In the case of Raju Kumar Manjhi vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Delhi High Court granted regular bail to an applicant accused of being a key member of an organized cyber-fraud and money-laundering syndicate that utilized “digital arrests” to extort money. Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed that the investigating agency
In the consolidated matters of Dharamvir Singh & Ors. vs. State and Joginder Singh & Ors. vs. State, the Delhi High Court quashed two cross FIRs involving charges of physical assault and criminal intimidation. The FIRs originated from a clash between two groups where dandas (wooden staffs) were used. Justice
In the case of Jairam & Anr. vs. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr., the Delhi High Court quashed a 2021 FIR involving charges of dowry-related cruelty and criminal breach of trust (Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act). Justice Girish Kathpalia allowed the petition
In Rajeev Behl vs. Bhupesh Kumar Dhingra & Ors., the Delhi High Court granted interim protection to a petitioner seeking to safeguard a claimed 50% share in a real estate project known as Capitol City Mall (now Emaya Mall). Justice Mini Pushkarna restrained the respondents from creating any third-party rights
In the case of Pawwan Khanna vs. Deepak Bagga & Anr., the Delhi High Court allowed applications for bringing additional documents on record and amending a plaint in a long-standing suit for specific performance. Justice Mini Pushkarna ruled that under Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act, a plaintiff is
In Ravi Kumar vs. Geeta Devi & Ors., the Delhi High Court upheld a Family Court’s order directing a DNA test to determine the paternity of three children born from an alleged relationship outside of the petitioner’s legal marriage. The Court ruled that an adult’s desire to avoid reputational harm
In Kokkanti Venkata Maheswara Reddy vs. Google LLC and Ors., the Delhi High Court entertained a petition filed by a serving Indian Police Service (IPS) officer seeking the removal and de-indexing of sensationalized news reports concerning a matrimonial dispute that had already been amicably settled. Invoking the “right to be
