abuse of process
Posted inNews

“Where parties have voluntarily settled and continuation of prosecution would amount to abuse of process, criminal law must yield to the ends of justice”: Delhi High Court quashes FIR alleging impersonation and cheating for securing Civil Defence job, notes genuine compromise between accused and complainant, applies Supreme Court principles on settlement-based quashing, and allows petition subject to payment of costs for use of State machinery

HEADNOTE Sandeep Kumar Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice Ravinder DudejaDate of Judgment: 10 December 2025Citation: W.P.(CRL) 4093/2025Laws / Sections Involved: Sections…
workman
Posted inNews

“Once the workman discharges the initial burden, failure of the employer—being the custodian of records—to produce muster rolls and wage registers invites adverse inference”: Delhi High Court dismisses management’s writ against Labour Court award, upholds finding of illegal termination for non-compliance with Section 25F of the ID Act, affirms reinstatement with 50% back wages or ₹3 lakh compensation, and reiterates that writ jurisdiction cannot be used to reappreciate evidence

HEADNOTE M/s Punjab Steel Works v. Shambhu Saran Singh Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice Chandrasekharan SudhaDate of Judgment: 11 December 2025Citation: W.P.(C) 6264/2019Laws / Sections Involved: Articles 226 &…
opportunity
Posted inNews

“When adjudication proceeds ex parte without a real opportunity of hearing, procedural fairness must prevail even as the vires of limitation-extending notifications await Supreme Court scrutiny”: Delhi High Court sets aside GST order against Seaton Impex for FY 2019–20, remands matter for fresh adjudication with personal hearing, imposes costs, restores GST portal access, and keeps the validity of Notification No. 56/2023–Central Tax open pending SLP

HEADNOTE M/s Seaton Impex v. Sales Tax Officer Class II (AVATO), Ward 83, Zone-7, Delhi & Anr. Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail JainDate…
forgery
Posted inNews

“A non-executant alleging forgery is not required to seek cancellation, nor can a plaint be rejected where limitation, possession and title raise triable issues”: Delhi High Court dismisses Order VII Rule 11 CPC application seeking rejection of suit challenging release deed, GPA and wills relating to Model Town property, holds proviso to Section 34 Specific Relief Act inapplicable, and reiterates strict threshold for rejection of plaint

HEADNOTE Dr. Saroj Bahl v. Sushma Batra & Ors. Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice Purushaindra Kumar KauravDate of Judgment: 12 December 2025Citation: CS(OS) 653/2023, I.A. 38413/2024Laws / Sections Involved:…
accident
Posted inNews

“Merely because an accident has occurred, rashness or negligence cannot be presumed”: Delhi High Court dismisses State’s appeal against acquittal in triple-motorcycle collision case, holds injured eyewitness could not explain manner of accident after losing consciousness, rejects reliance on FIR drafted by IO, finds site plan inconclusive, and reiterates that benefit of doubt must go to accused in absence of cogent proof under Sections 279 and 304A IPC

HEADNOTE State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjay @ Anit @ Nita Singh Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice Neena Bansal KrishnaDate of Judgment: 15 December 2025Citation: CRL.A. 1544/2025 (CRL.L.P. 720/2017)Laws…
main proceedings
Posted inNews

“No vested right can flow from continuation in service granted only under an interim order once the main proceedings fail”: Delhi High Court dismisses DTC employee’s plea seeking superannuation at 60 years instead of 55, holds that service rendered under interim CAT protection cannot alter retirement age, applies Supreme Court law on merger of interim orders, and upholds Tribunal’s decision deeming retirement from 31 March 2014

HEADNOTE Ramesh Kumar v. Delhi Transport Corporation Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu JainDate of Judgment: 12 December 2025Citation: W.P.(C) 1798/2024Laws / Sections Involved: Articles…
settlement letter
Posted inNews

“Once the alleged handwritten amendments and the subsequent settlement letter remain unproved, no court exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 can reappreciate evidence to reach a different conclusion”: Delhi High Court dismisses arbitration appeal by distributor, upholds arbitral award rejecting plea of full and final settlement based on disputed letters dated 06.05.2013 and 17.05.2013, reiterates narrow scope of interference and affirms counterclaims in commercial distribution dispute

HEADNOTE Ramakrishna Teletronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Top Victory Investments Ltd. Court: High Court of DelhiBench: Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Vinod KumarDate of Judgment: 12 December 2025Citation: FAO(OS) (COMM)…