Delhi Court April 2019 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.
Inderjeet Singh & Ors vs.the State (Govt of Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 02, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 1725/2019 INDERJEET SINGH & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rakesh Walia, Advocate versus THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State with SI Bhagwati Prasad Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) CRL.M.A.6945/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 1725/2019 Quashing of FIR No.78/2014, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at police station Nangloi, Delhi is sought on the basis of respondent No.2s affidavit of 26th February, 2019. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the complainant/first-informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Bhagwati Prasad on the basis of identity proof produced by her. CRL.M.C. 1725/2019 Page 1 of 3 ...
Const. Prakash Chand vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
$~1 to 4 & 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 873/2018 CONST. RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS. Through Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through Mr. Ruchir Mishra & Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocates Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC Law & Mr. Deepak Kumar, SI CRPF ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) 2407/2018 CONST. RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS. Through Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Rajesh Kumar & Ms. Santwana, Advocates Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC Law & Mr. Deepak Kumar, SI CRPF * + + + W.P.(C) 2427/2018 CONST. MUKESH KUMAR BAJIYA Through Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Advocate ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Vijay Joshi, Sr. Panel counsel , Mr. R.M.Tripathi, Mr. Abhimanyu, W.P.(C) 873/2018 & other connected matters Page 1 of 8 + + % Mr. Abhishek Khanna & Mr. Soumaya Karmakar, Advocates for Respondent No.1/UOI Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC...
Ravinder Kumar Joshi @ Rk Joshi vs.central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Crl.M.B.No.68/2018 in Crl. A. 44/2018 Judgment reserved on :13. 03.2018 Date of decision :01. 04. 2019 RAVINDER KUMAR JOSHI @ RK JOSHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manish Tiwari, Mr. Anil Kumar, Advs. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP for CBI with Mr. Hilomon Kani, Ms. Kriti Handa, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. The applicant/appellant vide this application under Section 389 r/w Section 482 of the Cr.PC, 1973 seeks the suspension of the impugned order on sentence dated 22.12.2017, vide which the applicant was sentenced as under:-"a. RI for 03 years u/s 13 (2) r/w 13 (1)(d) of PC Act 1988 and Fine of Rs.5,00,000/- and in default thereof Sentence of 06 months. b. RI for 03 years u/s 120 B Indian Penal Code, 1860, r/w Sections 420/468/471 Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 13(2) R/W131)(d) of PC Act, 1988 and fi...
Suresh Kumar Lakra vs.central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: March 27, 2019 Pronounced on: April 01, 2019 (i) + CRL.A. 526/2016 & Crl.M.A. 1347/2017 SURESH KUMAR LAKRA Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manish Tiwari & Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocates (ii) + CRL.A. 523/2016 PIYUSH GOEL @ PIYUSH GOYAL (IN CUSTODY) Through: Mr. Deepak Vohra, Advocate (iii) + CRL.A. 520/2016 & Crl.M.A. 1346/2017 JAIBIR SINGH SEHRAWAT @ JAIBIR SHERAWAT (iv) + CRL.A. 499/2016 MUKESH GUPTA Through: Mr. Mahavir Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate Through: Mr. Ganesh Khanna & Dr. Sushil Gupta, Advocates (v) + CRL.A. 495/2016 & Crl.M.(B) 257/2017 UMESH PARASHAR Crl.A.526/2016 Crl.A.523/2016 Crl.A.520/2016 Crl.A.499/2016 Crl.A.495/2016 Crl.A.480/2016 Page 1 of 29 1. Through: Mr. Mahavir Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate (vi) CRL.A. 480/2016 & Crl.M.A. 15869/2016 VIRENDER PAL Through: Mr. Mahavir Singh, Senior Versus Advocate with Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate .... Appellant...
Vikram Jai Kumar & Ors vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 01, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 1697/2019 & CRL.M.As. 6810-6811/2019 VIKRAM JAI KUMAR & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Pravin Kumar Jha, Advocate Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Virender Kumar. Mr. Sahil Munjal & Ms. Rhea G. Mungal, Advocates with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.648/2014, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC r/w Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at police station K.N. Katju Marg, Rohini, Delhi is sought on the basis of settlement of 25th January, 2019 (Annexure-B) reached between the parties. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the complainant/first-informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Virender Kumar on the basis of identity...
Const. Mukesh Kumar Bajiya vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
$~1 to 4 & 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 873/2018 CONST. RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS. Through Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through Mr. Ruchir Mishra & Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocates Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC Law & Mr. Deepak Kumar, SI CRPF ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) 2407/2018 CONST. RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS. Through Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Rajesh Kumar & Ms. Santwana, Advocates Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC Law & Mr. Deepak Kumar, SI CRPF * + + + W.P.(C) 2427/2018 CONST. MUKESH KUMAR BAJIYA Through Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Advocate ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Vijay Joshi, Sr. Panel counsel , Mr. R.M.Tripathi, Mr. Abhimanyu, W.P.(C) 873/2018 & other connected matters Page 1 of 8 + + % Mr. Abhishek Khanna & Mr. Soumaya Karmakar, Advocates for Respondent No.1/UOI Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC...
Sikkan vs.state n.c.t. Of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
$~11 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:1. t April, 2019 CRL.A. 738/2002 SIKKAN ..... Appellant Through: Mr. A.T.M. Rangaramanujam, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Anu Gupta, Mr. Pratyush Raj & Ms. Gouri Mohanti, Advs. versus STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT(ORAL) 1. Mithilesh, daughter of Munesh (PW-10), was married to Rakesh Kumar @ Bobby (A-1), he being the son of Mange Ram (A-2) and Sona Devi (A-3), all of them indisputably being residents of Jhuggi No.244/173, Balmiki Camp, East of Kailash, New Delhi, falling within the jurisdiction of police station Lajpat Nagar. There is sufficient evidence available on record to show, and it is not disputed, that Mithilesh gave birth to a son ten months after the marriage, the said child having later died. The incident which became the subject-matter of the sessions Crl. Appeal No.738/2002 Page 1 of 6 case in which the judgment that is impugned...
M/S. Tropex Promotion & Trading Ltd. Vs.the Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
$~R1A * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA302001 M/s. TROPEX PROMOTION & TRADING LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Inder Paul Bansal with Mr. Vivek Bansal, Advocates. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA % ORDER0104.2019 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is filed by the Assessee and is directed against an order dated 31st August 2000 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA7484of 1992 for the assessment year 1986-87. While admitting this appeal on 15th January 2002 the following questions were framed for consideration by this Court: 1. Whether on the facts of the case borne on record, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the legal validity of the action of the Assessing Officer in initiating re- assessment proceedings against the assessee-appellant company for the assessment year 1...
Prakash Gupta vs.securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 01, 2019 CRL.REV.P. 1076/2018 & CRL.M.As. 48768/2018 & 1407/2019 PRAKASH GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jagdeep Singh Bakshi and Mr. Abhishek Mohan Sinha, Advocates Versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Mann and Ms. Simran, Advocates for respondent-SEBI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Trial court vide impugned order of 15th November, 2018 rejects petitioners application under Section 24A of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the SEBI Act) while relying upon Supreme Courts decision in JIK Industries Limited and Others Vs. Amarlal V.Jumani And Another (2012) 3 SCC255 2. Learned counsel for petitioner relies upon recent Supreme Courts decision in Meters and Instruments Private Limited and Another Vs. Kanchan Mehta (2018) 1 SCC560to submit that consent of respondent to permit compounding is not required. ...
Mr. Prashant Agarwal & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 01, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 1705/2019 MR. PRASHANT AGARWAL & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. H.S. Dhillon, Advocate Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with W/SI Sneh Lata. Ms. Meera Menon, Advocate with Special Attorney-Mr. Rajiv Dhingra, father of Respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.152/2018, under Sections 498-A/377/3of IPC, registered at police station Malviya Nagar, New Delhi is sought on the basis of settlement agreement of 28th January, 2019 reached between the parties. Mr. Rajiv Dhingra, father of respondent No.2, who is complainant of FIR in question is present in the court and he submits that his daughter i.e. respondent No.2 has given Special Power of Attorney in his favour to appear on her behalf. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for CRL.M.C. 1705/2019 Page 1 of 3 respondent-State submits that Mr. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 57
- 58
- 59
- Next ›
- Last »