Delhi High Court Quarterly Digest: July To September, 2025 [Citations 720 - 1235]

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH v. STATE (GOVT. OF THE NCT) OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 721

Amazon Technologies Inc v. Lifestyle Equities 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 722

Rasiklal Mohanlal Gangani v. State & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 723

SHANKESH MUTHA v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 724

NK v. K 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 725

Neelam Azad v. State and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 726

MM DHONCHAK v. UNION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 727

Anish Sharma v. DOE GNCTD & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 728

VIP Industries Ltd v. Carlton Shoes Ltd & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 729

RAJDEEP SARDESAI & ORS. V/s SHAZIA ILMI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 730

M/S Crocs Inc USA v. M/S Bata India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 731

Jitendra Chouksey v. Union of India & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 732

Aditya Chauhan & Anr v. Union of India & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 733

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 734

M/S Products And Ideas (India) Pvt. Ltd v. Nilkamal Limited And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 735

AADRITI PATHAK THROUGH HER NEXT FRIEND AND NATURAL MOTHER MRS. SADHANA SHARMA v. GD GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 736

Dabur India Limited v. Patanjali Ayurved 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 737

INSPECTOR MIN GAJENDRA KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 738

UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. COL. BALBIR SINGH (RETD.) and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 739

BELVEDERE RESOURCES DMCC v. OCL IRON AND STEEL LTD & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 740

VINOD v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 741

JACQUELINE FERNANDEZ v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 742

AIIMS v. Minor A & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 743

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs AMAZON WEB SERVICES 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 744

Modi Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd v. Speciality Meditech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 745

Modi Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd v. Speciality Meditech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 746

PRANAV PANDEY v. UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 747

Commissioner Of Service Tax Delhi v. Shyam Spectra Private Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 748

M/S Independent News Service Pvt. Ltd. v. The Assessing Officer, Circle 10(1) & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 749

M/S Shreehari Ananta Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner Of Customs Icd Patparganj 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 750

DAZN LIMITED & ANR vs BUFFSPORTS. ME & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 751

CONQUEROR INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR v. XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 752

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-7 v. M/S Thomson Press (India) Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 753

GNCTD v. Jyoti 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 754

M/S Viva Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 755

Nand Lal Luhar And Ors v. Western Railway And Ors (and batch) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 756

Mrs Madhurbhashani & Ors v. Ranjit Singh (and connected matter) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 757

ROSHAN REAL ESTATES PVT LTD versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 758

Amrit Pal Singh v. ED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 759

M/S LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED. Versus RAIL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 760

CELEBI AIRPORT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 761

Raheja Developers Limited v. Ahluwalia Contractors India Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 762

STATE v. YOGESH @ GOLU & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 763

RAM KAWAR GARG versus BAJAJ CAPITAL INVESTOR SERVICES LIMITED NOW NEW NAME IS JUST TRADE SECURITIES LIMITED AND ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 764

BIRKENSTOCK IP GMBH v. ASHOK KUMAR(S)/JOHN DOE(S) & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 765

AAKASH DEEP CHOUHAN v. CBI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 766

GNCTD v. Nisha 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 767

Saurav Das & Ors v. CIC 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 768

Rahnuma & Ors. v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 769

UPENDRA NATH DALAI v. UNION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 770

Gulshan Babbar Advocate v. GNCTD (and batch) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 771

SURENDRA KUMAR v. CBI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 772

Mubina v. Commissioner of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 773

Dr Aastha Raj v. National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 774

SAGIR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 775

MAULANA ARSHAD MADANI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 776

SHIV SHANKAR v. STATE & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 777

Asociacion De Productores De Pisco A.G v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 778

DIVYANSHI KHANNA (MINOR) THROUGH HER LEGAL GUARDIAN & ORS v. HOCKEY INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 779

RUSHANT MALHOTRA & ORS v. THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 780

SHANKAR v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 781

AXIS MAX LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 782

RAJAB ALI KHAN v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 783

Baba Global Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 29 & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 784

TATA SONS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR v. JOHN DOE AND 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 785

UMESH VERMA v. STATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 786

Kroll Information Assurance LLC v. The Controller General Of Patents, Designs And Trademarks And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 787

PUMA SE v. HIMANSHU SHARMA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 788

TIPS FILMS LIMITED v. HTTPS//0GOMOVIES.COM.TR/ & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 789

SARVINDER SINGH & ANR v. VIPUL TANDON 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 790

M/S MJ Bizcrafts LLP Through Partner Rajender Kumar v. Central Goods And Services Tax Delhi South Commissionerate Through Its Commissioner & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 791

UNION OF INDIA versus VEDANTA LIMITED & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 792

BUDHI SINGH v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 793

ARSALAN FEROZE AHENGER v. NIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 794

Reliance Industries Limited v. Pawan Kumar Gupta & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 795

Johnson & Johnson Pte Ltd v. Mr. Abbireddi Satish Kumar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 796

ANWAR KHAN @ CHACHA & ORS v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 797

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 798

A v. B 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 799

SAMIR @ AZHAR v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 800

DR. SUBHASH VIJAYRAN v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 801

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 802

Bhupender Kumar v. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Ors.2025 LiveLaw (Del) 803

ABHIJIT MISHRA v. WIPRO LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 804

Tungsten Automation England Limited (Formerly Known As Tungsten Network Limited) v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 3(1)(1) New Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 805

Principal Commissioner Of Customs (ACC Imports) Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 806

ANIL VERMA v. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 807

Exclusive Motors Pvt Ltd v. CBI & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 808

ANKIT v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 809

Reliance Retail Limited v. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 810

MOHD ANWAR & ORS. v. STATE NCT OF DELHI and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 811

Dolby International AB & Anr. v. Lava International Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 812

Ability Dodzi @ Chinazom Ability v. State NCT Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 813

Arpit Mishra v. State2025 LiveLaw (Del) 814

National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) vs. South Indian Bank Ltd and Union Bank of India Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 815

BALBIR MEENA v. STATE GOVT NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 816

Neeraj Bharadwaj v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(2) & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 818

CANARA BANK versus SANJEEV SHARMA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 819

Ms. X v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 820

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI v. MUKESH & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 821

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI v. JAWAHAR SINGH 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 822

Bhadra International India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Punjab national Bank & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 823

Amit Jain & Ors. v. Anila Jain & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 824

E. R. SQUIBB AND SONS, LLC & ORS v. ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 825

Teena Choudhary v. UPSC & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 827

Banti Kumar Mathur v. The State Of Nct Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 828

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 829

SANEESH SOMAN v. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 830

Anurag Dalmia v. Income Tax Office 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 831

Mold Tek Packaging Limited v. Pronton Plast Pack Pvt. Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 832

MS VEERJI RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED v. YASH RAI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 833

Prabir Purkayastha v. ED and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 834

Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 835

Twenty-Four Frames Factory Private Limited v. John Doe & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 836

Naresh Kumar @ Pahelwan v. State Of Nct Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 837

SKD v. MG & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 838

AS v. NKS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 839

MOHAMMAD SHAHID @ SAHID v. STATE OF (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 840

MOHD RIZWAN ASHRAF v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 841

BRAND PROTECTORS INDIA PVT. LTD v. ANIL KUMAR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 842

Mohd Alam v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 843

HARI SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025LiveLaw (Del) 844

B.D. SHARMA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 845

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 846

DR AMIT KUMAR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 847

Vinay Sharma v. GNCTD 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 925

F- Hoffmann -La Roche Ag & Anr. v. Zydus Lifesciences Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 926

Ambika Traders Through Proprietor Gaurav Gupta v. Additional Commissioner, Adjudication DGGSTI, CGST Delhi North 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 927

Vi-John Healthcare India LLP v. Dabur India Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 928

Tata Power Renewable Energy Limited & Ors. v. Ashok Kumar/S & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 929

Sh. Raj Kumar And Anr. v. Mrs Poonam 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 930

Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 931

MOHD. IMRAN v. THE STATE GNCTD 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 932

SACHIN YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 933

Shree Radhe Vallabh Traders v. Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi East Commissionerate, New Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 934

Tata Play Ltd v. Sales Tax Officer Class II/ Avato 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 935

YV v. VV 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 936

SJ v. AJ 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 937

SHONEE KAPOOR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 938

Shri Sarabjeet Singh , Proprietor Of M/S Khurana Associates v. The Commissioner Of SGST, Delhi SGST & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 939

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 940

Shamina v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 941

NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY v. SATYA NISHTH & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 942

PAUL DEEPAK RAJARATNAM & ORS. versus SURGEPORT LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 943

MOHDMMED JAVED v. UNION OF INIDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 944

Indmoney Tech Private Limited & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar And Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 945

MAHUA MOITRA v. NISHIKANT DUBEY & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 946

Mohit Kumar Goyal v. State of NCT of Delhi And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 947

Bodhisattva Charitable Trust And Ors. v. Mayo Foundation For Medical Education And Research 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 948

Surender Kumar Sharma And Ors v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 949

Sarfraz Ahmad v. Vice Chancellor, JMI And Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 950

Court On Its Own Motion v. Union Of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 951

Meena v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 952

SYED AHMAD SHAKEEL v. NIA and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 953

SUKHBIR SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SHO 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 954

Raj Kumar Kedia v. Income Tax Office 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 955

Ganpati Polymers Through It Proprietor Prop. Ankur Jain v. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax And Another 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 956

SOHAIL MALIK v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 957

PEC Ltd v. Ms Badri Singh Vinimay Pvt Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 958

Azam v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 959

Court On Its Own Motion v. Dhanraj & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 960

M/S Exclusive Capital Limited v. Clover Media Private Limited & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 961

ADVOCATE MANISH KUMAR V/s UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 962

Aditya Rai Gupta v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 963

AMAN SINGH V/s MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI THORUGH ITS COMMISSIONER & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 964

Narender v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 965

Satya Pal Singh v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 966

PRINCE TYAGI AND ANR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 967

CCS Computers Pvt Ltd v. NDMC 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 968

MOHAMMAD SHAHNOOR MANSOORI v. STATE OF DELHI THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 969

Sachindra Priyadarshi v. State Of NCT Of Delhi Through The Chief Secretary 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 970

STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) v. GAURANG KADYAN 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 971

The Commissioner Of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 v. Xiocom (Nz) Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 972

Aadya Antya v. High Court Of Delhi Through Registrar General 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 973

Lakshay Vij v. ED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 974

GAINDA LAL v. STATE & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 975

DRAGON BOAT INDIA AND TRADITIONAL SPORTS FEDERATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 976

Neosky India Limited & Anr. v. Mr. Nagendran Kandasamy & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 977

RAJASTHAN EQUESTRAIN ASSOCIATION v. EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 978

Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited v. Sauss Home Products Private Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 979

ANEJA CONSTRUCTIONS (INDIA) versus DOOSAN POWER SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 980

University of Delhi v. Neeraj and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012

Bhupinder Kumar Malik v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1013

M/S ECG Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1014

Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1015

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1016

SUSHANT RAJ v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1017

Manish Goel HUF v. The Commissioner Delhi Goods And Services Tax Trade And Tax Department New Delhi And Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1018

Gujarat State Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd. v. M/S Gail (India) Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1019

Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1020

Omega QMS v. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1021

Ashiya v. Commissioner of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1022

Lakhveer Singh v. NIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1023

Rahimullah Rahimi v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1024

X v. STATE (NCTD) AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1025

Praveen @ Lallu v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1026

YASH MISHRA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1027

Tata Sons Pvt Ltd v. John Doe 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1028

Deepak Sain v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1029

Samyak Jain v. Superintendent (Adjudication), Central Gst Delhi & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1030

Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1031

Surender Bajaj v. Dinesh Chand Gupta and Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1032

Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1033

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS v. SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1034

Commissioner Of Income Tax-Tds-01 v. Diamond Tree 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1035

ASHWANI KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1036

HAVELI RESTAURANT AND RESORTS LTD v. ADISON RESORTS LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1037

Soni Devi v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1038

Abdul Malik Alias Parvez v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1039

XX v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1040

Tanvi Chaturvedi v. Smita Shrivastava & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1041

ANJALI & ANR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1042

Ankush Kumar Parashar v. Sapna @ Mona & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1043

Union Of India And Ors vs Ex Wo Om Prakash Retd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1044

ALTAF v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1045

Ashok Babu v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1046

Pramiti Basu v. Secretary General Supreme Court Of India (and batch) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1047

MS. ARCHANA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1048

Burger King Corporation vs. Swapnil Patil & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049

VIKAS VERMA v. DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION AND ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1051

Himanshu v. TCNS Clothing Co. Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1052

AJAY KUMAR NAYYAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1053

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1054

Chetan v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1055

VGP IPCO LLC & Anr v. Mr Suresh Kumar Trading As Om Shiv Lubricants & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1056

STUMPP SCHUELE LEWIS MACHINE TOOLS PVT LTD v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1057

Mitraj Business Private Limited Through Its Director Mr Manoj Kankane v. Union Of India Represented By The Secretary Ministry Of Finance & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1058

Rama Oberoi v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1059

Dr. Punita K. Sodhi vs UOI & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1060

Castrol Limited v. Sanjay Sonavane 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1061

BHEL v. Xiamen Longking Bulk Material Science and Engineering Co. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1062

Rahul Solanki v. CRPF 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1063

Gurpreet Singh Sonik v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1064

Sangeet Seth v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1065

Leelawati v. Rajeev Kumar 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1066

Tasleem Ahmed v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1067

M/s. KNR Tirumala Infra Pvt. Ltd. versus National Highways Authority of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1068

NASIR MOHD SODOZEY @ AFTAAB AHMED @ ABDULLAH v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1069

Uday Jain & Anr. v. Additional Commissioner Customs Air Cargo And Import & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1070

Commissioner Of Customs (Airport And General) v. M/S Jaiswal Import Cargo Services Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1071

ANKIT RAJ v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1072

ASHISH v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1073

ASIF HAMID KHAN v. STATE & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1074

M/S Tecmax Electronics v. The Principal Commissioner Of Customs (Import) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1075

Court On Its Own Motion v. Union Of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1076

SG v. DG 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1077

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1078

NITA PURI v. UNION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1079

Ritesh v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1080

Aakash Goel v. Election Commission of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1081

Hamzah Muneer & Anr v. Mohd Aqil & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1082

Arjan Dugal v. Shubham Gandhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1083

SNS ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. versus M/S HARIOM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1084

SB v. HB 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1085

Woodland (Aero Club) Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 49(1), New Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1086

AMAN SATYA KACHROO TRUST v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND ORS and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1087

ICAR National Research Center Of Plant Biotechnology v. Azad Singh Dagar Prop M/S Servitor Intelligence 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1088

AISHWARYA RAI BACHCHAN v/s AISHWARYAWORLD.COM & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1089

Intec Capital Limited v Shekhar Chand Jain 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1090

Puneet Batra v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1091

SHYAM BHARTEEY v. CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION REGIONAL OFFICER DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1092

AMITA SACHDEVA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1093

ABHISHEK BACHCHAN v. THE BOLLYWOOD TEE SHOP & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1094

HARVEY MANN v. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1095

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1096

Crest Digitel Private Limited v. DMRC & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1097

NAVIN M. RAHEJA & ANR v. DINESH GOYAL & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1098

Vishan Singh v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1099

Mamtaz Foundation Through Its Director v. Dental Council of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1100

Cembond Constructions Pvt Ltd v. NTPC 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1101

Sonaram Bagadaram Mali v. The Commissioner Of Custom & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1102

XX v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1103

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT THROUGH ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DELHI v. RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1104

GAUTAM SHARMA v. GOVT.OF NCT,DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1105

MV v. DS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1106

WOW MOMO FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED v. WOW BURGER & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1107

G v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1108

RAKESH BABU v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1109

SMT USHA SHARMA AND ANOTHER v. SWATI SHARMA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1110

Imran v. Commissioner Of Customs, IGI Airport 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1111

RAJ KAMAL YADAV & ANR v. SMT. MANJU YADAV & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1112

Vivek Kumar Singh v. Commissioner Of Customs A G & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1113

Raj Krishan Gupta And Ors v. Principal Director Of Income Tax (Investigation) -1 New Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1114

M/S Azure Hospitality Private Limited v. Amit Bhasin, Proprietor Of Retail India Solutions 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1115

Dinesh Kumar Verma v. Ramesh Ghai 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1116

Amrita Jain v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1117

Kritika Jain v. Rakesh Jain 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1118

Exotic Mile v. Imagine Marketing Pvt Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1119

Sh. Kewal Krishan v. Sh. Gulshan Kumar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1120

PRAVEEN RANA v. STATE GNCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1121

DR THELMA J TALLOO Versus JESUS AND MARY COLLEGE & ANOTHER 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1122

ISTEKAR ALI @ SANU v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1123

MS. JAHANVI NAGPAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1124

DR SHAMA MOHAMED v. SMT SANJU VERMA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1125

MUSKAN v. SATYAWATI COLLEGE & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1126

SINGHANIA UNIVERSITY v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1127

M/S EROS RESORTS & HOTEL LTD & Anr v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1128

PETA v. Committee For Control And Supervision Of Experiments On Animals (CCSEA), Ministry Of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry And Dairying, Government Of India Through Its Chairman & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1129

X v. Y and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1130

POOJA RASNE @ PUJA RASNE v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1131

ASHVINI KUMAR SHARMA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1132

Prashant Manchanda v. Union of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1133

SHRUTI VYAS & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1134

JIOSTAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. VEGAMOVIES.YACHTS & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1135

MAN MOHAN SINGH ATTRI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1138

AMIT SETHI v. LALIT SETHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1139

Delhi International Airport Ltd v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1140

XX v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1141

Sh. Alok Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. M/s Vigneshwara Developwell Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

RESCOM Mineral Trading FZE v Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

MOHD KAMRAN v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

SHASHI BALA v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

Srishti Rustagi v. SEBI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

R v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

D A Minor Through Her Mother And Natural Guardian Mrs. Rupi Babbar v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1148

Soumya Bhattacharya v. Sudhir Kumar Thakur & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1149

Delhi International Airport Ltd v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1150

MD SHAKIR v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1151

KARAN JOHAR v. ASHOK KUMAR/JOHN DOE & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1152

HAMID RAZA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1153

Mushlina v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1154

Manoj Kumar M. Through A.R Ashish Dubey vs Union Of India And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1155

SHELLY MAHAJAN v. MS BHANUSHREE BAHL & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1156

Arjun v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1157

Umesh @ Kala v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1158

HARMEET SINGH KAPOOR & ANR. versus M/S NEO DEVELOPERS PVT LTD and Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1159

Genesis Enterprises v. Principal Commissioner CGST Delhi East 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1160

DEVANGANA KALITA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1161

ARVIND KUMAR AND OTHERS v. THE STATE AND ANOTHER and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1162

Mahesh Malkani v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1163

PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED & ANR. V/s DABUR INDIA LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1164

Roger Shashoua & Ors. v. Mukesh Sharma & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1165

PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1166

Chand Mehra & Anr. British Airways PLC 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1167

G.D. GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL v. AADRITI PATHAK & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1168

M/S S K Overseas v. Superintendent Range 20 Central Gst Division 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1169

Naqibullah Rodaie v. Air Customs, IGI Airport 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1170

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1171

SHASHANK SHEKHAR PANDEY v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1172

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. STATE & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1173

A R Rahman v. Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1174

Shannu Baghel v. Union of India & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1175

ANUSHA GUPTA & ORS v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY (THROUGH THE DIRECTOR) & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1176

TAUQIR ALAM v. ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1177

TAUQIR ALAM v. ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1177

Vishwa Vedic Sanatan Sangh v. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1179

CBI v. V K SINGH & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1180

Upendra Nath Dalai v. Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1181

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1182

Dreamfolks Services Limited v Encalm Hospitality Private Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1183

ROHIT DANDRIYAL & ORS v. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ANR and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1184

NIKHIL JAIN v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1185

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. versus M/S VALLEY IRON & STEEL CO. LTD 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1186

Aam Aadmi Party vs. Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Housing And Urban Affairs & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1187

Tahir Hussain v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1188

HAMID RAZA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1189

TV Today v. Anurag Srivastava & And 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1190

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR v. M/S VIKAS WSP LTD & ORS & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1191

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1192

Gaura Bhatia v. Samajwadi party Media Cell & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1193

NEWSLAUNDRY MEDIA PVT LTD V/s UNION OF INDIA with RAVISH KUMAR V/s UNION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1194

MANISH KUMAR GIRI ALIAS SABI GIRI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1195

Honasa Consumer Limited v. Cloud Wellness Private Limited & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1196

MM DHONCHAK v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1197

The Trustees Of Princeton University v. The Vagdevi Educational Society & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1198

ANIRUDH PRATAP AGARWAL v. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1199

RAHUL SAHNI v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1200

BS v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1201

G4S Limited And Another v. 4Group Safeguard And Security Services Private Limited And Others 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1202

VIPIN YADAV v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1203

M/S ND Info Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. Rehabilitation Council of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1204

MANISH KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1205

Darshana Rani v. The Government Of Nct Of Delhi Through Pr Secretary & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1206

Omwati v. The Bank Of Maharashtra And Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1207

Crocs Inc v. The Registrar Of Trademarks New Delhi & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1208

Delhi High Court Allows Minor Rape Survivor To Terminate 27-Week Pregnancy

Title: MINOR A THR HER MOTHER S v. STATE & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 720

The Delhi High Court has allowed a minor rape survivor to terminate her pregnancy of approximately 27-weeks gestational period and directed the Medical Superintendent of AIIMS to make necessary arrangement for the same.

Vacation judge Justice Manoj Jain noted that the 16-year-old girl was a victim of sexual assault and was not interested in continuing with the pregnancy.

Priyadarshini Mattoo Case: Delhi High Court Finds 'Element Of Reformation' In Life Convict, Orders Review Of Plea For Early Release

Title: SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH v. STATE (GOVT. OF THE NCT) OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 721

The Delhi High Court set aside a decision of the Sentence Review Board (SRB) of Delhi Prisons denying the request for premature release made by Santosh Kumar Singh, convicted in the 1996 rape and murder case of law student Priyadarshini Mattoo in the national capital.

Singh is serving life imprisonment in the case.

Delhi High Court Stays Ruling Asking Amazon To Pay ₹339.25 Crore To 'Beverly Hills Polo Club' Over Trademark Infringement

Title: Amazon Technologies Inc v. Lifestyle Equities

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 722

The Delhi High Court stayed a single judge ruling asking Amazon Technologies Inc to pay Rs. 339.25 crore damages and costs for trademark infringement of the luxury lifestyle brand, Beverly Hills Polo Club.

“The considerations outlined herein above make out, in our considered opinion, an exceptional case, in which it would be a complete travesty of justice to require the Appellant Amazon Tech to deposit, or secure, any part of the amount decreed by the impugned judgment, in order to maintain its appeal,” the Bench said .

Trial Court Cannot Issue Summons To Accused Without Assigning Proper Reasons: Delhi High Court

Case title: Rasiklal Mohanlal Gangani v. State & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 723

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a trial court cannot issue a summons to an accused person without assigning proper reasons for the same.

Justice Amit Mahajan observed, “Merely taking note of the facts of the case and recording prima facie satisfaction, without giving any reasons for the same, is insufficient.”

[Extradition Act] Anticipatory Bail Available To Indian Citizen Apprehending Arrest For Alleged Offence Committed Abroad: Delhi High Court

Title: SHANKESH MUTHA v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 724

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the protection of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of CrPC can be invoked by a 'fugitive criminal' facing proceedings under the Extradition Act, 1962.

Justice Sanjeev Narula held that an Indian citizen who apprehends arrest in India for an alleged offence committed abroad is not stripped of the protection guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Ad-Interim Maintenance Can Be Granted Without Filing Of Specific Application, Is Payable From Date Of Order: Delhi High Court

Title: NK v. K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 725

Distinguishing between interim maintenance and ad-interim maintenance, the Delhi High Court has held that the latter can be granted without filing of a specific application by the concerned party and is payable from the date of the order passed by the Court and not from the date of filing of maintenance application or petition.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that Court can grant ad-interim maintenance to alleviate the hardship of the claimant, pending its decision on the grant of interim maintenance and determination of its quantum.

Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Two Accused In 2023 Parliament Security Breach UAPA Case, Bars Them From Giving Interviews

Case Title: Neelam Azad v. State and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 726

The Delhi High Court granted bail to Neelam Azad and Mahesh Kumawat, accused in the Parliament security breach case which happened on December 13, 2023.

A division bench comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar granted bail to the two subject to them furnishing bail bond of Rs. 50,000 each and two sureties of like amount.

Delhi High Court Rejects Retired Judge MM Dhonchak's Appeal, Upholds Extension Of Suspension From Chandigarh DRT

Title: MM DHONCHAK v. UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 727

The Delhi High Court upheld a single judge ruling upholding the extension of suspension of MM Dhonchak, a retired judicial officer and former Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh.

A division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Renu Bhatnagar dismissed Dhonchak's appeal against the single judge order of March 03 dismissing his petition against the second order of extension of suspension.

'Policy Decision': Delhi High Court Asks Litigant Seeking Special Syllabus For Autistic Children To Approach Concerned Authorities

Title: Anish Sharma v. DOE GNCTD & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 728

The Delhi High Court closed a PIL seeking special syllabus for children suffering from autism observing that it is a policy decision which has to be taken by the concerned authorities.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela asked the litigant, Anish Sharma, to file an appropriate representation to the authorities- Union Government, Delhi Government, CBSE, education boards and other relevant authority.

Goodwill Lies In 'Mark' Itself, Not In Particular Category: Delhi High Court In VIP v. Carlton London

Case title: VIP Industries Ltd v. Carlton Shoes Ltd & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 729

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that goodwill, for the purposes of a passing off action, is to be shown in respect of a mark and not in respect of particular goods or a category of goods.

In stating so, a division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul upheld a single judge order restraining luggage and travel accessories manufacturer VIP from making use of the mark 'CARLTON' with respect to any kind of bags.

After Delhi High Court Shows Reluctance Rajdeep Sardesai Withdraws Appeal Challenging Partial Relief To BJP's Shazia Ilmi In Defamation Case

Case title: RAJDEEP SARDESAI & ORS. V/s SHAZIA ILMI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 730

Journalist Rajdeep Sardesai withdrew his appeal from the Delhi High Court which was filed against a single judge ruling granting partial relief to BJP leader Shazia Ilmi in her defamation case over a video posted by Sardesai on 'X'— alleging that she abused a video journalist of India Today during a televised debate.

The single judge had confirmed an interim order passed in August last year, directing Sardesai to remove the video.

After a division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Renu Bhatnagar showed reluctance to interfere in the matter, Sardesai withdrew the appeal.

Passing Off Action For Product Registered Under Design Act Maintainable: Delhi High Court Restores Crocs' Pleas Against Liberty, Bata, Relaxo

Case title: M/S Crocs Inc USA v. M/S Bata India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 731

The Delhi High Court has restored the suits filed by Crocs USA against Indian footwear brands Liberty, Bata, Relaxo, Aqualite and others for copying its distinctive clog design.

The suits were dismissed earlier by a single judge by holding that no passing off action can be found on a trade dress which is registered as a design under the Designs Act.

Delhi High Court Orders DCGI Intervention On Plea Concerning Approval Of Weight Loss Drugs, Directs Stakeholders Consultation

Title: Jitendra Chouksey v. Union of India & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 732

The Delhi High Court ordered intervention of the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) on a plea filed concerning the issue of approval of drug combinations sold in the market for weight loss treatment.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the DCGI to consult experts and stakeholders, including the manufacturers of the drugs, on the issue.

Ensure RTI Information Is Provided In Modes Sought, With Adequate Safety Measures: Delhi High Court To Centre

Title: Aditya Chauhan & Anr v. Union of India & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 733

The Delhi High Court directed the competent authority of the Union Government to take measures and issue directions of frame Rules to ensure that the information under the Right to Information Act (2005) is provided in the mode sought by the information seeker, while also ensuring adequate safety measures.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the competent authority of the Government of India to take a decision on the issue within three months.

Dignity Of Dependent Wife & Child Is Denied When Financial Support Is Delayed By Husband: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 734

The Delhi High Court has observed that the dignity of a dependent wife and child is denied when the financial support is delayed by the husband, underscoring that even a day's lapse defeats the very purpose of maintenance.

“The very object of maintenance is defeated if its disbursal is left at the convenience of the earning spouse. Financial support delayed is dignity denied, and this Court is conscious of the fact that timely maintenance is integral to safeguarding not only subsistence but the basic dignity of those who are legally entitled to such support,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.

Dealer Importing & Selling Trademarked Goods Cannot Sue Authorised Distributor For Infringement: Delhi High Court

Case title: M/S Products And Ideas (India) Pvt. Ltd v. Nilkamal Limited And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 735

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that when a trader imports and sells goods bearing the trademark of another company, such trader cannot sue another authorized dealer of the trademark holder for infringement.

Inclusive Education Not Merely About Access, It Is About Belongingness: Delhi High Court Relief To Child With 'Mild Autism'

Title: AADRITI PATHAK THROUGH HER NEXT FRIEND AND NATURAL MOTHER MRS. SADHANA SHARMA v. GD GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 736

While granting relief to a child with “mild autism”, the Delhi High Court has observed that “inclusive education‟ is not merely about access to education but it is about belongingness.

“It is also about recognising that every child has a place in the classroom not because they are the same, but because they are different, and that difference enriches the learning environment for all,” Justice Vikas Mahajan observed.

Delhi High Court Restrains Patanjali Ayurved From Running Ads Allegedly Disparaging To Dabur's Chyavanprash Product

Title: Dabur India Limited v. Patanjali Ayurved

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 737

he Delhi High Court restrained Patanjali Ayurved from running advertisements allegedly disparaging to Dabur's Chyavanprash product.

The Court noted that Patanjali's TVC portrayed that the existing Chyawanprash in the market are ordinary and consumers ought not to settle for ordinary products, which are not prepared in accordance with ayurvedic knowledge as they are not manufactured as per ancient ayurvedic texts and tradition.

Delhi High Court Upholds Rule Restricting Retention Of General Pool Residential Accommodation By CAPF Personnel To Max Three Years

Title: INSPECTOR MIN GAJENDRA KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 738

The Delhi High Court has upheld a rule placing restriction on the retention of General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) by Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) personnel to a maximum of three years at the last place of posting, when a personnel is thereafter posted to a Non-Family Station.

Disability Pension Can Be Granted For Disease Suffered By Armed Forces Personnel After Joining Service: Delhi High Court

Title: UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. COL. BALBIR SINGH (RETD.) and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 739

The Delhi High Court has ruled that grant of disability pension to Indian Armed Forces personnel is "not an act of generosity" but a rightful "acknowledgement of their sacrifices which manifest in the form of disabilities or disorders" suffered during the course of their military service.

WhatsApp, Email Communications Between Parties Can Constitute Valid Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court

Title: BELVEDERE RESOURCES DMCC v. OCL IRON AND STEEL LTD & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 740

The Delhi High Court has ruled that communications between the parties through WhatsApp and emails can constitute a valid arbitration agreement.

Justice Jasmeet Singh perused Section 7(4)(b) of the Arbitration Act and said that it is not necessary for a concluded contract to be in existence for a valid arbitration agreement to be existing between the parties.

Unduly Harsh To Reject Furlough Applications On Ground Of Delay In Surrender During COVID-19: Delhi High Court

Title: VINOD v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 741

The Delhi High Court has ruled that it is unduly harsh of the prison authorities to reject the furlough applications of convicts on the ground of delay in surrender by a few says during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma said that courts and prison authorities must also remain mindful of the exceptional and unprecedented circumstances that prevailed during the pandemic.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Bollywood Actor Jacqueline Fernandez's Plea To Quash Rs. 200 Crore Money Laundering Case

Title: JACQUELINE FERNANDEZ v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 742

The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea moved by Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez seeking quashing of Rs. 200 crores money laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar.

Justice Anish Dayal said that her apprehension that any evidence would be self-incriminating cannot lead to quashing of the ECIR as statutory and constitutional protections are already provided and will have to be assessed in that rubric.

Delhi High Court Modifies MTP Order After Minor Rape Survivor Agrees To Carry Pregnancy, Orders Free Medical & Psychological Help By AIIMS

Title: AIIMS v. Minor A & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 743

A minor rape survivor, who had sought termination of her 27-week pregnancy, agreed before the Delhi High Court to carry the child after AIIMS's medical board opined that the pregnancy be prolonged to 34 weeks of gestational period for the best interest of the girl as well as the baby.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal modified a single judge's order which had earlier allowed the 16-year-old girl to terminate her pregnancy which was at 26 weeks and six days as on June 30.

Payments Made To AWS For Cloud Computing Services Not Taxable: Delhi High Court

Case Title:THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs AMAZON WEB SERVICES

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 744

The Delhi High Court has held that payments made to Amazon Web Services (AWS) for cloud computing services do not qualify as “royalty.”

The bench, comprising Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tejas Karia, upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's (ITAT) decision which held that such payments are not taxable as royalties or fees for technical services (FTS).

Can't Reject Claim Of Infringement Merely Because Defendant Could Seek Removal Of Plaintiff's Trademark Due To 'Non-Use': Delhi High Court

Case title: Modi Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd v. Speciality Meditech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 745

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a registered trademark owner's claim against infringement cannot be rejected merely on the ground that the defendant could have sought removal of the mark from the trademark's register under Section 47 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 on grounds of 'non-use'.

'Family Of Marks' Concept Not Expressly Recognised Under Trademarks Act, But Can Be Applied To Injunct Specific Marks: Delhi High Court

Case title: Modi Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd v. Speciality Meditech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 746

The Delhi High Court has held that though the Trade Marks Act 1999 does not expressly recognise the concept of a 'family of marks' however, the same is judicially developed and can be invoked by a registered trademark owner to seek injunction against specific marks.

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Against Civil Services Exam 2023, Says It Can't Suggest Manner In Which Questions Are Framed In Paper

Title: PRANAV PANDEY v. UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 747

Rejecting a plea challenging Paper I and Paper II of Civil Services Examination (CSE) 2023, the Delhi High Court has observed that it cannot suggest the manner in which questions are framed in a question paper, so long as there is no ambiguity in the question or the answers provided.

Appeal On Taxability Including Point Of Limitation Doesn't Lie Before HC U/S 35G Of Central Excise Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Commissioner Of Service Tax Delhi v. Shyam Spectra Private Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 748

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that an appeal from CESTAT under the Central Excise Act 1944 involving the issue of taxability will lie before the Supreme Court under Section 35L.

Delhi HC Sets Aside Income Tax Action Against Rajat Sharma-Owned India TV's Parent Company Over Alleged Unaccounted Foreign Remittances

Case title: M/S Independent News Service Pvt. Ltd. v. The Assessing Officer, Circle 10(1) & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 749

The Delhi High Court set aside the reassessment action initiated against journalist Rajat Sharma's company, M/S Independent News Service Pvt. Ltd., which owns and runs the India TV channel, over alleged foreign remittances.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside ₹10 Crore Security Demanded By Customs For Provisional Release Of Seized Goods, Calls It 'Onerous'

Case title: M/S Shreehari Ananta Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner Of Customs Icd Patparganj

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 750

Coming to the rescue of an importer, the Delhi High Court has set aside the security of ₹10 crore (approx) demanded by the Customs Department for provisional release of its perishable goods.

Calling the condition 'onerous', a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta ordered provisional release of Petitioner's imported Roasted Areca Nuts on furnishing bond of Rs.4.10 crore along with a Bank Guarantee of Rs. 50 lakh.

Delhi High Court Grants Exparte Injunction To Dazn india Against Websites Illegaly Streaming FIFA 25

Case Title: DAZN LIMITED & ANR vs BUFFSPORTS. ME & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 751

The Delhi High court has granted ex parte dynamic injunction to DAZN Ltd.the official broadcasters of the FIFA World Cup 2025 against illegal streaming rogue website.A single bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee has allowed immediate blocking of rogue websites following an ex-parte order

Delhi High Court Refuses To Injunct Xiaomi From Using 'Find Device' Technology Over Alleged Patent Infringement

Title: CONQUEROR INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR v. XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 752

The Delhi High Court has ruled in favour of Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited in a patent infringement suit filed against its “find device” technology, which helps users to locate, lock or erase data from their lost or stolen devices.

Delhi High Court Rejects Income Tax Department's Appeal Against Thomson Press Over Alleged Transaction Of Property Below Circle Rate

Case title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-7 v. M/S Thomson Press (India) Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 753

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal preferred by the Income Tax Department against Thomson Press (India) over the sale of a property in Noida back in 2013, allegedly at a price much lower than the prevailing circle rate.

OBC Certificate Issued Only For Applying To Posts Under Govt Of India Can't Be Used To Claim Reservation To Delhi Govt Posts: High Court

Case title: GNCTD v. Jyoti

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 754

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that where the OBC certificate is issued to a person from a backward community only for applying to posts under the Central government, such a certificate cannot be used to claim reservation to posts notified by the Delhi government.

Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause Prevails Over Arbitrator's Procedural Order In Determining 'Seat' Of Arbitration: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Viva Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 755

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that an 'exclusive jurisdiction clause' in the arbitration agreement unequivocally denotes the 'seat' of arbitration. The court observed that any contrary determination made by the Arbitrator without the express written consent of the parties only relates to a 'venue' under Section 20(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court therefore dismissed the Section 29A(5) petition due to lack of territorial jurisdiction.

Rights Must Be Balanced With Public Interest: Delhi High Court Upholds Division Of Railway Posts Between Low Vision & Blind Aspirants

Case title: Nand Lal Luhar And Ors v. Western Railway And Ors (and batch)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 756

The Delhi High Court recently upheld the action of Railways in bifurcating the posts reserved for visually impaired candidates into two categories— one which could be held by both low vision (LV) and blind candidates and the other which could be held only by LV but not blind candidates.

Delhi High Court Flags Trend Of Rich Tenants Occupying Landlord's Property On 'Paltry' Rate In Dispute Over ₹40 Rent In Sadar Bazar Area

Case title: Mrs Madhurbhashani & Ors v. Ranjit Singh (and connected matter)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 757

The Delhi High Court raised concerns over the trend of financially well-off tenants continuing to occupy the landlord's property for decades altogether, while parting with a very meagre rent.

Irked by mere ₹40 rent paid by the Respondent-tenants in Delhi's Sadar Bazar area, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani ordered their eviction.

Past Professional Relationship Creates Enough Bias To Terminate Arbitrator's Mandate U/S 14 Of A&C Act, Duration Is Immaterial: Delhi HC

Case Title: ROSHAN REAL ESTATES PVT LTD versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 758

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that if any person had any professional or supervisory relationship with the party to the Arbitration, such person cannot be appointed as an Arbitrator as per Entry 1 of the Seventh Schedule. It does not matter whether such a relationship existed over 17 years ago but the real test is whether such a relationship created a reasonable apprehension of bias. Accordingly, the mandate of the Arbitrator was terminated in the present case.

SC's Vijay Madanlal Judgment Doesn't Exempt Foreign Recipients Of Proceeds Of Crime From Scrutiny On Mere Contractual Legitimacy Of Transaction: Delhi HC

Case title: Amrit Pal Singh v. ED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 759

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that foreign recipients of proceeds of crime are not exempted from scrutiny under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, on a mere ground of 'contractual legitimacy' of transactions.

Contract Clause Favouring Employer Over Contractor In Claiming Damages Are Deemed Knowingly Included If Not Challenged Before Tribunal: Delhi HC

Case Title: M/S LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED. Versus RAIL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 760

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has held that clauses of the contract giving an advantage to the employer over the contractor in claiming damages, if not questioned before the Arbitral Tribunal or at the time of formation or execution of the contract, cannot be questioned under section 34 of the Arbitration Act as the parties are deemed to have knowingly incorporated such clauses in the contract.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Turkey-Based Celebi's Plea Against Revocation Of Security Clearance On Ground Of 'National Security'

Case title: CELEBI AIRPORT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 761

The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea by Turkey based company Celebi Airport Services Private Limited challenging the decision of Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) revoking its security clearance in the "interest of national security".

Amendment To Bring Additional Grounds U/S 34 Of A&C Act Is Maintainable If Objections Are Not Beyond Judicial Scrutiny Of Court: Delhi HC

Case Name: Raheja Developers Limited v. Ahluwalia Contractors India Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 762

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri while hearing amendment petition filed u/s 34 of the A&C Act observed that the omission to plead a ground of challenge in the original Section 34 petition pertaining to non-adherence to the mandatory procedure of Section 29A would not oust the jurisdiction of the Section 34 Court to scrutinize the same. The Court held that the amendments sought in the present application fall within the exceptions carved out by the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Hindustan Construction.

State's Delay In Filing Appeals In Serious Criminal Offences Prejudices Victim's Right To Fair Adjudication: Delhi High Court

Title: STATE v. YOGESH @ GOLU & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 763

The Delhi High Court has observed that State's delay in filing appeals in serious criminal offences prejudices the victim's right to fair adjudication of allegations, especially where the victim comes from marginalized or economically weaker sections of society.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that Courts must remain sensitive to the said factor while adjudicating applications for condonation of delay in criminal cases involving serious offences.

Mandate Of Arbitrator Can Be Terminated For Delay In Passing Award Despite Absence Of Automatic Termination Clause In NSE Bye-Laws: Delhi HC

Case Title: RAM KAWAR GARG versus BAJAJ CAPITAL INVESTOR SERVICES LIMITED NOW NEW NAME IS JUST TRADE SECURITIES LIMITED AND ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 764

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that although the National Stock Exchange (NSE) Bye Laws do not provide for the automatic termination of the Arbitrator's mandate after the expiry of the time period stipulated under Bye Law 7(b) of the NSE Bye Laws, the mandate of the Arbitrator can be terminated by the Relevant Authority if the Arbitrator fails to pass the award within time thereby indirectly limiting the arbitrator's mandate. This shows that the intent and spirit of both the NSE Bye-Laws and the Arbitration Act is the same as both prescribe for the termination of the arbitrator's mandate if timely award is not passed.

Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order In Favour Of Birkenstock, Orders Local Commissioners To Inspect Infringers' Premises

Title: BIRKENSTOCK IP GMBH v. ASHOK KUMAR(S)/JOHN DOE(S) & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 765

While passing a john doe order in favour of footwear brand Birkenstock, the Delhi High Court has ordered inspection by local commissioners on the premises of infringer entities.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee restrained the defendants or distributors or sellers or importers or exporters or franchises from selling or marketing or dealing in the products bearing “Birkenstock” trademark or its trade dress.

Interception Of Calls Valid To Prevent Corruption, Economic Scale Of Offence Must Satisfy 'Public Safety' Threshold: Delhi High Court

Title: AAKASH DEEP CHOUHAN v. CBI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 766

The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea filed by an accused against interception of calls and messages by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), saying that corruption has a pervasive impact on a nation's economy.

Justice Amit Mahajan dismissed the plea moved by one Aakash Deep Chouhan, challenging a trial court order framing charges against him under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He further sought directions for expunging or destruction of telephonic messages and calls allegedly unlawfully intercepted by CBI.

OBC Certificate Issued In Delhi Can't Be Treated As 'Migrant' Because It's Based On Father's Caste Certificate From Another State: High Court

Case title: GNCTD v. Nisha

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 767

The Delhi High Court upheld a direction to Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board not to treat the OBC certificate granted by the Delhi government to an aspirant as 'migrant', merely because it was based on her father's caste certificate issued by the UP government.

A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul observed,

“The certificate has to be read as it is. It does not purport to have been issued to the respondent merely because she is a migrant. It clearly states that “Nisha, Resident of (address redacted) Delhi belongs to the community JAT which is recognized as Other Backward Class...The mere fact that it has been issued on the basis of the OBC certificate issued to the respondent's father in UP does not deviate from the earlier recitals in the Certificate.”

'Not That Simple, Entails Huge Infrastructure Investment': Delhi High Court On PIL To Allow Public, Journalists To Attend CIC Hearings

Title: Saurav Das & Ors v. CIC

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 768

The Delhi High Court disposed of a public interest litigation seeking a direction on the Central Information Commission (CIC) to allow members of the general public as well as journalists to attend the proceedings physically as well as virtually.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal remarked the issue is not as simple as the petitioners want to portray and that the matter requires huge infrastructural investment.

Delhi High Court Orders Railways To Pay Compensation For Death Of Man Who Fell From Train After Boarding From Wrong Side

Case title: Rahnuma & Ors. v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 769

The Delhi High Court has ordered the Railway Claims Tribunal to grant compensation to the heirs of a man who passed away after falling from his train.

While doing so, Justice Manoj Jain observed that it “really does not matter” that the deceased had boarded the train from the wrong side, when it was proved that he had successfully boarded the train and had fallen thereafter.

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL To Abolish Offences Of 'Waging War', 'Unlawful Assembly' From BNS 2023

Title: UPENDRA NATH DALAI v. UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 770

The Delhi High Court dismissed a public interest litigation seeking abolition of offences of waging war against the State and unlawful assembly from the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal remarked that it cannot direct the Parliament to abolish the provisions as that will be amounting to legislation, which is not the realm of Courts.

SC's AR Antulay Judgment On Locus Standi To Initiate Criminal Complaints Doesn't Apply To Writ Petitions: Delhi High Court

Case title: Gulshan Babbar Advocate v. GNCTD (and batch)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 771

The Delhi High Court dismissed with costs a batch of writ petitions seeking court-monitored ED probe into real estate company M/s IREO Residences for allegedly duping homebuyers and siphoning of funds worth over ₹4,000 crore.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora noted that the Petitioner was neither a homebuyer nor was otherwise directly or indirectly affected by the alleged acts of the company.

Delhi High Court Grants Relief To 90-Year-Old Booked In 1984 For Demanding ₹15K Bribe

Title: SURENDRA KUMAR v. CBI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 772

In a 41-year-old corruption case, the Delhi High Court has granted relief to a 90-year-old man, who remained in custody for only one day and remained on bail during pendency of trial and appeal, by commuting his sentence to the period already undergone.

Surendra Kumar, who was working in Chief Marketing Manager of the State Trading Corporation of India (STCI), was arrested in the case in 1984 over the allegations of demanding Rs. 15,000 bribe from a firm partner. Kumar was released on bail shortly after his arrest but was convicted in the case after 19 years- in 2002.

'Was Returning From Mecca': Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release Woman's Gold Jewellery, Says 24 Kt Purity Not Grounds For Seizure

Case title: Mubina v. Commissioner of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 773

The Delhi High Court has ordered the Customs Department to release the gold jewellery which was seized from a Muslim woman while she was returning from a religious pilgrimage to Mecca.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that it is normal practice in our country for women to wear basic jewellery and the same cannot be seized by the Customs Department only on the ground that it is of 24 carat purity.

Stigma Of 'Unfair Means' Adversely Affects Candidate's Career, Must Be Supplied Relevant Docs, CCTV Footage To Enable Defence: Delhi HC

Case title: Dr Aastha Raj v. National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 774

The Delhi High Court came to the rescue of a doctor, whose candidature was rejected by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences and was barred from appearing in the exam for two years, over unsubstantiated allegations of using 'unfair means' during the exam.

Justice Vikas Mahajan observed that the stigma of indulging in unfair means can adversely affect the career of a candidate and thus, the Exam authority must afford a meaningful opportunity of defence to the candidate by providing all the documents relied upon by them, including CCTV footage, if any.

Purpose Of Punishment Not 'Endless Incarceration': Delhi High Court Grants Relief To Life Convict Seeking Premature Release

Title: SAGIR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 775

The Delhi High Court has granted relief to a man, convicted for life in 2003 rape and murder case of an 8 year old, whose plea for premature release was rejected by the Sentence Review Board (SRB).

Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that while the crime committed by the convict was gruesome, but he was awarded life imprisonment for the same and had already spent 24 years in jail.

Delhi High Court Stays Release Of 'Udaipur Files' Movie, Asks Centre To Decide On Revision Against CBFC Certificate

Title: MAULANA ARSHAD MADANI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 776

The Delhi High Court stayed the release of the controversial movie "Udaipur Files : Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder", allowing Islamic clerics body Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind and other petitioners to approach the Central Government in revision against the certification granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for the movie.

Till the Central Government took a decision on the interim relief on the petitioner's revision application, the High Court stayed the release of the film.

The film, said to be based on the 2022 murder of Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal, was due for release tomorrow. Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, through its President Arshad Madani, approached the High Court against the film alleging that it was communally provocative and vilified the Muslim community at large.

Husband Dejected With Marriage Not Proof Of Abetment: Delhi High Court Upholds Wife's Acquittal In Suicide Case

Title: SHIV SHANKAR v. STATE & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 777

The Delhi High Court has upheld the acquittal of a wife and her family members in a case accusing them of abetting the suicide of the husband, citing lack of evidence and proof.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said that it may be a case where the husband was unhappy and dejected with his marriage but no act of abetment was made out against the wife and her family members, either from the suicide note or from the testimony of the deceased's parents.

Unlike Trademarks Act, Priority Of Adoption Plays No Role In Ownership Under GI Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Asociacion De Productores De Pisco A.G v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 778

The Delhi High Court embarked upon the distinction of rights under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 and the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

While dealing with the GI claims of Peru and Chile-based organisations in South America over 'PISCO' for certain alcoholic beverages, Justice Mini Pushkarna observed,

“While the trademark is a private right of an individual or an entity, GI is collective right of producers in a region. The Trade Marks Act distinguishes the goods and services of one trader from others. On the other hand, GI indicates a product‟s origin from a specific geographical origin. While a trademark can be assigned, transferred or licensed, a GI cannot be assigned or transferred. The trademark belongs to one person or entity, however, GI belongs to the community/region.”

High Court Grants Relief To Delhi Hockey Team After Hockey India Agrees To Modify Sub Junior Women Championship Schedule

Title: DIVYANSHI KHANNA (MINOR) THROUGH HER LEGAL GUARDIAN & ORS v. HOCKEY INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 779

Hockey India recently told the Delhi High Court that the schedule for the 15th Hockey India Sub Junior Women NationalChampionship 2025 will be modified or tailored for the Delhi Hockey Team.

This was after the participation of Delhi Hockey Team was cancelled in the championship due to the team being taken off the Hockey India online portal.

Appreciating the stand taken by Hockey India, the Court disposed of the plea filed by group of sub-junior hockey players of the Delhi Hockey Team,represented by their legal guardians.

Delhi Govt Should Decide On Approved Enhancement Of Monthly Remuneration For Law Researchers Expeditiously: High Court

Title: RUSHANT MALHOTRA & ORS v. THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 780

The Delhi High Court has issued notice on a plea seeking to enhance the monthly remuneration of its law researchers from Rs. 65,000 to Rs. 80,000 along with arrears.

A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Ranjeesh Kumar Gupta said that prima facie, the Delhi Government ought to consider the approved enhancement for the LRs by the Court and take a decision in an expedited manner.

'Scant Regard For Liberty': High Court Raps Delhi Police Over Non-Appearance Of IOs, Calls For 'Serious Efforts' To Streamline System

Title: SHANKAR v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 781

The Delhi High Court has rapped the Delhi Police over non-appearance and unpreparedness of its investigating officers, calling it “scant regard for liberty” in their eyes.

While dealing with an anticipatory bail plea filed in a cheating case, Justice Girish Kathpalia expressed shocked over the fact that despite repeated directions, neither the IO nor the SHO had appeared.

Delhi High Court Restrains Disclosure Of Confidential Information Of Axis Max Life Insurance Customers On Dark Web, Online Platforms

Title: AXIS MAX LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 782

The Delhi High Court has restrained disclosure or transmission of confidential personal information of Axis Max Life Insurance customers on online platforms and dark web.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee passed the interim order in the suit filed by Axis Max Life Insurance Limited against an unknown entity(s) threatening that the confidential and sensitive personal data of its 20 lakh customers will be published for sale on the dark web, if it did not deal and negotiate.

'Violent, Repeated Sexual Abuse': Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Minor's Rape & Murder

Title: RAJAB ALI KHAN v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 783

The Delhi High Court has denied bail to a man accused of raping and murdering a minor girl in 2018, noting that the post-mortem report provided "clear medical evidence" which revealed that it was a case of "violent and repeated sexual abuse" of the victim.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that prima facie, the strength of the material, including forensic, electronic, medical, and documentary evidence, weighed heavily against the grant of bail to the accused.

AO Is 'Deciding Authority' U/S 148A Income Tax Act, Can't Revise Decision At Instance Of Principal Commissioner: Delhi High Court

Case title: Baba Global Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 29 & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 784

The Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer is the “authority” to decide whether a reassessment action under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 should be initiated against an assessee and his stance can't be revised at the instance of another authority.

Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order, Restrains Infringement Of 'Tata' Trademarks

Title: TATA SONS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR v. JOHN DOE AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 785

The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order restraining the infringement of “Tata” trademarks, observing that repeated instances of duping of customers had occurred through domains that have claimed to offer fake dealerships or distributorships.

Cryptocurrency Has Profound Implications On Country's Economy, Dissolves Money: Delhi High Court Denies Bail In Fraud Case

Title: UMESH VERMA v. STATE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 786

Denying bail to a man in a fraud case, the Delhi High Court has observed that cryptocurrency has profound implications on country's economy which dissolves recognized money into “dark unknown and untraceable money.”

S.3(k) Patents Act | Delhi High Court Declines Patent To US-Entity For System To Locate Users Sharing 'Sensitive Content' On P2P Networks

Case title: Kroll Information Assurance LLC v. The Controller General Of Patents, Designs And Trademarks And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 787

The Delhi High Court has declined a plea moved by US-based Kroll Information Assurance, seeking to patent 'System to locate users via a Peer to Peer Network'.

Justice Amit Bansal cited Section 3(k) of the Patents Act 1970 which declares inventions related to 'algorithm' and 'computer program per se' as non-patentable.

Delhi High Court Awards ₹8 Lakh In Favour Of Puma In Trademark Infringement Suit Against Counterfeit Products

Title: PUMA SE v. HIMANSHU SHARMA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 788

The Delhi High Court has awarded Rs. 8 lakh in favour of footwear brand Puma in its trademark infringement suit against an individual manufacturing counterfeit products.

Delhi High Court Restrains Rogue Websites From Streaming Maalik, Sarbala Ji Movie Content

Title: TIPS FILMS LIMITED v. HTTPS//0GOMOVIES.COM.TR/ & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 789

The Delhi High Court has restrained 56 rogue websites from illegally and unauthorisedly streaming content of Maalik and Sarbala Ji movies.

Need Evidence To Ascertain Rent, Can't Do Guess Work To Calculate Mense Profit: Delhi High Court

Title: SARVINDER SINGH & ANR v. VIPUL TANDON

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 790

The Delhi High Court has held that coming to a figure which might be the rent of an area on its own, without any material, is not permissible in law.

Justice Subramonium Prasad said mere guess work in thin air is no evidence and cannot be used to ascertain rent.

S.107 GST Act | Impugned Order “Automatically Stayed” Once Appeal Is Filed & Pre-Deposit Is Made; No Attachment Of Bank Account: Delhi HC

Case title: M/S MJ Bizcrafts LLP Through Partner Rajender Kumar v. Central Goods And Services Tax Delhi South Commissionerate Through Its Commissioner & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 791

The Delhi High Court has observed that once an appeal is filed by the assessee under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 and pre-deposit is made, there is “automatic stay” of the impugned order raising demand.

Parties Can't Be Barred From Performing Contractual Obligations In Final Partial Award When It Remains In Force: Delhi HC

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA versus VEDANTA LIMITED & ANR.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 792

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that parties cannot be prevented from performing their contractual obligations as interpreted in the Final Partial Award, especially when both the Final Partial Award as well as the contract interpreted therein have not been stayed and remain in force.

Applications For Furlough, Parole Can Be Considered During Pendency Of Appeal Against Conviction Before Supreme Court: Delhi High Court

Title: BUDHI SINGH v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 793

The Delhi High Court has ruled that applications for furlough and parole of a convict can be considered by the prison authorities during the pendency of their appeals against conviction before the Supreme Court.

Using Social Media For Disseminating Radical Ideology Attracts UAPA: Delhi High Court

Title: ARSALAN FEROZE AHENGER v. NIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 794

The Delhi High Court has observed that using social media for disseminating radical information or ideology attracts UAPA and that it is not necessary that such an act must be a physical activity.

Delhi High Court Provides Interim Relief To Jio & Reliance, Orders E-Commerce Platforms To Delist Counterfeit FMCG Goods

Case title: Reliance Industries Limited v. Pawan Kumar Gupta & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 795

The Delhi High Court has ordered e-commerce platforms like Amazon and Flipkart to temporarily delist pages of as many as 21 sellers offering counterfeit products in the FMCG sector by misusing Reliance and Jio trademarks.

'Triple Identity Test Satisfied': Delhi High Court Restrains Infringement Of Johnson & Johnson's ORSL Trademark, Awards ₹1.2 Cr Damages

Case title: Johnson & Johnson Pte Ltd v. Mr. Abbireddi Satish Kumar & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 796

The Delhi High Court awarded Rs. 1,21,56,864 cumulative damages to pharmaceutical multinational Johnson & Johnson over infringement of its ORSL trademark.

ORS-L (later changed to ORSL) is a range of flavoured electrolyte drinks first introduced by Jagdale Industries Limited in 2003.

No Bar On Re-Arrest Of Accused After Procedural Defects Of Prior 'Illegal Arrest' Are Cured: Delhi High Court

Title: ANWAR KHAN @ CHACHA & ORS v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 797

The Delhi High Court has ruled that there is no statutory or judicial bar on re-arrest of an accused after curing the procedural defects of a prior illegal arrest.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that a lapse or omission on the part of the investigating agency, whether inadvertent or deliberate, cannot result in a blanket immunity to the accused against any future arrest in the same case.

Domestic Violence Act Doesn't Distinguish Between First Or Subsequent Marriage For Maintenance: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 798

The Delhi High Court has observed that the Domestic Violence Act does not distinguish between a first or subsequent marriage for the purpose of entitlement to maintenance.

Self-Declared Information On Matrimonial Site Not Admissible Proof Of Income: Delhi High Court

Title: A v. B

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 799

The Delhi High Court has observed that any “self-declared information” made on a matrimonial portal, without verification or corroborative evidence, cannot be treated as reliable or admissible proof of income.

Delhi High Court Deprecates Investigating Officer Appearing Without Case Diaries, Grants Bail In Murder Case

Title: SAMIR @ AZHAR v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 800

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man accused in a murder case while strongly deprecating the conduct of an investigating officer who appeared in Court without proper case file and diaries.

Frame SOP To Avoid Unnecessary References To Forensic Labs In Criminal Cases: High Court To Centre, Delhi Govt

Title: DR. SUBHASH VIJAYRAN v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 801

The Delhi High Court directed the Union and Delhi Governments to take a decision on framing a standard operating procedure (SOP) or guidelines to avoid unnecessary references being made to the forensic science laboratories (FSLs).

Make Ad-Hoc Appointments To Posts Of Public Prosecutors Pending Regular Recruitment: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 802

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to take steps to make ad-hoc appointments to the post of Additional Public Prosecutors or Assistant Public Prosecutors in the criminal courts, pending regular recruitment.

Penalty U/S 122(1A) GST Act Can Be Imposed Retrospectively Even If SCN Was Issued After Its Enactment: Delhi High Court

Case title: Bhupender Kumar v. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 803

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Section 122(1A) of the Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 can be imposed retrospectively, provided the show cause notice had been issued to the assessee when the provision was introduced.

Delhi High Court Orders Wipro To Pay ₹2 Lakh To Employee For Defamatory Remarks In Termination Letter

Title: ABHIJIT MISHRA v. WIPRO LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 804

The Delhi High Court has expunged defamatory remarks made against the character of an employee working with Wipro Limited from his termination letter.

India-UK DTAA | Consideration For Availing Services That Require Technical Expertise Not FTS Unless Recipient Absorbs Technology: Delhi HC

Case title: Tungsten Automation England Limited (Formerly Known As Tungsten Network Limited) v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle 3(1)(1) New Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 805

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that consideration paid for merely availing services that require technical expertise would not qualify as 'Fees for Technical Service' under Article 13 of the India-UK DTAA.

Customs Act | Adjudicating Authority Can't Decline Refund Of Excess Duty In Presence Of CA's Certificate: Delhi High Court

Case title: Principal Commissioner Of Customs (ACC Imports) Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 806

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the Customs authority cannot, in absence of some evidence, decline refund of excess duty paid by a trader when the latter furnishes certificates from a qualified chartered accountant in support of its case.

Delhi High Court Imposes ₹20K Costs On Woman For 'Casually' Filing Sexual Assault Case Against Live-In Partner

Title: ANIL VERMA v. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 807

The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 20,000 costs on a woman for filing a sexual assault case against her live-in partner, observing that such a complaint cannot be permitted to be filed in a casual or reckless manner.

CBI Can't Seek Demand Draft Of Suspected Proceeds Of Crime U/S 91 CrPC: Delhi High Court

Case title: Exclusive Motors Pvt Ltd v. CBI & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 808

The Delhi High Court has held that Section 91 of CrPC, which empowers the Police to seek production of 'any document or other thing' desirable for the purposes of investigation, cannot be used to seek a demand draft of the amount suspected to be proceeds of crime.

After High Court Rap, Delhi Police Assures Production Of Case Diaries By All Investigating Officers

Title: ANKIT v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 809

After Delhi High Court rap, the Delhi Police has assured the Court that henceforth all the investigating officers shall produce the case diaries of the case for judicial examination.

Delhi High Court Issues 'Real Time' Injunction Restraining Entities From Misusing Reliance's Tira Trademark To Commit Financial Scams

Case title: Reliance Retail Limited v. Ashok Kumar & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 810

The Delhi High Court has issued interim directions restraining infringement of Reliance Retail's Tira trademark in the beauty and personal care sector and its misuse to commit financial scams.

Delhi High Court Quashes Charges Against Indian Nationals For Sheltering Tablighi Jamaat Attendees During COVID-19

Case Title: MOHD ANWAR & ORS. v. STATE NCT OF DELHI and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 811

The Delhi High Court quashed 16 cases registered against 70 Indian nationals accused of sheltering attendees of Tablighi Jamaat congregation in their homes or mosques during COVID-19.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna quashed the chargesheets registered against the Indian nationals and disposed of their pleas seeking quashing of 16 FIRs registered against them.

Delhi High Court Explains Scope Of 'Pro Tem' Orders In Patent Infringement Suit Against Mobile Company 'Lava'

Case title: Dolby International AB & Anr. v. Lava International Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 812

The Delhi High Court had the occasion to discuss in detail the scope of a pro tem order, while dealing with Europe based audio/video processor Dolby International's suit against alleged patent infringement by Indian mobile phone company Lava.

Bar On Revision Of Interlocutory Order U/S 438(2) Of BNSS Can't Be Bypassed By Invoking Inherent Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ability Dodzi @ Chinazom Ability v. State NCT Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 813

The Delhi High Court has held that the bar prescribed under Section 438(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Surakhsha Sanhita 2023 against revision of interlocutory orders cannot be bypassed by invoking the High Court's inherent powers.

Complainant Declining Medical Examination Despite Alleging Sexual Assault Can Weaken Prosecution Case: Delhi High Court

Case title: Arpit Mishra v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 814

The Delhi High Court has observed that refusal of the prosecutrix to undergo medical examination despite alleging serious sexual assault can weaken the prosecution's case.

Delhi High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Of About ₹229.5 Crores Against NHAI As 'Termination Payment'

Case Title: National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) vs. South Indian Bank Ltd and Union Bank of India Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 815

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has upheld an Arbitral Award directing the National Highways Authority of India (“NHAI”/”Petitioner”) to deposit ₹229.50 crores as Termination Payment into the Escrow Account along with interest and costs. The court reiterated that the scope of judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is narrow and circumscribed. The Arbitral Award can be set aside on the ground, inter alia, being in conflict with the public policy of India, patent illegality, violation of principles of natural justice.

Delhi High Court Imposes Rs. 20K Costs On Litigant For 'Abusing' Victim Compensation Scheme Under SC/ST Act

Title: BALBIR MEENA v. STATE GOVT NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 816

The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of Rs. 20,000 on a litigant for “misusing and abusing” the victim compensation scheme under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Notice U/S 153C Income Tax Act Can Be Issued Only If Incriminating Material Has 'Bearing On Total Income' Of Non-Searched Assessee: Delhi HC

Case title: Neeraj Bharadwaj v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(2) & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 818

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that assessments under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be made on a non-searched entity only when the Assessing Officer has incriminating material which “has a bearing” on its total income.

Arbitration Can't Be Restricted To Specific Respondents When Agreements Form Part Of Single Commercial Transaction: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CANARA BANK versus SANJEEV SHARMA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 819

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar held that when an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act is filed in opposition to a civil suit, a party cannot later object that the arbitration was intended to apply only to specific respondents, especially when the pleadings indicate that the agreements formed part of a single commercial transaction.

[S.53A CrPC] Almost Mandatory To Take Blood Samples For DNA Analysis In Rape Cases, Police Can Use Force If Needed: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ms. X v. State (NCT of Delhi)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 820

Stating that DNA testing is an “almost perfect science” to determine truthfulness of the allegations of rape, the Delhi High Court has held that Police is duty bound to take accused's blood sample for analysis in such cases.

Confinement In A Room Sufficient To Frame 'Wrongful Confinement' Charge, Tying Of Victim's Hands Not Necessary: Delhi High Court

Title: THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI v. MUKESH & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 821

The Delhi High Court has observed that confinement within a room is sufficient to make out a prima facie case for framing charge for the offence of wrongful confinement.

Mere Threats Without Intention To Cause Alarm Not Criminal Intimidation: Delhi High Court

Title: STATE OF NCT OF DELHI v. JAWAHAR SINGH

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 822

The Delhi High Court has observed that mere threats given by the accused, without an intention to cause alarm, would not constitute an offence of criminal intimidation.

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked When Party Has Already Approached DRT Under SARFAESI Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Bhadra International India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Punjab national Bank & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 823

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition while upholding that if a borrower has already approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the SARFAESI Act, for a one-time settlement, a writ seeking the same relief under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable.

Monthly Rent Payment Cannot Be Accepted As Instalments Towards Sale Consideration Of Property: Delhi High Court

Case title: Amit Jain & Ors. v. Anila Jain & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 824

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that monthly payment of rent made under a registered lease deed cannot be construed as instalments towards the sale consideration of a property.

Patent Infringement: Delhi High Court Restrains Zydus From Manufacturing Biologic Similar To 'Nivolumab' Cancer Drug

Title: E. R. SQUIBB AND SONS, LLC & ORS v. ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 825

The Delhi High Court has restrained Zydus Lifesciences Limited from manufacturing, selling importing, exporting or dealing in any biologic which is similar to Nivolumab, a drug used to treat cancer, sold under the brand name “Opdivo.”

Post-Wise Identification Within 1% Reservation For Visually Impaired Candidates (Low Vision & Blind) Is Valid For Safety Reasons : Delhi HC

Case Name: Yash Sharma and Ors vs. West Central Railway and Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 826

A division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Ajay Digpaul held that identification of posts suitable only for low vision within the 1% reservation for visually impaired is valid, as post-wise identification within reserved vacancies based on the nature of duties and safety requirements is permissible, and blind candidates cannot claim posts not identified as suitable for them.

'Unhappy With Approach': Delhi HC Tells UPSC For Ousting Eligible CAPF Candidate Who Mistakenly Uploaded Outdated OBC Certificate

Case title: Teena Choudhary v. UPSC & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 827

The Delhi High Court has expressed its 'unhappiness' with the Union Public Service Commission for ousting an aspirant from the recruitment process to Central Armed Police Force, merely because she uploaded the caste certificate of an earlier date.

'Raises Suspicion': Delhi HC Expresses Alarm Over Missing Case Diaries From Police Record In Murder Investigation

Case title: Banti Kumar Mathur v. The State Of Nct Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 828

While dealing with the bail plea of a murder accused, the Delhi High Court was shocked to note that certain case diaries were missing from Police records.

Child Being In Husband's Custody After Matrimonial Dispute Not Cruelty Or Harassment U/S 498A IPC: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 829

The Delhi High Court has observed that the child being in custody of the husband after matrimonial disputes arise between the parties is not cruelty or harassment under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

“…merely because the child was in the custody of the husband after disputes interse arose, cannot be equated with cruelty or harassment as envisaged under Section 498A IPC,” Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said.

Merely Receiving A Package Without Being Aware Of Illicit Contents Not 'Possession' Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

Title: SANEESH SOMAN v. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 830

The Delhi High Court has ruled that merely receiving a package without the accused being aware of its illicit contents is not “conscious possession” under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

“The act of merely receiving a package, absent any material to suggest that the Applicant was aware of its illicit contents, prima facie, cannot by itself satisfy the legal threshold of “possession” under the NDPS Act,” Justice Sanjeev Narula said.

Unauthenticated Documents From Foreign Govt Regarding Swiss Bank Account Of Assessee Can't Form Basis For Criminal Action: Delhi HC

Case title: Anurag Dalmia v. Income Tax Office

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 831

The Delhi High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against an assessee under Section 276C, 276D and 277 of the Income Tax Act 1961 merely on the basis of some unauthorised documents alleging existence of an undisclosed Swiss Bank account in his name.

Advisable For Legislature To Correct Lacuna On What Constitutes 'Infringement' Under Patents Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Mold Tek Packaging Limited v. Pronton Plast Pack Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 832

The Delhi High Court has suggested to the legislature to define what constitutes 'infringement' under the Patents Act 1970.

A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul noted that while other intellectual property statutes define what constitutes infringement therein, the Patent Act is 'peculiarly' silent on this aspect.

Delhi High Court Orders Food Joints To Pay ₹5 Lakh Damages To 'Veerji Malai Chaap Wale' Restaurant Over Trademark Infringement

Title: MS VEERJI RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED v. YASH RAI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 833

The Delhi High Court has awarded Rs. 5 lakh as costs and damages to famous Veerji Malai Chaap Wale restaurant in its trademark infringement suit against various eateries and food delivery joints.

While the matter was settled with one of the defendant eateries, Justice Amit Bansal noted that the other five food joints did not appear before the Court and thus, their conduct not only warranted but also necessitated imposition of both costs and damages.

Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To NewsClick Founder Prabir Purkayastha In ED, EOW Cases Alleging Foreign Funding

Title: Prabir Purkayastha v. ED and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 834

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to Prabir Purkayastha, editor-in-chief and founder of news portal NewsClick, in Enforcement Directorate's money laundering case as well as Delhi Police's EOW FIR concerning allegations of foreign funding.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna pronounced the verdict and disposed of the pleas filed by Purkayastha in 2021.

High Court Unsatisfied With Steps Taken By Delhi Govt, Police In Running One Stop Centres For Women & Children; Issues Directions

Title: Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 835

The Delhi High Court said that it was not satisfied with the steps and measures taken by the Delhi Government and the Police in running one stop centres provide support for women and children facing violence in the national capital.

Issuing guidelines to the authorities, a division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that necessary steps and action which are required to be taken in the matter have not been taken by the Delhi Government and the Delhi Police.

Delhi High Court Directs Meta, 'X' Social Media Platforms To Take Down Pirated Links Of 'Kannappa' Film

Case title: Twenty-Four Frames Factory Private Limited v. John Doe & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 836

The Delhi High Court directed social media platforms Meta and X to take down pirated links of Vishnu Manchu starrer Telugu film 'Kannappa'.

Justice Jyoti Singh passed the interim order on a copyright infringement suit filed by the film production Twenty-Four Frames Factory Private Limited.

Right To Speedy Trial Cannot Be Diluted Merely Because Case Arises Under Special Enactment Like MCOCA: Delhi High Court

Case title: Naresh Kumar @ Pahelwan v. State Of Nct Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 837

Reinforcing the principle of right to speedy trial, the Delhi High Court admitted on bail an accused under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act 1999, citing prolonged incarceration of over 8 years.

'Capability To Earn' & 'Actual Earnings' Are Separate Things: Delhi High Court Upholds Grant Of Maintenance To MBA-Qualified Wife

Case title: SKD v. MG & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 838

Stating that “capability to earn and actual earnings are two separate things”, the Delhi High Court recently upheld the grant of maintenance to an MBA-qualified wife.

In doing so, a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar observed that when the couple separated, their child was very young and in order to take care of the child, the wife may have left her job.

Making Allegations Of Extra-Marital Affair In Complaints To Spouse's Employer Is 'Cruelty': Delhi High Court

Case title: AS v. NKS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 839

The Delhi High Court has upheld a family court order dissolving the marriage of a couple on the grounds that the wife had subjected the husband to cruelty by making derogatory complaints to his employer.

A division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar observed that marriage requires adjustment and parties may take a long time to adjust with each other but both husband and wife are expected to show due respect to each other.

Mere Friendship Can't Give Liberty To Indulge In Sexual Intercourse Without Consent: Delhi High Court

Title: MOHAMMAD SHAHID @ SAHID v. STATE OF (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 840

The Delhi High Court has observed that mere friendship cannot give liberty to a boy to indulge in sexual intercourse with a girl without her consent.

“….merely because a girl befriends a boy, the latter cannot be given liberty to indulge into sexual intercourse with her without her consent,” Justice Girish Kathpalia said.

UAPA | Delhi High Court Refuses Default Bail To 'ISIS Member' Accused Of Procuring Arms, Radicalising Youth

Title: MOHD RIZWAN ASHRAF v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 841

The Delhi High Court denied default bail to a man accused of being an active member of the ISIS, procuring arms, ammunitions and explosives for the extremist armed group and radicalising impressionable youth.

A division bench comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar dismissed the appeal filed by Mohd. Rizwan Ashraf who was arrested in the UAPA case on October 01, 2023.

S.223 BNSS | Cognizance Can't Be Taken On Complaint Without Giving Notice To Accused: Delhi High Court

Title: BRAND PROTECTORS INDIA PVT. LTD v. ANIL KUMAR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 842

Comparing the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the Delhi High Court has held that cognizance cannot be taken on a complaint before giving notice to the accused under the new law.

Give Written Note Of Surrender Date To Convict During Release On Parole, Furlough To Avoid Ambiguity: Delhi High Court To Jail Authorities

Title: Mohd Alam v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 843

The Delhi High Court has directed the jail authorities in the national capital to ensure that a written note of date of surrender is handed over to the convict at the time of releasing him or her on parole or furlough after taking their acknowledgement to avoid any ambiguity.

Justice Girish Kathpalia said that in various cases, it is seen that due to illiteracy and ignorance, the convict released on parole or furlough fails to surrender back in time and the delayed surrender leads to punishment.

Delhi High Court Grants Relief To 1993 Plane Hijacker In Plea Against Denial Of Premature Release

Title: HARI SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 844

The Delhi High Court has granted relief to a man, convicted for hijacking an Indian Airlines flight in 1993, in his plea against the decision of the authorities denying him premature release.

Justice Sanjeev Narula set aside the decision of the sentence review board (SRB) and remanded the matter back for fresh consideration, noting that the convict's conduct in jail indicated elements of reformation.

Trial Court Judges Must Pronounce Orders In Reserved Cases Within Two-Three Weeks After Transfer: Delhi High Court

Title: B.D. SHARMA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 845

The Delhi High Court has directed that all the judges in the trial courts in the national capital shall pronounce orders or judgments in the reserved cases within two or three weeks after their transfer and that the same will not be listed before the subsequent judge for rehearing.

Highly Qualified But Unemployed Wife Has Right To Be Maintained By Husband Till She Gets Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 846

The Delhi High Court has observed that a highly qualified wife, who is unemployed, has a right to be supported and managed by the husband till the time she is able to get gainful employment or develop the source of income.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna rejected a husband's plea challenging a family court order directing him to pay Rs. 1 lakh ad-interim maintenance monthly to the wife.

Delhi High Court Upholds ICC Verdict Finding DU Professor Guilty Of Sexual Harassment

Title: DR AMIT KUMAR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 847

The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea filed by a professor of the Delhi University against the findings of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) holding him guilty over the allegations of sexual harassment made by various students and an alumnus, as well as the decision to compulsory retirement him.

Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that the Executive Authority gave a fair hearing to the professor and its failure to pass a speaking order did not pass the test of prejudice.

Recovered 'Ganja' Was Only Marginally Above Commercial Quantity, Rigours U/S 37 NDPS Act May Not Apply: Delhi High Court Grants Bail

Case title: Vinay Sharma v. GNCTD

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 925

The Delhi High Court has held that the rigour of Section 37 NDPS Act does not apply strictly in cases where the quantity of contraband recovered from an accused is only marginally above the prescribed commercial quantity.

The applicant in this case was apprehended with a bag containing 21.508 kg of ganja.

Process Patent | S.104A Of Patents Act Can Be Invoked At Interim Stage To Seek Disclosure Of Defendant's Process: Delhi High Court

Case title: F- Hoffmann -La Roche Ag & Anr. v. Zydus Lifesciences Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 926

The Delhi High Court has held that there is no bar on the invocation of Section 104A of the Patent Act 1970 at the initial stage of a suit, when the patent holder seeks disclosure of the defendant's process.

For context, Section 104A prescribes that where the subject matter of a patent infringement suit is a 'process' for obtaining a product, the burden is on the defendant to prove that the process used by him to obtain the identical product is different from the patented process.

S.74 CGST Act | Consolidated SCN For Multiple Financial Years Necessary To Establish Wrongful Availment Of ITC: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ambika Traders Through Proprietor Gaurav Gupta v. Additional Commissioner, Adjudication DGGSTI, CGST Delhi North

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 927

The Delhi High Court has held that consolidated show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST is not only permissible but necessary, to unearth wrongful availment of ITC over a span of period.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,

“The nature of ITC is such that fraudulent utilization and availment of the same cannot be established on most occasions without connecting transactions over different financial years. The purchase could be shown in one financial year and the supply may be shown in the next financial year. It is only when either are found to be fabricated or the firms are found to be fake that the maze of transactions can be analysed and established as being fraudulent or bogus.

'Disproportionate': Delhi High Court Quashes ₹12 Lakh Cost On Vi-John For Delay In Responding To Dabur's Trademark Infringement Suit

Case title: Vi-John Healthcare India LLP v. Dabur India Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 928

Granting relief to Vi John Healthcare in connection with a trademark suit filed against it by Dabur for alleged infringement of its Meswak toothpaste packaging, the Delhi High Court set aside a cost of ₹12 lakh imposed on the former by the trial court.

The costs were imposed in view of the trial court's previous order that any delay by Vi John in filing its Written Statement shall only be considered subject to a cost of ₹25,000/- for each day of delay.

Delhi High Court Passes Summary Judgment In Tata Power's Trademark Infringement Suit, Grants Dynamic Injunction Against John Doe Entity

Case title: Tata Power Renewable Energy Limited & Ors. v. Ashok Kumar/S & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 929

The Delhi High Court passed summary judgment in favour of Tata Power in a suit filed against infringement of its trademarks, including Tata Power Solaroof and Tata Power EZ Charge.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora also granted dynamic injunction and permitted the company to implead and seek relief against any other John Doe entity found infringing its marks.

S.60(1)(ccc) CPC | Delhi High Court Stays Auction Sale Of Man's Ancestral Property Over Maintenance Dues

Case title.: Sh. Raj Kumar And Anr. v. Mrs Poonam

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 930

The Delhi High Court has stayed a Magistrate Court order directing auction of husband's alleged share in a family property, in the execution petition filed by his wife seeking payment of maintenance.

This was after the husband cited violation of Section 60(1)(ccc) CPC, which prescribes that every person has a right to reside and there cannot be an execution against the only dwelling house which a person possesses.

'Corroding Nation's Economic Fabric': Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Ex-DHFL Chairman Kapil Wadhawan In ₹34,926 Crore Bank Fraud Case

Case title: Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 931

The Delhi High Court denied bail to former Chairman of the erstwhile Dewan Housing Finance Corp Ltd (DHFL) Kapil Wadhawan in a case related to the alleged multi-crore loan scam.

Justice Ravinder Dudeja observed that Wadhawan was at the helm of a conspiracy that resulted in the diversion and misappropriation of approximately ₹34,926.77 crores from a consortium of 17 banks.

2019 Anaj Mandi Fire: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing Of Charges Against Building Owner Citing Absence Of Safety Mechanisms

Title: MOHD. IMRAN v. THE STATE GNCTD

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 932

The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court order framing charges against one the owners of a building situated in city's Anaj Mandi area of Sadar Bazar which caught massive fire in the early hours of December 08, 2019, claiming lives of 45 individuals, mostly labourers.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that the accused- Mohd. Imran, was the owner of a portion of the fourth floor as well as the storeroom constructed on the terrace of the building, which were unauthorised and illegal structures, thereby reflecting clear violation of building norms.

Compassionate Appointment Can't Be Sought Long After Death Of Family's Bread Winner, Doesn't Continue In Perpetuity: Delhi High Court

Title: SACHIN YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 933

The Delhi High Court has observed that compassionate appointment cannot be sought long after the death of a family's bread winner and is not a right which continues in perpetuity.

A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla observed that compassionate appointment caters to a very specific exigency, which dies with efflux of time.

GST Refund Can't Be Granted To Trader Until Cancelled Registration Is Restored: Delhi High Court

Case title: Shree Radhe Vallabh Traders v. Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi East Commissionerate, New Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 934

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that GST refund cannot be granted to a trader whose GST registration stands cancelled.

In the case at hand, the Petitioner's registration was cancelled in February 2023 with retrospective effect from July 2018.

Phrase 'Three Months' U/S 73(2) GST Act Means Three Calendar Months, Not 90 Days: Delhi High Court

Case title: Tata Play Ltd v. Sales Tax Officer Class II/ Avato

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 935

The Delhi High Court has held that the 'three months' period prior to expiry of three years within which show cause notice for alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit must be issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, means three calendar months and not 90 days.

Delhi High Court Denies Interim Maintenance To Wife Citing Estranged 70-Yr-Old Husband's Financial & Emotional Incapacity

Case title: YV v. VV

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 936

The Delhi High Court denied interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to a woman, citing her estranged husband's financial incapacity.

“Respondent should not be burdened with the obligation to provide interim maintenance, particularly when his own financial, physical and emotional conditions are visibly strained,” a division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar observed.

Wife's Right To Shared Household Under DV Act No Bar To Partition Of Matrimonial Home Between Divorced Couple: Delhi High Court

Case title: SJ v. AJ

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 937

The Delhi High Court has held that a married woman's right to reside in a shared household under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act cannot override or nullify the lawful entitlement of husband to seek partition or enforcement of ownership rights in civil proceedings.

A division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar thus dismissed a divorced woman's appeal against Family Court judgment declaring her and her former husband are entitled to 50% each in the suit property.

Expeditiously Decide Plea To Maintain Database Of Complainants Filing Multiple Sexual Offence Cases: High Court To Delhi Police

Title: SHONEE KAPOOR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 938

The Delhi High Court asked the Delhi Police and other authorities to decide expeditiously a plea seeking maintenance of a database of complainants who have filed multiple cases of sexual offences.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela disposed of a PIL filed by one Shonee Kapoor, represented by Advocate Shashi Ranjan Kumar Singh.

Trader Can't Be Labelled Defaulter Over Unpaid Demand During Pendency Of GST Appeal, After Making Pre-Deposit: Delhi High Court

Case title: Shri Sarabjeet Singh , Proprietor Of M/S Khurana Associates v. The Commissioner Of SGST, Delhi SGST & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 939

The Delhi HIgh Court has held that once a trader prefers an appeal against a demand raised by the GST Department and makes the mandatory pre-deposit, the demand order is automatically stayed and the trader cannot be treated as a defaulter.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta thus granted relief to the Petitioner-proprietorship firm and directed the Department to process its request for a fresh GST registration.

S.125 CrPC | Technical Delays, Procedural Lapses Can't Defeat Purpose Of Interim Maintenance To Wife & Minor Child: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 940

The Delhi High Court has observed that technical delays or procedural lapses cannot defeat the purpose of interim maintenance to wife and minor child under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that interim maintenance under the provision in question is meant to provide immediate relief to a spouse and minor children who are otherwise unable to maintain themselves.

Customs Wrongly Treated 998 Purity Gold Jewellery As Prohibited Goods Under Baggage Rules: Delhi High Court Grants Relief To Traveller

Case title: Shamina v. Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 941

The Delhi High Court granted relief to a woman whose 998 purity (equivalent to 24 karat) gold jewellery was treated as prohibited goods under the Baggage Rules 2016, and absolutely confiscated by the Customs Department on her return to the country.

Delhi High Court Orders NTA To Streamline Biometric Process For NEET UG, Upholds Direction To Constitute Grievance Redressal Framework

Title: NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY v. SATYA NISHTH & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 942

The Delhi High Court has directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to streamline the biometric process while conducting National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET-UG) for future examinations.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Sachin Datta upheld the direction of a single judge asking NTA to constitute a Standing Grievance Redressal Committee to resolve issues of candidates who suffer loss of time due to technical issues, without any fault on their part.

Restraining Breaching Party From Activities Barred By Shareholders' Agreement Is Not Prohibited U/S 27 Of Contract Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: PAUL DEEPAK RAJARATNAM & ORS. versus SURGEPORT LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 943

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that restraining a breaching party through an interim award passed under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act from engaging in certain activities, as per the terms of Shareholders' Agreement (SHA), to prevent the subject matter of arbitration from being rendered futile, is not barred under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, especially when the contract remains valid and has not been lawfully terminated.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Release Of 'Udaipur Files' Movie, Dismisses Accused's Plea For Interim Relief

Title: MOHDMMED JAVED v. UNION OF INIDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 944

he Delhi High Court refused to stay the release of “Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder" which is scheduled for release on Friday, i.e., August 8.

The court rejected one of the accused in the case Mohammad Javed's plea for interim relief seeking stay on the release of the film. It however issued notice on the main petition against the order passed by the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) clearing the certification of the film.

'Defrauding Unsuspecting Users': Delhi High Court Grants John Doe Injunction Over Trademark Infringement Of Share Market App 'INDmoney'

Case title: Indmoney Tech Private Limited & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar And Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 945

The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe interim injunction restraining rogue websites and applications from infringing the trademark of share market and financial services app INDmoney.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora was prima facie satisfied that the defendant-entity, by making unauthorised use of the Plaintiffs' trademarks, has been luring unsuspecting users to invest monies with the said Defendant No. 1.

Cash-For-Query Row: Delhi High Court Orders 'Strict Confidentiality' After Mahua Moitra Flags Media Leak Of CBI Report To Lokpal

Tile: MAHUA MOITRA v. NISHIKANT DUBEY & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 946

Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Mahua Moitra moved the Delhi High Court against the alleged media leak of the news of CBI submitting its report to Lokpal of India in relation to the alleged cash-for-query scam.

Justice Sachin Datta directed that confidentiality shall be “strictly maintained by all the concerned.”

Delhi High Court Asks CBI To Probe Alleged 'Extortion Racket' Inside Tihar Jail

Title: Mohit Kumar Goyal v. State of NCT of Delhi And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 947

The Delhi High Court told the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR over the allegations of extortion racket being run inside the Tihar jail involving its officials and inmates.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela perused the status report as well as the preliminary enquiry report of Delhi Government's Principal Secretary (Home).

'Priority Of Use' No Defence Against Trademark Infringement Unless It Predates Both Use & Registration By Plaintiff: Delhi High Court

Case title: Bodhisattva Charitable Trust And Ors. v. Mayo Foundation For Medical Education And Research

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 948

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that priority of user is not a defence to an action for infringement of trademark unless the use of such mark by the defendant predates both the user as well as the registration of the asserted mark of the plaintiff.

Delhi High Court Warns Of Criminal Action Against Unauthorised Street Vendors In City's Shalimar Bagh Area

Case title: Surender Kumar Sharma And Ors v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 949

The Delhi High Court told the Municipal Corporation of Delhi that merely because it is unable to control unauthorised street vendors and prevent encroachment of public pathways is not grounds to discontinue the weekly market approved by the Town Vending Committee (TVC).

The bench was dealing with a plea moved by holders of the Certificate of Vending (CoV), seeking directions to MCD not to restrain them from holding the weekly market in the city's Shalimar Bagh area. TVC had approved around 300 vendors for the same.

'Too Little, Too Late': Delhi High Court Grants Relief To Jamia Millia Assistant Professor Terminated Without Proper Hearing

Case title: Sarfraz Ahmad v. Vice Chancellor, JMI And Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 950

The Delhi High Court has set aside the order of Jamia Millia Islamia University terminating the services of an Assistant Professor for unauthorised absence, who claimed to have discontinued taking classes for a period of time over alleged victimisation by certain other Professors of the varsity.

In doing so, Justice Prateek Jalan noted there was “inadequate compliance with the principles of natural justice” in as much as the inquiry report, on the basis of which the Executive Council passed its resolutions terminating the Petitioner, was never served upon him.

Recruitment Of Nursing Officers/ Para-Medical Staff Absolutely Crucial For Health Management In Delhi Govt Hospitals: High Court

Case title: Court On Its Own Motion v. Union Of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 951

Stating that appointment of nursing and para-medical staff is “absolutely crucial for the health management in hospitals in Delhi”, the High Court has ordered the government to undertake the process of recruitment without any impediment.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora ordered, “as and when the results are declared, after completing the necessary formalities, the appointment shall be done on a post-to-post basis without waiting for the recruitment in the other post.”

S.37 NDPS Act | Contraband Recovered From Separate Accused Can't Be Collectively Attributed To One Person To Deny Bail: Delhi High Court

Case title: Meena v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 952

The Delhi High Court has held that when contraband is recovered from multiple accused persons separately, the same cannot be collectively attributed to one of the accused to deny him bail.

UAPA: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To One, Denies Bail To Other In J&K Terror Funding Case

Title: SYED AHMAD SHAKEEL v. NIA and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 953

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to one Syed Ahmad Shakeel and has denied bail to one Shahid Yusuf in relation to an alleged case of terror funding and secessionist activities in Jammu and Kashmir.

A division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur observed that Shakeel had already suffered prolonged incarceration of around 6 years and 11 months, without any certainty of the trial concluding within a reasonable time.

[MCOCA] If State Cites Seriousness Of Offence To Oppose Bail, It Must Avoid Delays In Critical Processes Like Appointing Prosecutor: Delhi HC

Title: SUKHBIR SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SHO

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 954

While dismissing an accused's plea in a MCOCA case, the Delhi High Court has observed that the State must avoid delays in “critical processes” such as appointment of an SPP where it cites seriousness and gravity of alleged offence to oppose a plea.

Income Tax Act | Criminal Complaint For Tax Evasion Filed During Pendency Of Reassessment Proceedings Not Premature: Delhi High Court

Case title: Raj Kumar Kedia v. Income Tax Office

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 955

The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea for quashing a criminal complaint lodged under Income Tax Act 1961 for alleged tax evasion, moved on the ground that reassessment action was pending and hence the complaint was premature.

Delhi High Court Imposes ₹50K Cost On Trader Who Missed Personal Hearing After Failing To Check GST Portal

Case title: Ganpati Polymers Through It Proprietor Prop. Ankur Jain v. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax And Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 956

The Delhi High Court refused to interfere with a GST demand raised against a trader, who failed to either appear for personal hearing or even file a reply.

Complainant's Privacy Concern Can't Come In Accused's Way To Preserve Call Records Claimed To Be Exculpatory Evidence: Delhi High Court

Title: SOHAIL MALIK v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 957

The Delhi High Court ruled that the privacy concern of a complainant cannot come in the way of an accused seeking preservation of Call Detail Records which is claimed to be exculpatory evidence.

“Preservation of exculpatory evidence is of the utmost sanctity for purposes of ensuring a fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India; and a narrow construction or interpretation of section 91 Cr.P.C. must not stand in the way of preservation of such evidence, whilst of course leaving it to the trial court to subsequently decide whether such evidence is relevant and admissible,” Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani said.

Parties' Decision To Transact Goods In 'Sound Condition' Prevails Over Prior Agreement To Transact On 'As Is Where Is' Basis”: Delhi HC

Case Title – PEC Ltd v. Ms Badri Singh Vinimay Pvt Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 958

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar while upholding an arbitral award has observed that if the parties had agreed to transact goods on 'as is where is' basis in the tender document but agreed in the acceptance letter that the goods would be transacted on 'sound condition' basis, then the earlier agreement will stand substituted by the latter understanding between the parties and the goods will be transacted on 'sound condition' basis.

Knife Is A 'Deadly Weapon' Irrespective Of Its Dimensions, Recovery Not Essential To Attract Offence U/S 397 IPC: Delhi High Court

Case title: Azam v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 959

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that dimension or type of knife used to threaten a person of injury is irrelevant for the purpose of attracting the offence of Section 397 IPC.

The provision states that if, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.

1984 Anti-Sikh Riots Case: Delhi High Court Flags Shortcomings In Murder Trial Of 3 Sikh Men, Directs Reconstruction Of Records

Case title: Court On Its Own Motion v. Dhanraj & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 960

The Delhi High Court found flaws in the investigation and subsequent trial conducted into the killings of three Sikh men in Delhi NCR region, following assasination of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

Court Must Scrutinise Invocation Of Expression 'Urgent Interim Relief' By Litigants U/S 12A Of Commercial Courts Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: M/S Exclusive Capital Limited v. Clover Media Private Limited & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 961

The Delhi High Court has held that the expression “contemplates urgent interim relief” under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act 2015 though not defined under the statute, demands a rigorous scrutiny of commercial suits bypassing mandatory mediation to ensure that the benefit of exemption under the provision is not misused by unscrupulous litigants.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Against SC/ST Reservation For Those Who Convert From Hinduism To Buddhism

Case title: ADVOCATE MANISH KUMAR V/s UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 962

The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a plea questioning the vires of extension of SC/ST reservation benefits to those who have converted from Hinduism to Buddhism, after noting that the document in question which allegedly provides such benefits was not placed before it.

'Entire Trial Was Concluded In Two Days': Delhi High Court Sets Aside 'Sham' Conviction Under Defacement Of Public Property Act

Case title: Aditya Rai Gupta v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 963

The Delhi High Court slammed a Magistrate Court for conducting a “sham” trial within two days, where the accused was neither aware of the charges, nor given an opportunity to defend himself and not even supplied a copy of the Judgment.

'Are We Post Office?' Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Filed Against Illegal Establishments Without Awaiting MCD's Reply To Representation

Case title: AMAN SINGH V/s MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI THORUGH ITS COMMISSIONER & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 964

The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL claiming "illegal establishments" were being run on certain land, after noting that the petitioner had filed the plea within 10 days of filing his representation with the MCD on July 23 without waiting for a response.

Delhi High Court Flags Trend Of Using Children To Commit Crimes Like Drugs & Arms Distribution, Denies Anticipatory Bail To Accused

Case title: Narender v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 965

The Delhi High Court denied anticipatory bail to a man accused of using a child for transporting 450 quarters of illicit liquor.

In doing so, Justice Girish Kathpalia said,

“Over a period of time, it is being observed that criminals use children to commit wide ranging crimes, involving not just liquor and drugs peddling but also arms/ammunitions and even acts of extreme violence, which is leading the society to consider re-fixing the age of juvenility.”

Compulsory Retirement Over Conviction 'Disproportionate' When Court Released Employee On Probation: Delhi High Court

Case title: Satya Pal Singh v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 966

The Delhi High Court has reinstated an Air Force Accounts Auditor who was compulsorily retired from service following his conviction for dowry harassment under Section 498A of IPC.

Family Disapproval Can't Curtail Autonomy Of Consenting Adults To Choose Life Partners: Delhi High Court

Title: PRINCE TYAGI AND ANR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 967

The Delhi High Court has ruled that family disapproval cannot curtail the autonomy of two consenting adults to choose life partners.

“The right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and to live together in peace is a facet of their personal liberty, privacy, and dignity protected under Article 21. Family disapproval cannot curtail that autonomy,” Justice Sanjeev Narula said.

Company Can Be Blacklisted From Future Tenders If Employee Files Forged Documents In Bid: Delhi High Court

Case title: CCS Computers Pvt Ltd v. NDMC

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 968

The Delhi High Court has held that a company can be blacklisted from future tenders if its employee, authorised to submit the bid forges the documents submitted, irrespective of the company management's knowledge regarding such forgery.

Choice To Marry Across Lines Of Faith Is Individual's Autonomy, Immune From External Veto: Delhi High Court

Title: MOHAMMAD SHAHNOOR MANSOORI v. STATE OF DELHI THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 969

The Delhi High Court has observed that the choice to marry across lines of faith is the autonomy of the individual and is immune from external veto.

Rape Victim's Refusal To Undergo Medical Exam Doesn't Affect Prosecution Case At Stage Of Framing Charges: Delhi High Court

Case title: Sachindra Priyadarshi v. State Of NCT Of Delhi Through The Chief Secretary

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 970

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that where a rape survivor has given detailed accounts of the alleged sexual assaults by the accused, here mere refusal to undergo internal medical examination doesn't materially affect prosecution case at the stage of framing charges.

Continuing Physical Relations On Promise To Marry Despite Family's Caste-Objections Shows Dishonesty, Constitutes Rape: Delhi High Court

Title: STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) v. GAURANG KADYAN

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 971

The Delhi High Court has observed that continuing physical relations with a woman knowing that the marriage is impossible, based on a false promise to marry from the inception, would constitute the offence of rape.

Consideration Paid To Foreign Company For Use Of Computer Software Not 'Royalty', No TDS Liability: Delhi High Court

Case title: The Commissioner Of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 v. Xiocom (Nz) Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 972

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that consideration paid by an Indian entity to a foreign company for the resale/ use of their computer software is not 'royalty'.

Delhi Judicial Services Rules | Waitlisted Candidate Can't Join Service Even If Appointed Candidate Resigns After Filling Of Vacancies: High Court

Case title: Aadya Antya v. High Court Of Delhi Through Registrar General

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 973

The Delhi High Court has held that in terms of the Delhi Judicial Services Rules 1970, if all the vacancies of judicial officers are initially filled and subsequently, an appointed judge resigns, then such vacancies are treated as fresh vacancies which cannot be filled by a candidate next-in-line in the waitlist.

[Section 223 BNSS] Cognizance On ED Complaint Can't Be Taken Without Hearing Accused: Delhi High Court

Title: Lakshay Vij v. ED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 974

The Delhi High Court has observed that special court cannot take cognizance of the complaint filed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) without giving opportunity of hearing to the accused.

Merely Because Deceased Was Seen Crying Doesn't Prove She Was Harassed For Dowry: Delhi High Court In Dowry Death Case

Title: GAINDA LAL v. STATE & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 975

While upholding discharge of a husband and his family members in a dowry death and cruelty case, the Delhi High Court has observed merely because the deceased was seen crying cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment.

Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Ask J&K Govt To Include 'Dragon Boat Racing' In Khelo India Water Sports Festival

Title: DRAGON BOAT INDIA AND TRADITIONAL SPORTS FEDERATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 976

The Delhi High Court has directed the Union Government to ask the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to include “Dragon Boat Racing” as a competitive sport in the Khelo India Water Sports Festival, scheduled to be held from August 21-23 at Dal Lake, Srinagar.

Post-Termination Restrictive Covenants In Employment Contracts Are Void U/S 27 Of Contract Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Neosky India Limited & Anr. v. Mr. Nagendran Kandasamy & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 977

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that post-service restrictive covenants in employment contracts, which operate after cessation of employment, are void and are not enforceable under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (“Contract Act”) and violate Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The court vacated the injunction granted in an application under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”), which restrained the Respondents from engaging in a competing business post-termination of their employment agreements.

Delhi High Court Flags 'Serious Disputes' In Functioning Of Equestrian Federation Of India, Stays Extraordinary General Meeting

Title: RAJASTHAN EQUESTRAIN ASSOCIATION v. EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 978

The Delhi High Court has restrained the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) from holding Extra-Ordinary General Meeting (EOGM) on Sunday, citing “serious disputes” in the overall functioning of the Federation.

“It is evident that there are serious disputes about virtually every facet of the functioning and current state of affairs of the EFI,” Justice Sachin Datta said in an order passed on August 13.

Delay Is No Defence Against Action For Infringement & Passing Off Where Adoption Of Trademark Is Dishonest: Delhi High Court

Case title: Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited v. Sauss Home Products Private Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 979

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that delay by a registered trademark holder in prosecuting alleged infringement is not a defence available to the Defendant, where it is evident that Defendant's use of impugned trademark was dishonest/ fraudulent.

Timeline Prescribed For Filing Statement Of Defence Under Rule 18(3) Of Indian Council Of Arbitration Rules Is Directory In Nature: Delhi HC

Case Title: ANEJA CONSTRUCTIONS (INDIA) versus DOOSAN POWER SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 980

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Jain has held that the timeline prescribed under Indian Council of Arbitration Rules, 2024 for filing a Statement of Defence by the respondent is directory in nature and can be extended by the Arbitral Tribunal if a sufficient cause is established.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside CIC Order Directing Disclosure Of Information On PM Modi's Degree

Title: University of Delhi v. Neeraj and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012

The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Delhi University (DU) to disclos information with respect to the bachelor's degree of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Justice Sachin Datta allowed DU's plea filed in 2017 against CIC's order which allowed inspection of records of the students who had passed BA programme in 1978, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is also stated to have cleared the examination. The order was stayed on the first date of hearing on January 24 in 2017.

No Right To Ante-Dating Of Promotion Merely Because Post Remained Unfilled Despite Availability Of Eligible Candidate: Delhi High Court

Case title: Bhupinder Kumar Malik v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1013

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that an employee cannot claim right to antedating of promotion merely because he was promoted at a later point in time, keeping the vacant post unfilled without providing reasons.

Import Of Counterfeit iPhones Dilutes Brand Equity, Affects Consumer Welfare: Delhi High Court In Customs Fraud Case

Case title: M/S ECG Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1014

The Delhi High Court has expressed concern over alleged import of counterfeit iPhones, stating that such imports not only affect brand owners but also adversely affect consumer welfare— as old and used products could get re-branded as new ones.

'Greedy Investors Pumping Money Into Unsustainable Ventures Distort Market Balance, Must Be Prepared For Consequences': Delhi HC In Cheating Case

Case title: Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1015

The Delhi High Court has held that investors, who gamble their money with impractical promises of “unbelievably high returns”, must own their risks instead of running to the State and crying foul when they face loss.

Woman's Right To Reside In Shared Household Can't Act As Sword To Create Proprietary Rights: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1016

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a woman's right to reside in a shared household under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act cannot act as a sword to create proprietary rights.

Domestic Violence Offences With Intention To Kill Must Be Viewed With Seriousness, Marriage Not Mitigating Factor: Delhi High Court

Title: SUSHANT RAJ v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1017

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the offences of domestic violence with the intention to kill must be viewed with seriousness and marital relationship is not a mitigating factor in such cases.

'Total Non-Application Of Mind': Delhi High Court On Dept's Rejection Of Trader's Plea For GST Cancellation, Subsequent Cancellation Order

Case title: Manish Goel HUF v. The Commissioner Delhi Goods And Services Tax Trade And Tax Department New Delhi And Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1018

The Delhi High Court expressed its disapproval with the GST Department for rejecting a trader's application for retrospective cancellation of his GST registration on medical grounds, and later cancelling his registration with retrospective effect.

Govt Notifications Imposing Restrictions On Usage In Contracts For Supply Of Gas Are Laws Under Article 12, Must Be Complied With: Delhi HC

Case Name: Gujarat State Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd. v. M/S Gail (India) Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1019

The Delhi High Court, while dismissing a Section 34 petition, observed that the five contracts entered into between the parties were subject to the restrictions imposed by the Government. By providing the gas at a subsidised price, the Government has the authority to regulate the use of such gas.

Inherent Jurisdiction U/S 528 BNSS Can Be Exercised To Prevent Abuse Of Process, Not To Reopen Concluded Adjudication: Delhi High Court

Case title: Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1020

The Delhi High Court has held that inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 are available to it even if the bail plea preferred before it stands disposed of.

Department Can't Withhold Refund In Terms Of S.54(11) GST Act Unless Appeal Against Refund Order Is Filed: Delhi High Court

Case title: Omega QMS v. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1021

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the power to withhold refund under Section 54(11) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 cannot be exercised by the Department in absence of an appeal against the refund order.

'Mere Prospect Of Filing Review Not Grounds To Hold Seized Goods': Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release Woman's Gold Jewellery

Case title: Ashiya v. Commissioner of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1022

The Delhi High Court has granted relief to a Muslim woman whose gold bangles were seized by the Customs Department on return from Mecca and were withheld despite an order of the Adjudicating Authority, directing release.

Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Under UAPA For Supplying Weapons To 'Bambiha' Gang, Says Arrest Not Illegal

Case title: Lakhveer Singh v. NIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1023

The Delhi High Court denied bail to a UAPA accused, booked for supplying arms and ammunition to the Bambiha Gang, in furtherance of alleged conspiracy to commit terrorist activities in the country, particularly the national capital.

Mere Non-Filing Of FSL Report At Time Of Filing Chargesheet Doesn't Entitle NDPS Accused To Default Bail: Delhi High Court Reiterates

Case title: Rahimullah Rahimi v. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1024

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that the non-filing of Forensic Science Laboratory Report in a drugs case does not vitiate the chargesheet and the accused cannot claim it as a ground to seek default bail.

Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction Of Father For Repeatedly Raping 9-Yr-Old Daughter, Says Witnesses' Credibility Unshaken

Title: X v. STATE (NCTD) AND ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1025

The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and 10 year sentence of a father for raping his 9 year old minor daughter repeatedly every night in 2017.

Conviction Of A Single Accused For Gang Rape Is Permissible If Other Accused Couldn't Be Apprehended: Delhi High Court

Case title: Praveen @ Lallu v. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1026

The Delhi High Court has held that a single person can be convicted for the offence of gang rape punishable under Section 376DA IPC (Section 70 BNS), even if the co-offender manages to escape trial.

Delhi High Court Upholds Vires Of S.193(9) BNSS On Further Probe, Says It Does Not 'Camouflage' Accused's Right To Default Bail

Title: YASH MISHRA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1027

The Delhi High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 193(9) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, saying that the provision does not act as a camouflage to an accused's right to default bail.

Delhi High Court Grants John Doe Order Awarding Dynamic Interim Injunction Protecting Tata Pay Trademark

Case title: Tata Sons Pvt Ltd v. John Doe

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1028

The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim dynamic injunction, protecting the trademark of Tata Group's payment solutions platform Tata Pay.

'Can't Turn Blind Eye To Reformative Purpose Of Imprisonment': Delhi High Court Reduces 3-Month Sentence Awarded To POCSO Convict

Case title: Deepak Sain v. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1029

The Delhi High Court has reduced the sentence of 3 months imprisonment imposed upon a POCSO convict after 10 years of trial, stating that it cannot “uproot” him from the society after a decade.

GST Dept Can't Probe Misuse Of GSTIN By Third Party, Power Lies With Economic Offences Wing: Delhi High Court

Case title: Samyak Jain v. Superintendent (Adjudication), Central Gst Delhi & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1030

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that allegations of misuse of a trader's GST identification number by a third party cannot be probed by the GST Department.

No Injunction Can Be Granted Against Defendant Using Their Name As Trademark Even In Cases Of Passing Off: Delhi High Court

Case title: Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1031

The Delhi High Court has held that “no injunction can be granted even in the case of passing off against a defendant, restraining the use by her, or him, of her, or his, own name.”

Dismissal Of Plea U/S 8 Of A&C Act Amounts To Res Judicata; S.11 Court Cannot Refer Parties To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

Case Name: Surender Bajaj v. Dinesh Chand Gupta and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1032

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, while dismissing a Section 11 petition under the A&C Act, observed that dismissing a Section 8 application under the A&C Act amounts to res judicata. The Section 11 Court cannot refer the parties to Arbitration if the order dismissing Section 8 is not set aside or interfered with.

Use Of Full Name Not Mandatory To Avail Protection U/S 35 Trademarks Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1033

The Delhi High Court has held that the benefit of Section 35 of the Trade Marks Act 1999, which proscribes any injunction being granted against the use by the defendants of his/ her name as a trademark, is not restricted to use of full name by the defendant.

Delhi High Court Rejects Centre's Plea Against Direction To Grant Promotion To IRS Officer Sameer Wankhede If Found Eligible

Title: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS v. SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1034

The Delhi High Court has dismissed Central Government's plea against a direction to grant promotion to IRS officer Sameer Wankhede if he is found suitable by the UPSC.

'Common Area Maintenance Charge' Paid To Mall By Showroom Is Not Rent, Not Liable To TDS U/S 194-I Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Commissioner Of Income Tax-Tds-01 v. Diamond Tree

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1035

The Delhi High Court has held that the Common Area Maintenance Charge (CAM) paid by a showroom owner to the mall does not qualify as 'rent' and is not liable to TDS under Section 194I of the Income Tax Act 1961.

Hindu Marriage Can't Be Dissolved By Signing Marriage Dissolution Deed In Front Of Villagers: Delhi High Court

Title: ASHWANI KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1036

The Delhi High Court has held that a Hindu marriage cannot be dissolved by signing a marriage dissolution deed in front of villagers or “social people and witnesses.”

Delhi High Court Rules In Favour Of Haveli Restaurants, Asks 'Punjabi Haveli' To Remove Ads From Third Party Websites

Title: HAVELI RESTAURANT AND RESORTS LTD v. ADISON RESORTS LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1037

Ruling in favour of famous Haveli Restaurant and Resorts, the Delhi High Court has recently asked a Ludhiana based company running under the name “Punjabi Haveli” to refrain from using “Haveli” marks and to remove its advertisements or listings from third party websites.

Matrimonial Dispute Is No Grounds To Deny Family Pension To Wife Upon Husband's Death: Delhi High Court

Case title: Soni Devi v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1038

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a wife cannot be denied family pension upon her husband's death, merely because they had an ongoing matrimonial dispute.

'American Ganja' Being More Expensive Than 'Indian Ganja' Doesn't Increase Culpability Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Abdul Malik Alias Parvez v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1039

“Merely because American ganja is more expensive than Indian ganja, culpability does not increase in the former,” the Delhi High Court has held.

Working “For” An Organisation Cannot Be Equated With Working “In” It For Eligibility In Recruitment Process: Delhi High Court

Case title: XX v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1040

The Delhi High Court has held that working 'for' an organization cannot be equated with working 'in' an organization”, and 'employment' and 'empanelment' are to be treated differently when interpreting recruitment rules.

Mandatory To Implead Alleged Paramour Of Spouse When Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Adultery: Delhi High Court

Case title: Tanvi Chaturvedi v. Smita Shrivastava & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1041

The Delhi High Court has held that it is not only necessary but mandatory to implead the alleged paramour of one's spouse when seeking divorce on the ground of adultery.

Students Contesting DUSU Polls Need Not Deposit Rs. 1 Lakh Bond: Delhi High Court Clarifies

Title: ANJALI & ANR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1042

The Delhi High Court has clarified that the students contesting the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) Elections, 2025, need not deposit the bond of Rs. 1 lakh, which was imposed as a precondition by the varsity.

Husband's Home Loan & Responsibility Towards Parents Can Be Considered While Determining Maintenance: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ankush Kumar Parashar v. Sapna @ Mona & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1043

The Delhi High Court, while reducing the quantum of maintenance granted to a man's wife and child, took into consideration his financial obligations like home loan and responsibility towards his parents.

Disability Attributable To Military Service; Burden To Rebut Lies On Employer : Delhi HC

Case. : Union Of India And Ors vs Ex Wo Om Prakash Retd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1044

A Division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that a member of the armed forces is presumed to be in sound health at the time of entry into service; therefore, if a disability such as Primary Hypertension arises during service and was not noted at entry, it is presumed to be attributable to or aggravated by military service. The burden lies on the employer to rebut this presumption with clear reasons. Further the disability pension being a beneficial provision, must be interpreted liberally.

Accused Seeks Quashing Of POCSO Case Saying Victim Would Face Social Stigma, Delhi High Court Imposes Rs. 10K Costs

Title: ALTAF v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1045

The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 10,000 costs on an accused who sought quashing of a POCSO case registered against him on the ground that it was in the interest of the minor victim who would otherwise would face social stigma.

Omission To Act When Someone Else Commits An Offence In Furtherance Of Common Intention Attracts S.34 IPC; Presence Not Necessary: Delhi HC

Case title: Ashok Babu v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1046

The Delhi High Court has held that merely standing guard or omitting to act when someone else commits an offence in furtherance of their common intention would be sufficient to attract liability under Section 34 IPC.

Delhi High Court Declines Pleas Of Candidates Excluded From Supreme Court Junior Court Assistant Recruitment

Case title: Pramiti Basu v. Secretary General Supreme Court Of India (and batch)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1047

The Delhi High Court dismissed a batch of pleas filed by candidates aspiring for the post of Junior Court Assistant (JCA) at the Supreme Court, over their exclusion from the recruitment process.

'Men-Only' Reservation In Air Force Flying Posts Unjustified; Eligible Women Must Be Appointed: Delhi High Court

Title: MS. ARCHANA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1048

The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Government to appoint a woman candidate on the post of Air Force Pilot, observing that we are no longer in the times in which discrimination could be made between male and female candidates for entering into the Armed Forces.

Delhi High Court Blocks Fraudulent Websites Collecting Money Under 'Burger King' Trademark

Case title: Burger King Corporation vs. Swapnil Patil & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049

The Delhi High Court has observed that the illegal use of “Burger King” trademark or collecting money under the name of the American multinational fast food restaurant chain is not permitted.

Delhi Riots: High Court Denies Bail To Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam And 7 Others In UAPA Case

Title: Sharjeel Imam v. State & other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1050

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail pleas filed by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and seven other accused persons in the 2020 Delhi riots "larger conspiracy" case.

A division bench of Justice Naveen Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur pronounced the verdict.

Delhi High Court Stays Advertisement For Appointing Only Retired Public Prosecutors As APPs

Title: VIKAS VERMA v. DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION AND ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1051

The Delhi High Court has stayed an advertisement restricting appointment of only retired public prosecutors as Assistant Public Prosecutors (APPs).

Justice Sachin Datta passed the order on a plea filed by one Vikas Verma challenging the advertisement issued by the Delhi Government's Directorate of Prosecution on August 22.

Non-Impleadment Of Firm In Cheque Bounce Case Is Curable Defect: Delhi High Court

Case title: Himanshu v. TCNS Clothing Co. Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1052

The Delhi High Court has held that non-impleadment of a firm in cheque bounce case instituted against its partner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a curable defect.

Thus allowing a complainant/ payee to amend the pleadings subject to ₹35,000/- cost, Justice Amit Mahajan observed,

“This Court is of the view that the non-impleadment of the firm is a curable defect...the stage of effective trial has not commenced yet. The accused has not yet faced the process of recording of plea, evidence, or cross-examination. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that permitting an amendment to implead the partnership firm would cause prejudice to the petitioner. On the contrary, refusal to allow such an amendment would result in stifling of proceedings on a mere technicality, thereby defeating the object of Section 138 of the NI Act.”

Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Cheating Businessman By Impersonating Amit Shah's Nephew

Title: AJAY KUMAR NAYYAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1053

The Delhi High Court has denied bail to a man accused of cheating a businessman of Rs. 3.90 crores by impersonating as the nephew of Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

Justice Girish Kathpalia passed the order considering the nature and expanse of the allegations, coupled with the pending consideration of amendment in charge to include offences of forging documents punishable with life imprisonment and also keeping in mind the antecedents.

Significant Increase In Husband's Income, Cost Of Living Valid Factors To Enhance Wife's Maintenance: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1054

The Delhi High Court has ruled that rise in the income of the husband, coupled with the significant increase in his cost of living, constitute a “clear change in circumstances”, warranting enhancement of the amount of maintenance to the wife.

State Can't Curtail Reformative Provisions Like Parole, Furlough In Name Of Disciplining Prison Inmates: Delhi High Court

Case title: Chetan v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1055

The Delhi High Court frowned upon the Delhi government for withdrawing a notification which prescribed that a punishment of warning imposed upon a prisoner shall not stand in his way of seeking furlough.

Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that the said withdrawal was a “regressive step”, not consonant with the concept of reformation of the convict.

Delhi High Court Restrains “Vivoline” In Trademark Infringement Suit By US-Based Automobile Lubricant Manufacturer 'Valvoline'

Case title: VGP IPCO LLC & Anr v. Mr Suresh Kumar Trading As Om Shiv Lubricants & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1056

The Delhi High Court has granted a permanent injunction in favour of US-based automotive lubricant manufacturer Valvoline in its trademark infringement suit against an Indian company selling similar products under the trade name 'VIVOLINE'.

Delhi High Court Upholds CRPF's Decision To Reject Company's Bid In Tender For Procuring Sniper Rifles, Ammunitions

Title: STUMPP SCHUELE LEWIS MACHINE TOOLS PVT LTD v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1057

The Delhi High Court has upheld the decision of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) rejecting bid of a company in a tender for procuring 200 Sniper Rifles along with day scope and 20,000 Lapua Magnum Ammunitions.

A division bench comprising Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that matters relating to tender has to be minimal and to be exercised only if the Court finds that the decision of the tendering authority is arbitrary or whimsical or unreasonable.

Govt Is Promoting Start-Up Culture, Customs Should Be Sensitive In Proceedings Against Them: Delhi High Court

Case title: Mitraj Business Private Limited Through Its Director Mr Manoj Kankane v. Union Of India Represented By The Secretary Ministry Of Finance & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1058

The Delhi High Court has asked the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs to consider whether some “preferential treatment” ought to be given to Start-ups and MSMEs in terms of timelines, warehousing and provisional release in cases of misdeclaration of goods, especially in case of low value consignments.

[S.138 NI Act] Cheque Bounce Complaint Can Be Filed If Payment Is Not Made Within 15 Days: Delhi High Court

Case title: Rama Oberoi v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1059

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a cheque drawer's contention that Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act proceeding initiated against him is premature, since it was filed before the '45 days statutory notice period'.

Joining Within Extended Period Entitles Employee To Seniority From Original Appointment Date: Delhi HC

Case Name : Dr. Punita K. Sodhi vs UOI & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1060

A Division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain held that if an appointee joins service within the period extended by a competent authority or by court orders, such joining is deemed to be within the stipulated time in the offer of appointment, and seniority must be reckoned from the original appointment date without any depression in seniority, along with consequential notional benefits.

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Castrol Over '3X Protection' Trademark On Engine Oil Packaging

Case title: Castrol Limited v. Sanjay Sonavane

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1061

The Delhi High Court has restrained one Sanjay Sonavane from issuing any groundless threats of Trademark/ Copyright infringement to Castrol Limited, which uses '3X Protection' mark on its engine oil packaging, over purported infringement of the former's 3P Marks.

Arbitrator's Decision To Defer Compliance With Essential Pre-Condition In Agreement Amounted To Rewriting Contract, Vitiated It: Delhi HC

Case Title – BHEL v. Xiamen Longking Bulk Material Science and Engineering Co.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1062

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh while allowing a petition under Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act (“ACA”) observed that when the contract required the bidder to establish an office in India as a pre-requisite to performance, the decision by the Arbitrator holding that compliance could be deferred, amounted to rewriting the contract. Such a holding violated fundamental policy of Indian law and the award was liable to be set aside.

Whistleblowing Activities Don't Make Employee 'Immune' From Transfer: Delhi High Court

Case title: Rahul Solanki v. CRPF

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1063

The Delhi High Court has held that an internal whistleblower in an organisation cannot forever immunize himself against transfer, by merely leveling allegations of vengeance against the officials.

Passenger's Non-Appearance For Appraising Seized Goods Doesn't Stop Limitation For Issuing SCN: Delhi High Court Tells Customs

Case title: Gurpreet Singh Sonik v. Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1064

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the Customs Department cannot exceed the limitation period prescribed for issuance of show cause notice after detention of goods, merely on the ground that the person from whom goods were seized did not appear for appraisement.

TDS Default | Higher Compounding Fees On Second Plea Not Applicable If First Application Was Rejected: Delhi High Court

Case title: Sangeet Seth v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1065

The Delhi High Court has held that the higher rate of 5% interest to be paid when an assessee moves second plea for compounding the offence of failure to pay Tax Deductible at Source (TDS), is not applicable if their first plea was simply rejected.

Wife Of Judgment-Debtor Not Stranger To Decree, Can't Invoke Order XXI Rule 99 CPC: Delhi High Court

Case title: Leelawati v. Rajeev Kumar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1066

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Order XXI Rule 99 of CPC cannot be invoked by a Judgment-Debtor, including their spouse, since it is only meant to enable a 'stranger' to the suit to seek relief.

Delhi Riots: High Court Denies Bail To Tasleem Ahmed In UAPA Larger Conspiracy Case

Title: Tasleem Ahmed v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1067

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail plea filed by Tasleem Ahmed, accused in the UAPA case alleging larger conspiracy in the commission of 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Independent Panel Of Arbitrators Not Curated By Either Party Cannot Be Challenged On Grounds Of Impartiality: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s. KNR Tirumala Infra Pvt. Ltd. versus National Highways Authority of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1068

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that when the panel of arbitrators from which appointments are to be made is broad-based, comprising retired Supreme Court Judges and other eminent officials, and is independent, not controlled by any party, the other party cannot refuse to abide by the institutional rules it has consciously agreed to, on the ground that the panel is not impartial.

Delhi High Court Denies Relief To Man Convicted For Life For Abducting Foreign Nationals To Pressurise Govt To Release Jailed Militants

Title: NASIR MOHD SODOZEY @ AFTAAB AHMED @ ABDULLAH v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1069

The Delhi High Court has denied relief to a man convicted for life in 2002 for being part of a “terrorist conspiracy” of abducting four foreign nationals with the objective of pressuring the Indian Government to release jailed militants.

Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release Padma Bhushan Awardee's Imported Artwork Amidst Dispute Over Valuation

Case title: Uday Jain & Anr. v. Additional Commissioner Customs Air Cargo And Import & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1070

The Delhi High Court has ordered the Customs Department to release the artwork of Padma Bhushan awardee Late BC Sanyal, seized amid a dispute surrounding its valuation.

Customs Broker's Failure To Oversee Warehousing Of Re-Export Goods Leading To Sale In Local Market Is 'A Clear Infraction': Delhi HC

Case title: Commissioner Of Customs (Airport And General) v. M/S Jaiswal Import Cargo Services Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1071

The Delhi High Court has held that a Customs Broker must diligently perform its responsibilities under the 2018 Licensing Regulations however, any failure thereof must be met with a proportionate punishment.

Educated Woman In Relationship Despite Knowing Partner's Marital Status Can't Be Said To Be Exploited In Law: Delhi High Court

Title: ANKIT RAJ v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1072

The Delhi High Court has observed that when an independent and educated woman willingly continues to engage in a romantic relationship even with knowledge of her partner's marital status, it cannot be said that she was misled or exploited in law.

Delhi High Court Orders Counselling Of POCSO Victim Raped By Elder Brother, Orders Disbursement Of ₹13 Lakh Compensation

Title: ASHISH v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1073

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) to appoint a support person and provide counselling to a POCSO victim and her family in a case where she was repeatedly raped by her biological elder brother when she was a 15 year old minor, leading to her pregnancy which was later aborted.

Education, High Post Don't Protect Women From Sexual Harassment At Workplace, Mindset Of Men Unchanged Despite Strict Laws: Delhi High Court

Title: ASIF HAMID KHAN v. STATE & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1074

Citing Shakespeare, the Delhi High Court recently observed that despite stringent law and repeated lamentation about gender neutrality and equality, the psychology and mindset of men in workplace where sexual harassment continues to haunt women has remained unchanged, especially when it involves “Power-Dynamics.”

CESTAT Can't Admit Appeal Without Pre-Deposit But High Court Can Waive It In 'Rare' Circumstances: Delhi High Court

Case title: M/S Tecmax Electronics v. The Principal Commissioner Of Customs (Import)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1075

The Delhi High Court has held that the provision of pre-deposit for preferring an appeal before the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal is mandatory and the forum has no power to admit any appeal without the same.

High Court Asks Delhi Govt To Consider How Citizens Will Know About Availability Of Beds, Doctors In Emergency Through HMIS Software

Case title: Court On Its Own Motion v. Union Of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1076

The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi Government to consider how the citizens here will know about the availability of beds and doctors in emergency situations through Health Management Information System (HMIS) software.

Wife Can't Be Denied Maintenance Merely Because She Filed Application After Husband's Divorce Plea: Delhi High Court

Title: SG v. DG

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1077

The Delhi High Court has said that a wife cannot be denied maintenance merely because she files an application for such a relief only after the husband files a divorce petition.

Hindu Marriage Act | Presumption Of Valid Marriage Doesn't Always Diminish Merely Due To No Direct Evidence Of 'Saptapadi': Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1078

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the presumption of a valid marriage is not diminished simply because there is no direct or positive proof of the ceremony of Saptapadi having taken place between the parties.

SFIO Probe Against Company Citing Public Interest 'Extremely Serious Action', Due Application Of Mind Must: Delhi High Court

Title: NITA PURI v. UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1079

The Delhi High Court has observed that Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) investigation against a company citing public interest is an extremely serious statutory action and an order to that effect must reflect due application of mind.

Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Against Agniveer Personnel Over Discovery Of Ammunition In Flight Baggage

Case title: Ritesh v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1080

The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR lodged against an Agniveer— attached with a unit of the Indian Army, over discovery of live ammunition from his baggage while travelling from Delhi to Kolkata.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Against 'Unchecked Political Expenditure'; Asks Litigant To Approach Centre

Title: Aakash Goel v. Election Commission of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1081

The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL highlighting the issue of unchecked and excessive political expenditure, misuse of government machinery during elections, lack of voter awareness and need for electoral reforms.

Grandchildren Are Excluded From Deceased Muslim Man's Estate Only If He Has Surviving Son/Daughter: Delhi High Court

Case title: Hamzah Muneer & Anr v. Mohd Aqil & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1082

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the grandchildren of a Muslim man are excluded from his estate only if, upon his demise, he is survived by a son or daughter.

Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Interim Injunction Protecting Designer Arjan Dugal's Clothing Label From Infringement

Case title: Arjan Dugal v. Shubham Gandhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1083

The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to a city-based clothing label run by designer Arjan Dugal, in his suit filed against a former employee over alleged infringement of his trade dress, original artistic work.

Absence Of Word 'Seat' Does Not Oust Court's Jurisdiction Conferred By Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SNS ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. versus M/S HARIOM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1084

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that absence of the word 'seat' does not strip the court of its exclusive jurisdiction to decide disputes arising out of an arbitration agreement.

Delhi High Court Grants Maintenance To Wife Earning Over ₹1 Lakh Per Month, Cites 'Stark Financial Disparity' With Husband's Income

Case title: SB v. HB

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1085

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a wife cannot be denied maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 merely because she is highly qualified and employed.

Employees' Contributions Must Be Paid By Due Date Under ESI/EPF Act, Not Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Woodland (Aero Club) Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 49(1), New Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1086

The Delhi High Court has held that an employer can claim deduction of employees' contributions towards Provident Fund or Employer's State Insurance Fund, held by it in trust, only if it deposits these amounts on or before the statutory due date prescribed under the relevant labour law.

Students Suicide Becoming More Frequent, Functional Anti-Ragging Helpline Utmost Necessity: Delhi High Court

Title: AMAN SATYA KACHROO TRUST v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND ORS and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1087

Observing that students suicide are becoming more frequent, the Delhi High Court has emphasised that a proper, functional and effective Anti-Ragging Helpline is an immediate and utmost necessity.

'Procedure Is Handmaiden Of Justice But It Can't Be Defeated In The Name Of Substantive Rights': Delhi High Court

Case title: ICAR National Research Center Of Plant Biotechnology v. Azad Singh Dagar Prop M/S Servitor Intelligence

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1088

The Delhi High Court observed that while procedure is handmaiden of justice and technicalities must not be allowed to infringe upon substantive rights of parties however, the procedural requirements cannot be “trashed” in the name of substantive rights.

Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Says Unauthorised Exploitation Violates Right To Privacy

Case title: AISHWARYA RAI BACHCHAN v/s AISHWARYAWORLD.COM & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1089

The Delhi High Court has protected the personality rights of bollywood actress Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, observing that unauthorized exploitation of personal attributes of an individual violates right to privacy and undermines the right to live with dignity.

Arbitration Clause In Loan Agreement Becomes Incorporated In Deeds Of Guarantee When Both Form Part Of Single Transaction: Delhi HC

Case Title – Intec Capital Limited v Shekhar Chand Jain

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1090

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has observed that contemporaneously executed Loan Agreement and Deeds of Guarantee, where the intent of the parties to incorporate the Loan Agreement into the Deeds of Guarantee is clear, the Guarantor although a non-signatory to the Loan Agreement, becomes bound by the arbitration clause in the Loan Agreement.

GST Department Can't Access Computer Device Of Any Lawyer Without His Presence Or Consent: Delhi High Court

Case title: Puneet Batra v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1091

The Delhi High Court has cautioned the GST Department against accessing the computer device of any advocate, in his absence or without his consent.

Films That Ridicule Religions Or Incite Hatred Can't Be Granted Certification In Secular Society: Delhi High Court

Title: SHYAM BHARTEEY v. CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION REGIONAL OFFICER DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1092

The Delhi High Court has ruled that in a diverse and secular society, certification cannot be granted to a film that ridicules religions, incites hatred or threatens social harmony.

High Court Rejects Plea For FIR Against Delhi Art Gallery Over Exhibition Of 'Offensive' MF Husain Paintings On Hindu Deities

Title: AMITA SACHDEVA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1093

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging a trial court order refusing to register an FIR against the Delhi Art Gallery and its Directors over exhibition of two allegedly offensive paintings of Indian painter MF Husain on Hindu deities.

Delhi High Court Protects Actor Abhishek Bachchan's Personality Rights; Restrains Unauthorised Use Of His Name, Image Or Voice

Title: ABHISHEK BACHCHAN v. THE BOLLYWOOD TEE SHOP & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1094

The Delhi High Court has passed an interim order protecting the personality rights of Bollywood actor Abhishek Bachchan by restraining various entities from misusing his image, name, voice or other elements of his persona for monetary gains without his consent or authorization.

Delhi High Court Orders Fresh Framing Of Charges Against Air India Flight Passenger Over Aggressive Behaviour

Title: HARVEY MANN v. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1095

The Delhi High Court has asked the trial court here to pass fresh order on charge against a man accused of displaying aggressive and abusive behaviour in an Air India flight.

Homemaker's Efforts Help Husband Build Assets, But No Law To Back Her Ownership Rights: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1096

The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no statutory basis at present recognising the contributions of homemakers in taking care of the household, family and children, “which remain hidden and downplayed,” for making any determination on their ownership rights, or even to quantify the value of such contributions.

Upgradation Of Telecom Infrastructure For Better Connectivity Integral To Delhi Airport Metro Line: High Court

Case title: Crest Digitel Private Limited v. DMRC & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1097

The Delhi High Court has emphasized that upgradation of telecom infrastructure is of paramount importance and is an integral part of the Delhi Airport Metro Express Line, a lifeline for Delhi travellers connecting IGI Airport to New Delhi Railway Station.

Not Mandatory For Two-Member Bench Of NCDRC To Be Comprised Of A Judicial Member: Delhi High Court

Title: NAVIN M. RAHEJA & ANR v. DINESH GOYAL & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1098

The Delhi High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for a two member bench of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) to necessarily comprise of a judicial member.

Delay In Trial Cannot Itself Be Grounds For Bail In Grave Offences When Evidence Links Accused To Crime: Delhi High Court

Case title: Vishan Singh v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1099

The Delhi High Court has held that the right to speedy trial of an accused, though sacrosanct, cannot be stretched in cases where there is overwhelming evidence of guilt against the accused.

Delhi High Court Upholds Dental Council Regulation Mandating State Govt NOC For Establishing New Colleges

Case title: Mamtaz Foundation Through Its Director v. Dental Council of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1100

The Delhi High Court has upheld the vires of Clause 6(2)(e) of the Dental Council of India (Establishment of New Dental Colleges, Opening of New or Higher Course of Study or Training and increase of Admission Capacity in Dental Colleges) Regulations, 2006— which relates to permission for establishment of new dental college, new courses of study, etc.

Debarment Order Can't Be Extended To Other Group Companies Without Individual Opportunity Of Hearing: Delhi High Court

Case title: Cembond Constructions Pvt Ltd v. NTPC

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1101

The Delhi High Court has held that a debarment order issued by one entity cannot be extended to other group companies without any independent opportunity of hearing through a separate show cause notice.

Incorrectly Declaring Indian Goods As 'Made In China' Contrary To Public Interest: Delhi High Court Denies Relief In Customs Case

Case title: Sonaram Bagadaram Mali v. The Commissioner Of Custom & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1102

The Delhi High Court has held that misleading consumers about locally manufactured goods by labelling them as 'Made in China' or in some other foreign country is contrary to public interest.

No Law Providing For Rights Of Viable Foetus If Born Alive, Lawmakers Must Address Issue: Delhi High Court

Title: XX v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1103

The law must clearly delineate the balance between maternal autonomy and foetal rights at the stage of viability, the Delhi High Court observed.

Allowing Retention Of Seized Property Without Strictly Following PMLA Undermines Purpose Of Procedural Safeguards: Delhi High Court

Title: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT THROUGH ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DELHI v. RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1104

The Delhi High Court ruled that allowing retention of seized property without strict adherence to PMLA provisions would amount to a violation of the legislative mandate of the enactment and would undermine the very purpose of incorporating procedural safeguards therein.

Consenting Adults Can Be In Relationship Even If Either Person Is Married, Judges Can't Impose Personal Morality Or Outdated Views: Delhi HC

Title: GAUTAM SHARMA v. GOVT.OF NCT,DELHI & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1105

The Delhi High Court has observed that the relationship between two consenting adults, even when one is married, cannot be approached by Courts with an outdated lens, adding that judges cannot impose their personal morality upon such individuals.

Sharp Decline In Husband's Declared Income Indicates Attempt To Understate Financial Capacity In Maintenance Cases: Delhi High Court

Case title: MV v. DS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1106

The Delhi High Court upheld a family court order taking into account two years old Income Tax Returns of a husband, an advocate by profession, to determine his financial capacity to pay maintenance to his wife.

Delhi High Court Declines Interim Injunction To 'WOW MOMO' In Trademark Infringement Suit Against 'WOW BURGER'

Title: WOW MOMO FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED v. WOW BURGER & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1107

The Delhi High Court has refused to grant interim injunction in favour of “WOW MOMO”, an Indian quick-service restaurant chain, in its trademark infringement suit filed against a Hong Kong-based company “WOW BURGER.”

Wife Can Be Denied Maintenance Upon Failure To Produce Latest Salary Slips: Delhi High Court

Case title: G v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1108

The Delhi High Court has held that Courts can draw adverse inference of a wife's failure to produce her latest salary slips, in order to show insufficiency of income or financial hardship, to claim maintenance from husband.

BSF Act Empowers General Security Force Court To Try POCSO Offences: Delhi High Court

Title: RAKESH BABU v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1109

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the BSF Act empowers the General Security Force Court (GSFC) to try an offence under the POCSO Act.

Delhi High Court Fines Woman For Dragging Aged In-Laws In Endless Litigation Despite Remarrying After Husband's Death

Title: SMT USHA SHARMA AND ANOTHER v. SWATI SHARMA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1110

The Delhi High Court has fined a woman for dragging aged in-laws in Court through endless litigation even after the death of their son, all the while remarrying another man.

Delhi High Court Directs Customs Department To Set Up Passenger Grievance Counters At Delhi Airport

Case title: Imran v. Commissioner Of Customs, IGI Airport

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1111

The Delhi High Court has asked the Commissioner of Customs at the IGI Airport to create some counters of the Department outside the airport's security zone, for easy access of aggrieved passengers.

Delhi High Court Raps Wife For Roping Husband's Relatives In Matrimonial Dispute Sans Evidence, Quashes Summoning Order

Title: RAJ KAMAL YADAV & ANR v. SMT. MANJU YADAV & other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1112

The Delhi High Court has quashed a summoning order passed against a husband's distant relatives while rapping the wife for roping them in the matrimonial dispute, without any cogent evidence.

Delhi High Court Grants Relief To National-Level Taekwondo Player In Alleged Gold Smuggling Case

Case title: Vivek Kumar Singh v. Commissioner Of Customs A G & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1113

The Delhi High Court has granted relief to a 19 year old, national-level taekwondo player, allegedly involved in gold smuggling at the instance of his coach, while returning to the country from a Championship in Thailand in 2022.

Surprise Searches Can Be Conducted On Family's Lockers U/S 132 Of Income Tax Act Over Suspicion Of Undisclosed Assets: Delhi High Court

Case title: Raj Krishan Gupta And Ors v. Principal Director Of Income Tax (Investigation) -1 New Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1114

The Delhi High Court has upheld the surprise search and seizure conducted by the Income Tax Department at the private lockers maintained by a family at South Delhi Vaults, without issuance of prior notice or summons to them.

Usage Of Disputed Trademark Even After Filing Of Challenge Would Cause Serious Confusion To Public: Delhi High Court

Case Name: M/S Azure Hospitality Private Limited v. Amit Bhasin, Proprietor Of Retail India Solutions

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1115

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain, while hearing a Section 37(1)(b) appeal under the Arbitration Act, observed that using the subject brand names after a dispute between the parties can cause enormous confusion to the public. People may associate the Respondent's outlets with the Appellants.

Plaintiff Has No Vested Right To File Replication Under CPC: Delhi High Court

Case title: Dinesh Kumar Verma v. Ramesh Ghai

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1116

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that filing of replication by a Plaintiff is only judicially sanctioned and is not a statutory right of the party.

Magistrate Not Empowered To Take Recognisance Of Offence U/S 358 BNSS: Delhi High Court

Case title: Amrita Jain v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1117

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Section 358 of the Bhartiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita (Section 319 ofCrPC) does not empower a Magistrate to take re-cognisance of an offence.

Section 358 BNSS empowers the Court to issue a summons to any person who is not an accused, but appears to be guilty of an offence from the evidence.

Hindu Person Cannot Claim Share In Grandparent's Property During Lifetime Of Parent: Delhi High Court

Case title: Kritika Jain v. Rakesh Jain

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1118

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a Hindu person cannot claim share in the property of their grandparent, during the lifetime of their parent.

Boat v Boult | Phonetic Similarity May Be Less Significant In Online Sales But Can Cause Confusion: Delhi High Court

Case title: Exotic Mile v. Imagine Marketing Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1119

The Delhi High Court has upheld an interim order restraining smart wearable brand Exotic Mile from using BOULT trademark and logos, purportedly similar to businessman Aman Gupta's 'Boat'.

'Lenient' Approach For Condoning Delay In Filing Written Statement Will Frustrate Purpose Of CPC: Delhi High Court

Case title: Sh. Kewal Krishan v. Sh. Gulshan Kumar & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1120

The Delhi High Court held that civil courts are not expected to take 'lenient view' for condonation of delay in filing of Written Statement by the defendant in a suit.

Delhi High Court Grants Parole Extension To Murder Convict To Look After His Crops Affected By Floods

Title: PRAVEEN RANA v. STATE GNCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1121

The Delhi High Court has granted extension of parole to a murder convict, enabling him to tend to his crops affected by the recent floods.

'Soliciting Illegal Gratification From Students Strikes At Core Of Academic Integrity': Delhi HC Upholds Termination Of DU Prof

Case Title: DR THELMA J TALLOO Versus JESUS AND MARY COLLEGE & ANOTHER

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1122

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh refused to set aside the termination of a Delhi University professor on the ground of seeking illegal gratification from students. The Court held that the professor was given a proper opportunity of being heard and that the Appeals Committee had carefully examined the evidence and testimonies before ordering her termination.

Delhi High Court Suspends Life Sentence Of Beggar With Psychosis, Says Murder Case Based On Circumstantial Evidence

Title: ISTEKAR ALI @ SANU v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1123

The Delhi High Court has suspended life sentence awarded to one Istekar Ali, a beggar suffering from psychosis, in relation to a 2021 murder case, noting that the case of the prosecution was based on circumstantial evidence only.

Delhi High Court Calls For Amendment Of Disabilities Act To Carry Forward Unfilled PwD Seats In Colleges

Title: MS. JAHANVI NAGPAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1124

The Delhi High Court has asked the Law Commission of India to bring amendment in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, to include a provision for carrying forward a vacancy in higher educational institutions which could not be filled in on account of non-availability of persons with benchmark disabilities for admission, to the next academic year.

Delhi High Court Declines Plea Of BJP's Sanju Verma To Reject Defamation Case Filed By Congress' Shama Mohamed

Title: DR SHAMA MOHAMED v. SMT SANJU VERMA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1125

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an application filed by BJP spokesperson Sanju Verma seeking rejection of a defamation suit filed against her by Congress spokesperson Shama Mohamed.

Students Without 75% Minimum Attendance Can't Contest Delhi University College Students' Union Elections: High Court

Title: MUSKAN v. SATYAWATI COLLEGE & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1126

The Delhi High Court has observed that a student not meeting the criteria of 75% minimum attendance cannot be permitted to contest the Delhi University College Students' Union elections.

UGC Can't Debar A University From Enrolling PhD Students Under UGC Act Or Regulations: Delhi High Court

Title: SINGHANIA UNIVERSITY v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1127

The Delhi High Court has observed that the University Grants Commission (UGC) does not have the power to debar a University from enrolling PhD students under the UGC Act, 1956, or its Regulations.

Imposition Of Higher Property Tax On Luxury Hotels By MCD Not Arbitrary: Delhi High Court

Title: M/S EROS RESORTS & HOTEL LTD & Anr v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1128

The Delhi High Court has held that the imposition of a higher rate of property tax on luxury hotels by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) is not arbitrary or capricious, noting the economic profile of the clientele such establishments are designed to attract.

Delhi High Court Orders Inspection Of Preclinical Drug Testing Facility In PETA's Plea Alleging Animal Abuse

Case title: PETA v. Committee For Control And Supervision Of Experiments On Animals (CCSEA), Ministry Of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry And Dairying, Government Of India Through Its Chairman & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1129

The Delhi High Court has constituted a three-member team to conduct inspections of a preclinical drug testing facility involving large and small animals, including beagle dogs, mini pigs etc.

'Disheartening' That Even Educated Parents Embroiled In Marital Discord Are Tutoring Or Influencing Children: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1130

The Delhi High Court has observed that it cannot countenance the practice of even educated parents, embroiled in marital discord, tutoring or influencing their minor children.

Courts Must Prevent Harassment Of Individuals Having No Involvement In Matrimonial Cruelty: Delhi High Court

Title: POOJA RASNE @ PUJA RASNE v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1131

The Delhi High Court has observed that it is the duty of Courts to prevent harassment of individuals having no substantial involvement in the alleged matrimonial cruelty.

Delhi High Court Raps Centre For Not Granting Disability Compensation To BSF DIG Who Suffered Hearing Loss In 2001 IED Blast

Title: ASHVINI KUMAR SHARMA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1132

The Delhi High Court has granted disability compensation to a man who superannuated from the Border Security Force (BSF) as a Deputy Inspector General (DIG) for 42% hearing loss suffered by him in an IED blast in Jammu and Kashmir in 2001.

Delhi High Court Bars Victory Procession By Candidates Elected In DUSU Polls, Warns Of Contempt If Regulatory Norms Violated

Title: Prashant Manchanda v. Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1133

The Delhi High Court barred any kind of victory procession by candidates, including their supporters, who are elected in the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) elections scheduled to take place on September 18.

Delhi High Court Bats For Gender Neutrality In Army Recruitment, Directs Consideration Of Women Candidates For Unfilled Men's Posts

Title: SHRUTI VYAS & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1134

The Delhi High Court has granted relief to five young girls wanting to join as Short-Service Commissioned Officers (Non-Tech) in the Indian Army, saying that elimination of “anachronistically artificial chromosomal distinction” between women and men is a cherished constitutional goal.

Delhi High Court Grants Dynamic+ Injunction To JioStar, Restrains Rogue Websites From Illegally Streaming Jolly LLB 3

Title: JIOSTAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. VEGAMOVIES.YACHTS & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1135

The Delhi High Court has passed a dynamic+ injunction restraining various rogue websites from illegally streaming, hosting or screening upcoming Bollywood film “Jolly LLB 3” which is scheduled to be released on September 19.

Delhi High Court Upholds Single Judge Order Paving Way For Demolition Of 12 Tower Signature View Apartments

Title: MAN MOHAN SINGH ATTRI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

The Delhi High Court has upheld a single judge order paving way for demolition and reconstruction of Signature View Apartments in city's Mukherjee Nagar.

Wife Pressurizing Husband To Sever Bonds With His Family Is Cruelty, Ground For Divorce: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1138

The Delhi High Court has observed that a wife's “persistent and pressurising conduct” to sever the husband's bonds with his family certainly amounts to cruelty and is a ground for divorce.

Hindu Succession Act | Property Of Father Who Dies Intestate Devolves On Son In Individual Capacity, Not As Family's Karta: Delhi High Court

Title: AMIT SETHI v. LALIT SETHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1139

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the property of a father who dies intestate devolves on his son in his individual capacity and not as the “Karta” of his own family.

Solid Waste Management At Delhi Airport Not Under Purview Of MCD: High Court

Case title: Delhi International Airport Ltd v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1140

The Delhi High Court has held that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi cannot assert its right to manage solid waste generated in the Delhi Airport zone.

Delhi High Court Allows Woman To Terminate 22-Week Pregnancy Resulting From Sexual Relations Established On False Promise Of Marriage

Title: XX v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1141

The Delhi High Court has permitted a 30-year-old unmarried woman to undergo medical termination of her 22-week pregnancy which resulted from sexual relations established with a man on the false promise of marriage

Delhi High Court Transfers Winding-Up Petitions Against Vigneshwara Developwell Pvt Ltd To NCLT

Case Name: Sh. Alok Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. M/s Vigneshwara Developwell Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

The Delhi High Court has transferred winding-up petitions filed against Vigneshwara Developwell Pvt Ltd to the NCLT.

Unadjudicated Claims Cannot Be Secured Through Interim Relief U/S 9 Of A&C Act Merely Due To Financial Distress: Delhi HC

Case Title – RESCOM Mineral Trading FZE v Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has observed that mere financial distress of the other party would not be a ground to allow interim relief and grant its unadjudicated claim under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act (ACA).

Accused Not Stating Self-Incriminatory Facts, Refusing To Confess Is Not Non-Cooperation: Delhi High Court

Title: MOHD KAMRAN v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

The Delhi High Court has observed that the act of an accused not responding to the questions asked by the investigating officer on dotted lines or refusing to make any confession cannot be termed as non-cooperation.

Calling Woman 'R***i' Attacks Her Character By Questioning Sexual Dignity, Amounts To Insulting Modesty: Delhi High Court

Title: SHASHI BALA v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

The Delhi High Court has ruled that calling a woman “r***i” attacks her character by questioning her sexual dignity and will amount to the offence of outraging her modesty.

Information On SEBI's Internal Probe Into Alleged Insider Trading Exempted From Disclosure Under RTI Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Srishti Rustagi v. SEBI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

The Delhi High Court has held that information pertaining to internal investigation being conducted by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is exempt from disclosure under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction Of Adoptive Parents For Cruelty, Sexual Assault On Minor; Says Police Failed To Examine Trafficking Angle

Title: R v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR & other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of adoptive parents of a minor girl of about six years over cruelty and sexually assaulting her, while citing the possibility of it being a case of child trafficking.

"Nothing More Grave": Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Of Father Booked For Repeatedly Raping Minor Daughter

Case title: D A Minor Through Her Mother And Natural Guardian Mrs. Rupi Babbar v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1148

The Delhi High Court has cancelled the bail granted to a man accused of repeatedly raping his minor daughter for years, forcing her to watch porn and terrorising her by abusing her mother in her presence.

Any Legal Heir Or Representative Of Deceased Can Maintain Consumer Complaint On Their Behalf: Delhi High Court

Case title: Soumya Bhattacharya v. Sudhir Kumar Thakur & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1149

The Delhi High Court has held that any “legal heir” and “representative” of a deceased consumer can maintain a consumer complaint on his/her behalf.

Delhi High Court Rejects MCD's Challenge Against Master Plan For Aerocity, Declares It Part Of Airport

Case title: Delhi International Airport Ltd v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1150

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Aerocity, a business and hospitality hub developed around the Delhi airport, is a part of the airport site and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi cannot assert its rights on the area.

'Brutal Rapes Persist Despite Nirbhaya Reforms': Delhi HC Orders Security In Isolated Hospital Areas Citing Vulnerability Of Female Staff

Title: MD SHAKIR v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1151

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to take steps to provide security to the areas of hospital buildings in the national capital which are deserted or isolated and may be misused for committing rapes and sexual assault.

Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Filmmaker Karan Johar; Orders Take Down Of 'Disparaging' Posts, Memes

Title: KARAN JOHAR v. ASHOK KUMAR/JOHN DOE & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1152

The Delhi High Court has passed an interim order protecting the personality rights of Bollywood filmmaker and producer Karan Johar.

'No One Is Victim Or Victimiser': Delhi HC Grants Interim Bail To Man Booked Under POCSO Act For Establishing Relations With Minor Wife

Title: HAMID RAZA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1153

The Delhi High Court has granted interim bail to a young man in a POCSO case, after the Delhi Police claimed that his wife was a minor at the time of their consensual relationship before their marriage, making her consent irrelevant.

Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release Traveller's Jewellery, Says Dept Not Keeping Passengers Informed Of Proceedings

Case title: Mushlina v. Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1154

The Delhi High Court has flagged the Customs Department's regular non-appearance in an appeal preferred by an aggrieved traveller whose articles were confiscated at the airport. The passenger further faced consistent non-implementation of the relief orders passed by the Appellate Authority.

Suspension Can't Be Extended On Ground Of Pending Disciplinary Proceedings Unless Charge-Sheet Is Issued: Delhi HC

Case Name : Manoj Kumar M. Through A.R Ashish Dubey vs Union Of India And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1155

A Division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that suspension cannot be validly extended on the ground that disciplinary proceedings are pending unless a charge-sheet has actually been issued; extensions made on this erroneous ground are invalid, entitling the employee to reinstatement.

Spouse Can Sue Partner's Lover Seeking Damages For Interfering With Marriage : Delhi High Court Discusses 'Alienation Of Affection'

Title: SHELLY MAHAJAN v. MS BHANUSHREE BAHL & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1156

The Delhi High Court has held that a civil suit by a spouse claiming damages from the other spouse's lover for intentionally interfering with the marriage is maintainable. The High Court discussed the novel concept of "Alienation of Affection" to hold that such an action is maintainable.

Delhi High Court Acquits Man In Rape Case After 7 Yrs, Says Trial Court Ignored Forged Birth Certificate Used To Prove Minor Victim's Age

Case title: Arjun v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1157

The Delhi High Court has set aside a trial court order convicting a man for rape of a minor, based on a 'forged' birth certificate of the victim.

'Cognisance' Of FIR Against Gang Member Enough To Invoke MCOCA, Conviction Not Required: Delhi High Court

Case title: Umesh @ Kala v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1158

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 can be invoked if a Magistrate takes cognizance of two or more FIRs against a person as 'member of the Gang' and there is no pre-condition that such FIRs should have resulted in conviction.

Commercial Unit Buyers Not Barred From Seeking Arbitration Relief After Availing Remedies Under RERA: Delhi High Court

Case Title: HARMEET SINGH KAPOOR & ANR. versus M/S NEO DEVELOPERS PVT LTD and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1159

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain has held that Buyers of commercial units are not prohibited from seeking arbitration relief subsequent to availing remedies under RERA, provided that the arbitration petitions were filed after a change in circumstances.

CCTV Footage Of Assessee's Family Cannot Be Used By GST Dept, Violates Right To Privacy: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Genesis Enterprises v. Principal Commissioner CGST Delhi East

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1160

The Delhi High Court has issued directions safeguarding the right to privacy in GST search proceedings, stating that any family-related CCTV footage which violates the privacy of family members cannot be used or disseminated in any manner.

Delhi Riots: High Court Rejects Devangana Kalita's Plea To Reconstruct Case Diaries, Allows Their Preservation

Title: DEVANGANA KALITA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1161

The Delhi High Court rejected a plea filed by Devangana Kalita seeking reconstruction of case diaries in relation to a 2020 Delhi riots case, while allowing preservation of the same.

Delhi High Court Quashes Assault FIRs; Asks Parties To Provide Chaach, Pizzas To Ashram Inmates

Title: ARVIND KUMAR AND OTHERS v. THE STATE AND ANOTHER and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1162

While quashing two FIRs alleging assault and misbehaviour between neighbours, the Delhi High Court has directed the parties to provide Amul Chaach and Mix Vegetable Pizzas to the inmates residing at an Ashram in city's Dilshad Garden.

One Rolex Watch Can Be For Personal Use, Not 'Commercial Quantity': Delhi High Court To Customs

Case title: Mahesh Malkani v. Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1163

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that one Rolex watch seized by the Customs Department from an air passenger cannot be called 'commercial quantity'.

Delhi High Court Closes Patanjali's Appeal In Dabur Chyawanprash Disparaging Ad Case, Asks It To Delete '40 Herbs' Reference

Case title: PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED & ANR. V/s DABUR INDIA LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1164

The Delhi High Court disposed of Patanjali Ayurved's appeal against single judge's order restraining it from running advertisements allegedly disparaging to Dabur's Chyawanprash product, while directing Patanjali to remove reference to Chyawanprash "made with 40 herbs".

Foreign Arbitral Awards To Be Enforced Under Indian Law, Interpretation Of 'Public Policy' U/S 48(2)(b) A&C Act Is Limited: Delhi HC

Case Name: Roger Shashoua & Ors. v. Mukesh Sharma & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1165

The Delhi High Court observed that to enforce a New York Convention Award, an application u/s 47 of the A&C Act, 1996 has to be filed. Thereafter, the onus shifts on the party opposing the enforcement to make out a ground enlisted in Section 48 of the A&C Act. The bench observed

High Time Adjudicators Discard 'Heavens Would Not Fall' Approach, Deferment Of Each Day Matters: Delhi High Court

Title: PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1166

The Delhi High Court has observed that it is high time the adjudicators shift paradigm and discard the “heavens would not fall” approach, underscoring that each day's deferment, unless unavoidable, matters.

Dispute Between Passenger & Airline Over Refund Of Flight Ticket Not 'Commercial Dispute': Delhi High Court

Case title: Chand Mehra & Anr. British Airways PLC

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1167

The Delhi High Court has held that an agreement containing a provision for providing mere services on payment of certain charges cannot, in every case, be termed to be an agreement, dispute in respect of which can be said to be a commercial dispute.

Private Schools Bound By Obligations Under RPwD Act, Must Provide 'Reasonable Accommodation' To Disabled Students: Delhi High Court

Title: G.D. GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL v. AADRITI PATHAK & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1168

The Delhi High Court observed that private schools must take adequate measures to overcome the learning disabilities of children and provide “reasonable accommodation” to them under Section 16 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016.

'Lawyers Filing Plea Even Without Meeting Clients': Delhi High Court Flags Rise Of Fictitious Firms In GST Cases

Case title: M/S S K Overseas v. Superintendent Range 20 Central Gst Division

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1169

The Delhi High Court has flagged the trend of lawyers filing GST cases on behalf of 'fictitious' firms, without even meeting the client, even for the purpose of attestation and notary.

Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Afghan National Found Smuggling Over 900 Grams Of Heroin Capsules Inside Body

Case title: Naqibullah Rodaie v. Air Customs, IGI Airport

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1170

The Delhi High Court has denied bail to an Afghan national, caught smuggling 905 grams Heroin into India, inside his stomach.

Wife's Repeated Absence From Matrimonial Home, Subsequent Institution Of Multiple Complaints Amounts To Cruelty: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1171

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a wife's repeated absence from the matrimonial home and subsequent institution of multiple complaints against the husband and his family members amounts to cruelty.

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Alleging Discrepancies In 2025 JEE (Main) Exam, Says NTA's Claim Prevails When No Technical Error

Title: SHASHANK SHEKHAR PANDEY v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1172

The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea filed by a candidate alleging discrepancies in the conduct of Joint Entrance Examination (Main) Exam 2025, observing that the claim of National Testing Agency (NTA) must take precedence over his case where there is no manifest technical error.

Defrauded Money Not Taxable Income Of Company Or Director, Would Constitute Proceeds Of Crime Under PMLA: Delhi High Court

Title: ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. STATE & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1173

The Delhi High Court has observed that defrauded money is not a taxable income of a company or its director but would constitute proceeds of crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Title: A R Rahman v. Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1174

The Delhi High Court set aside an interim injunction order granted in favour of veteran Indian classical singer Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar in his suit alleging copyright infringement of his “Shiva Stuti” composition by music composer A.R. Rahman and other producers in Tamil film Ponniyan Selvan 2 song "Veera Raja Veera.”

Delhi High Court Quashes NHAI Notification Prescribing CLAT-PG Score As Criteria For Lawyers Recruitment

Title: Shannu Baghel v. Union of India & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1175

The Delhi High Court allowed a PIL challenging National Highways Authority of India's (NHAI) August 11 notification which made CLAT-PG scores a basis for recruiting lawyers.

Title: ANUSHA GUPTA & ORS v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY (THROUGH THE DIRECTOR) & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1176

The Delhi High Court imposed Rs. 30,000 costs each on two candidates alleging irregularities in the conduct of JEE (Main), 2025, observing that they failed to successfully establish their bona fides to prove their case.

Title: TAUQIR ALAM v. ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS & other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1177

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the judicial process cannot be used to extort money from those undertaking unauthorised constructions.

CAPF Officers Can't Seek Posting Based On Parents' Illness; Authorities Expected To Be Alive To Hardships: Delhi High Court

Title: DR. VIVEK KUMAR MATHUR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1178

The Delhi High Court has said that the policy of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) at present does not contain a provision which could constitute a basis for an officer to choose a place of posting on the grounds that the parents are unwell.

Case Title: Vishwa Vedic Sanatan Sangh v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1179

The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL seeking the removal of the graves of Mohammad Maqbool Bhatt and Mohammad Afzal Guru, who were executed for terrorism-related offences, from Central Jail, Tihar.

Delhi High Court Allows Retired Major General VK Singh To Inspect Documents In CBI FIR Over Revealing Classified Information In Book

Title: CBI v. V K SINGH & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1180

The Delhi High Court has allowed Major General (retired) V.K. Singh to inspect documents to effectively defend himself during the trial in an FIR registered by CBI alleging that he published some classified and secret information about Research and Analysis Wing in his book authored in 2007 after his retirement.

Title: Upendra Nath Dalai v. Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1181

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a direction on the Union Government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) to conduct the general elections through ballot papers and not electronic voting machines (EVMs).

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1182

The Delhi High Court has observed that cordial exchanges between a husband and a wife cannot be equated with a bona fide attempt to restore matrimonial life.

Delhi HC Declines To Restrain Encalm Hospitality From Doing Business With Clients Of Dreamfolks Services, Says No Mandate Of Exclusivity

Case Title – Dreamfolks Services Limited v Encalm Hospitality Private Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1183

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Amit Bansal refused to enforce a negative covenant against Encalm Hospitality Private Limited holding that its agreement with Dreamfolks Services Limited did not mandate exclusivity between the latter and its clients and thus Encalm was not in violation of the Agreement.

Title: ROHIT DANDRIYAL & ORS v. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ANR and other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1184

The Delhi High Court has asked the Central Government and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to address the difficulties faced by visually impaired individuals before printing new currency notes.

Title: NIKHIL JAIN v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1185

The Delhi High Court has called for action against two judicial officers for staying the arrest of an accused in a cheating case, despite the dismissal of his anticipatory bail applications by the High Court as well by Supreme Court in SLP.

Case Title: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. versus M/S VALLEY IRON & STEEL CO. LTD

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1186

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act filed by United India Insurance Company Limited (Insurer), upholding an arbitral award in favor of M/S Valley Iron & Steel Company Limited (Insured). The court held that a discharge voucher or consent letter signed under economic duress does not bar arbitration.

Case title: Aam Aadmi Party vs. Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Housing And Urban Affairs & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1187

The Central Government informed the Delhi High Court that Arvind Kejriwal will be allotted “appropriate” residential accommodation within 10 days, given his position as the National Convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party.

Case Title: Tahir Hussain v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1188

The Delhi High Court denied bail to former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain's regular bail plea in the murder case of Intelligence Bureau (IB) staffer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Title: HAMID RAZA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1189

“Is it not the time to move towards a Uniform Civil Code (UCC)?,” the Delhi High Court has said, while flagging the conflicts in Islamic and Indian laws on the legality and criminality of child marriages.

Delhi High Court Awards ₹5 Lakh Damages To TV Today Over Defamatory Tweets Against Rajdeep Sardesai After Rhea Chakraborty Interview

Title: TV Today v. Anurag Srivastava & And

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1190

The Delhi High Court has awarded Rs. 5 Lakh as damages to TV Today Network over defamatory tweets by an 'X' (formerly Twitter) user against its anchor Rajdeep Sardesai after his exclusive interview with actor Rhea Chakraborty in 2020.

Title: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR v. M/S VIKAS WSP LTD & ORS & other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1191

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the suo motu directions of the Supreme Court extending limitation periods in light of COVID-19 pandemic also apply to adjudication process and confirmation of attachment of properties under Section 8 of the PMLA.

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1192

The Delhi High Court has ruled that separate petitions by husband and wife seeking dissolution of their marriage cannot be converted to a petition for “mutual consent” divorce under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act.

Case: Gaura Bhatia v. Samajwadi party Media Cell & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1193

The Delhi High Court has directed take down of two allegedly defamatory social media posts made over a video of Senior Advocate and BJP leader Gaurav Bhatia's recent appearance on a TV debate, which went viral on social media.

Case title: NEWSLAUNDRY MEDIA PVT LTD V/s UNION OF INDIA with RAVISH KUMAR V/s UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1194

The Delhi High Court closed two pleas filed by digital news platform Newslaundry and journalist Ravish Kumar challenging Centre's direction asking them to take down multiple reports and videos concerning the Adani Group of Companies, after noting that the parties have reached an 'understanding'.

Title: MANISH KUMAR GIRI ALIAS SABI GIRI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1195

The Delhi High Court's full bench is set to decide whether the Armed Forces Tribunal is competent to adjudicate on the vires of statutory legislations other than the Armed Forces Tribunals Act.

Case title: Honasa Consumer Limited v. Cloud Wellness Private Limited & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1196

The Delhi High Court has declined an interim injunction restraining skincare brand Dermatouch in a suit for alleged infringement of copyright, trade dress and packaging filed by The Derma Co.

Title: MM DHONCHAK v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1197

The Delhi High Court has upheld the suspension of MM Dhonchak, a retired judicial officer and former Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh, following various complaints alleging behavioural issues.

Case title: The Trustees Of Princeton University v. The Vagdevi Educational Society & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1198

The Delhi High Court has granted partial relief to prestigious Princeton University in the United States, by restraining Hyderabad based educational institutions using the name 'Princeton' from opening any new institutions with the said name.

Title: ANIRUDH PRATAP AGARWAL v. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1199

The Delhi High Court has observed that the confirmation of attachment of property involved in money laundering under Section 8(3) of PMLA does not authorize retention of such a property, as the process requires a valid order to be passed under Section 20.

Title: RAHUL SAHNI v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1200

The Delhi High Court has observed that cruelty in the matrimonial homes robs women of their dignity, underscoring that fight against social evils like dowry and domestic violence is far “from over.”

Title: BS v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1201

The Delhi High Court has recently upheld a jail term of 20 years of rigorous imprisonment awarded to a father convicted for repeatedly raping his 17 year old minor daughter.

Case title: G4S Limited And Another v. 4Group Safeguard And Security Services Private Limited And Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1202

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that under Section 29(5) of the Trade Marks Act, the use of a registered Trade Mark as a Trade Name itself amounts to infringement of the registered Trade Mark.

Delhi High Court Says ED's Approach Of Not Arresting Main Accused 'Arbitrary', Grants Bail To Others

Title: VIPIN YADAV v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & other connected matters

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1203

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to three men in a money laundering case, while saying that the approach of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in not arresting the main accused with graver role was “manifestly arbitrary.”

Case title: M/S ND Info Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. Rehabilitation Council of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1204

The Delhi High Court has refused to stall the admissions of specially abled candidates to diploma courses amid a contractual dispute between the examining body— Rehabilitation Council of India and a private entity— which won the tender to organise the exam.

Title: MANISH KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS & other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1205

The Delhi High Court has said that there is an "urgent need to streamline" the process relating to the "requirement of income certificates" under the National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme.

Case title: Darshana Rani v. The Government Of Nct Of Delhi Through Pr Secretary & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1206

The Delhi High Court has called upon the Bar Council of India as well as the Bar Council of Delhi to frame a policy providing financial aid to the families of deceased lawyers.

Case title: Omwati v. The Bank Of Maharashtra And Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1207

The Delhi High Court has held that the notional interest on terminal benefits earned by the family of a deceased government employee is relevant when determining its need and eligibility for grant of ex-gratia compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment.

Case title: Crocs Inc v. The Registrar Of Trademarks New Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1208

Granting relief to multinational footwear manufacturer Crocs, the Delhi High Court has ordered cancellation of trademark registration granted to mark 'CROOSE' in Class 25 which includes footwear for human use.

Trademark Infringer's Objective Is Served By Diverting Customer's Initial Attention: Delhi HC Rules Against 'Hotelscom' In Suit By Hotels.com

Case title: Hotels.com LLP v. Barath M L & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1209

Explaining the 'Initial Interest Confusion' test in the realm of trademark law, the Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction restraining 'HOTELCOM' from infringing the trademark of global hotel booking service provider Hotels.com.