Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 346 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 370NOMINAL INDEXGNCTD 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)...
Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 346 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 370
NOMINAL INDEX
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
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.