAL INDEX
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
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.