Delhi Court February 2018 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vikas vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: November 25th, 2017 Judgment pronounced on: February 19th, 2018 + CRL.A. 1151/2016 VIKAS STATE + CRL.A. 104/2017 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. M. L. Yadav, Adv. versus Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP ..... Respondent NEERAJ@KARAN STATE ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, (DHCLSC) versus Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP ..... Respondent + CRL.A. 82/2017 SONU@MATKA STATE ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, (DHCLSC) versus Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. P. GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR % JUDGMENT Crl.A. Nos. 1151/2016, 104/2017 & 82/2017 Page 1 of 79 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.1. The appellants, before us, were convicted, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma (hereinafter referred to as the learned ASJ), vide judgment dated 16th July 2016, for offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 3and 396 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as I...
M/S. Mohit Industries Akola vs.the Assistant Provident Fund Commission ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:19. 02.2018 W.P. (C) 1929/2016 M/S MOHIT INDUSTRIES AKOLA ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, Advocate. versus THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER ..... Respondent AKOLA Through: Ms. Inderjeet Sidhu along with Mr.Suchitra Chawla, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.(ORAL) 1. The challenge in this writ petition is the impugned order dated 14.12.2015 passed by the Employee Provident Fund Tribunal, New Delhi (in brief Appellate Tribunal) in ATA No.37 (9)/2012 by which the appeal of the petitioner under Section 7-I of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (in short EPF Act) was dismissed.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the Inspectors/Enforcement Officers of the respondent organisation visited the establishment of the appellant on 10.11.2011 and found 23 employees working there. They W.P (C) 1929/2016 Page...
Bushra Khan vs.govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-2018
$~43 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:19. h February, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Kumar Ghawana, Advocate. BUSHRA KHAN + W.P.(C) 12178/2016 versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi and Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for DDA. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for LAC/L&B with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings pertaining to land of the petitioner i.e. Plot No.H-19, Abdul Fazal Enclave, Part-II, Shaheen Bagh, Okhla, New Delhi comprised in Khasra Nos. 409, admeasuring 160 Sq. Yards in the revenue State of Village Jasola, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Subject Land) is deemed to have been lapsed in vi...
Khurshida Parveen vs.south Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-2018
$~1 * + W.P.(C) 1904/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI KHURSHIDA PARVEEN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Alamgir, Advocate. versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Reema Khorana and Mr.Kartik Rathi, Advocates for respondent no.1/SDMC. Mr.Sachin Nahar, Advocate for respondent nos.2 & 3. CORAM: % 1. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL ORDER1902.2018 This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a handicapped woman and she is squatting from Gate No.1 near Metro Station, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Under fear of being dispossessed, she has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction that the respondent be restrained from harassing her and a writ of mandamus seeking a direction to the respondent to allow her to vend at the site in question.2. Two status reports have been filed. Mrs.Khorana, counsel for resp...
Deepak @ Rahul vs.state (Gnct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 17, 2018 (i) + CRL.A. 412/2017 KAMAL Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma & Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Advocates Versus Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public STATE Through: Prosecutor for State with SI Ramesh Kumar, Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi ........ RESPONDENTS (ii) + CRL.A. 441/2017 DEEPAK @ RAHUL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Thanu B. Mishra, Mr. Ravi Mishra, Mr. Jitendera, Ms. Harkamal Jeet Kaur, Mr. Gagandeep Kulyana & Ms. Manisha Saharan, Advocates Versus STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Ramesh Kumar, Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Crl.A.412/2017 & Crl.A.441/2017 Page 1 of 8 JUDGMENT (ORAL) SUNIL GAUR, J1 The above captioned two appeals arise out of common impugned judgment of 28th November, 2016, vide which both the appellants have been held...
Santosh Kumar Singh @ Govinda vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision : February 17, 2018 CRL.A. 510/2017 SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH @ GOVINDA ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Sumit Verma, Advocate from DHCLSC STATE versus Through: Mr.Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with ..... Respondent Inspector R.C.Dahiya, PS Sarai Rohilla CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH SUNIL GAUR, J.JUDGMENT ORAL The impugned judgment of 21st October, 2016 holds appellant guilty 1. of the offence of murder while acquitting his co-accused Ashu and vide impugned order of 10th November 2016, the appellant has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine with default clause.2. The crux of the prosecution case as noticed in the opening paragraph of the impugned judgment is as under:-"Prosecutions case is that deceased and accused persons were vagabonds. On 12.05.2014, in Banderwala Park, accused Ashu quarreled with deceased Shravan and Crl.A.No.510/2017 Page 1 deceased took Shankars crutch and ...
Kamal vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 17, 2018 (i) + CRL.A. 412/2017 KAMAL Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma & Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Advocates Versus Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public STATE Through: Prosecutor for State with SI Ramesh Kumar, Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi ........ RESPONDENTS (ii) + CRL.A. 441/2017 DEEPAK @ RAHUL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Thanu B. Mishra, Mr. Ravi Mishra, Mr. Jitendera, Ms. Harkamal Jeet Kaur, Mr. Gagandeep Kulyana & Ms. Manisha Saharan, Advocates Versus STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Ramesh Kumar, Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Crl.A.412/2017 & Crl.A.441/2017 Page 1 of 8 JUDGMENT (ORAL) SUNIL GAUR, J1 The above captioned two appeals arise out of common impugned judgment of 28th November, 2016, vide which both the appellants have been held...
State (Gnct of Delhi) vs.neeraj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2018
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :16. h FEBRUARY, 2018 + CRL.REV.P. 132/2018 ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP with SI Jaivind Kumar, PS Kalyanpuri. ..... Respondent STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) NEERAJ versus Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) CRL.M.A.No.2911/2018 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. CRL.M.A.No.2910/2018 (Delay) 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay in filing the petition, the delay is condoned.2. The application for condonation of delay is disposed of. CRL.REV.P. 132/2018 1. Present revision petition has been filed against the respondent by the State to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 09.08.2017 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge by which the respondent was discharged of the commission of the offences Crl.Rev.P. 132/2018 Page 1 of 3 punishable under SectionsIPC and Section 4 PO...
Attar Singh vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2018
$~8 to 12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:16. h February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 10876/2016 ATTAR SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.V.P.Rana and Mr.Prem Garg, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for respondent/L&B-LAC. Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel with Ms.Akshita Manocha, Ms.Komal Sorout and Ms.Gauri Chaturvedi, Advocates for respondent/DDA. + W.P.(C) 10881/2016 J P GUPTA Through: Mr.V.P.Rana and Mr.Prem Garg, ........ Petitioner versus Advocates. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for respondent/L&B-LAC. Ms.Sapna Chauhan, Advocate for respondent/DDA. W.P. (C) No.10876/2016 etc. Page 1 of 7 + W.P.(C) 10885/2016 BALWANT SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.V.P.Rana and Mr.Prem Garg, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Mrs...