Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 25 To August 31, 2025

Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049

NOMINAL INDEX

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

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.