Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 105 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 124NOMINAL INDEXNarender 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...
Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 105 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 124
NOMINAL INDEX
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
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.