Search the cases we're tracking — try a natural query like “murder cases in Maharashtra”.
29 cases · page 1 of 2
The Delhi High Court permitted a 16-year-old sexual assault survivor to undergo medical termination of a 29-week pregnancy. Following its 19 October 2026 judgment, the court ordered that all medical expenses be borne by the State and directed the preservation of fetal tissue for DNA testing.
The Delhi High Court quashed the money laundering proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate against NewsClick and founder Prabir Purkayastha on 11 June 2026, describing the action as an abuse of process. As reported on 10 October 2026, the Enforcement Directorate has filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court of India challenging this decision to reinstate the investigation.
The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal for specific performance of a property sale agreement. The court ruled that the seller could not automatically forfeit the buyer's earnest money without proving actual loss or legal injury under Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act, despite the buyer failing to prove their own financial readiness.
The Delhi High Court upheld actor Rajpal Yadav's conviction and three-month prison sentence in a cheque bounce case on 10 July 2026. Following his deposit of Rs 2 crore on 15 October 2026, the Supreme Court permitted him to travel abroad and referred the dispute to mediation under Justice Najmi Waziri on 21 October 2026 to facilitate an amicable settlement.
On 20 October 2026, the Delhi High Court set aside a Central Information Commission order that had directed the Indian Air Force to disclose Part-II of the Special Flight Returns regarding the Prime Minister's foreign visits. The court ruled that such disclosure could compromise national security arrangements for these official flights. The petition against the Commission's order was allowed on 20 October 2026.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a Singapore-based man's petition challenging the rejection of his adoption application by the Central Adoption Resource Authority. On 17 October 2026, the court ruled that accepting a child referral does not guarantee adoption if parents are ineligible. Furthermore, the court clarified that couples with two or more children are ineligible to adopt a normal child under the 2022 Adoption Regulations and issued guidelines to prevent erroneous referrals in the future.
The Delhi High Court ruled that an executive notification providing age relaxation for recruitment cannot supersede specific recruitment rules governing the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). The court dismissed a petition from a candidate seeking a 10-year age relaxation for the post of Primary Teacher, affirming the existing upper age limit.
On 17 October 2026, the Delhi High Court modified an eviction order involving a father-in-law and his widowed daughter-in-law. While upholding the father-in-law's possession rights, the court ruled that he cannot evict the daughter-in-law unless he provides alternate accommodation or a monthly rent of Rs 15,000. This follows an earlier 14 October 2026 ruling establishing a legal obligation for fathers-in-law to provide residence to dependent widowed daughters-in-law who lack independent support.
In the case of Ansxxx and anr v. State of NCT of Delhi And Anr, the Delhi High Court ruled on 16 October 2026 that a woman can be charged with gang rape under Section 70 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita if she facilitated the crime under common intention. The court clarified that while the term persons in the legislation is gender-neutral, a woman cannot be charged as a principal perpetrator of rape in isolation.
The Delhi High Court adjudicated a petition from the Rays of New Beginning Foundation challenging the rejection of an application to host a Ramlila festival on public grounds. In a judgment delivered on 16 October 2026, the court rejected the Delhi Development Authority's first-come, first-served allotment policy. Authorities were directed to establish annual guidelines requiring public notices for ground allotments to be issued at least 90 days in advance to ensure a fair selection process.
In August 2024, the CBI arrested Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Santosh Kumar and four private individuals, Gurpal Singh, Rajiv Kumar, Ashok Chaurasia, and Pranay, in connection with an alleged 10 lakh bribery case. On 14 October 2026, the Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the accused. The court observed that the operation of touts in government offices is facilitated by the involvement and encouragement of officials.
In the case of Ganga Devi v. Rajesh Kumar, the Delhi High Court delivered a judgment on 14 October 2026 regarding compensation for a 74-year-old accident victim. The court ruled that the notional income of elderly homemakers should be based on skilled-worker minimum wage and applied a multiplier of 5 for claimants over the age of 70 to account for their unpaid household and caregiving services.
The Delhi High Court ordered a tenant to pay Rs 24 lakh as damages for unauthorised occupation of a commercial shop. The court rejected the tenant's claim that the landlords withheld a Rs 10 lakh security deposit and coerced eviction, finding no evidence to support these allegations.
The Delhi High Court addressed a dispute regarding the unilateral reduction of interest rates on a fixed deposit of Rs 5.89 crore. The bank had reduced the interest rate from 7.75% to 3.5% citing non-renewal of the deposit upon maturity, a decision the court ruled was arbitrary and unsupported.
In December 2025, a Delhi trial court declined to take cognizance of an Enforcement Directorate prosecution complaint against Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and others, ruling the matter not maintainable because it originated from a private complaint. The Enforcement Directorate subsequently appealed this dismissal to the Delhi High Court. On 12 October 2026, the Delhi High Court dismissed an interim application filed by the agency seeking a status quo on properties previously attached in the investigation.
Journalist Rajat Sharma filed a public interest litigation in the Delhi High Court seeking to regulate deepfake technology and block platforms hosting unauthorized content. On 15 September 2026, the Delhi High Court delivered a judgment in his favor, protecting his personality rights and directing the removal of deepfake videos featuring him.
Former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Delhi High Court for his role in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. His appeal against this conviction was pending before the Supreme Court as of 23 April 2026. Sajjan Kumar died at the age of 80 at Safdarjung Hospital on 13 September 2026 while serving his sentence.
A Delhi Court convicted Sukesh Chandrashekhar for impersonating a Supreme Court judge to pressure a judicial officer into granting him bail. Following his sentencing to eight years of rigorous imprisonment on 4 September 2026, Chandrashekhar moved the Delhi High Court to challenge the conviction and request the expungement of derogatory remarks. A hearing regarding the maintainability of his plea is scheduled for 3 November 2026.
An accused was acquitted by the Delhi High Court in a POCSO case on appeal. The trial court had convicted the appellant under sections 376AB and 341 IPC and section 6 POCSO Act on September 4, 2025, but the High Court found the victim's distress in court insufficient for conviction.
On 27 February 2026, the Rouse Avenue Special Court discharged all 23 accused, including Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia, from the CBI corruption case regarding the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22. The CBI challenged this discharge in the Delhi High Court, where Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia filed opposition pleadings as reported on 13 August 2026. Separately, the Delhi High Court initiated criminal contempt proceedings against several AAP leaders in connection with these legal developments on 14 May 2026.
Looking for a specific case? Describe the event and we'll verify it against trusted sources.
