Delhi Courts Weekly Round Up [January 19-25, 2026]

1. [Animal Shelter; Dog Seizure Case] A Delhi Court has come down heavily on an animal shelter that failed to comply with judicial orders directing the handover of ten dogs seized during a criminal investigation, observing that animals are “living, sentient beings” and not disposable case property. Additional Session Judge (ASJ) Surabhi Sharma Vats of Karkardooma Court termed the explanations offered by the shelter for non-compliance as “totally unsatisfactory, evasive, and lacking in bona fides,” and sought an exhaustive status report on its functioning, record-keeping, and handling of animals taken into custody under the law. The observations were made while hearing a criminal revision petition challenging an order dated August 11, 2025, passed by a Judicial Magistrate First Class at Karkardooma Courts, Shahdara. By the impugned order, custody of ten dogs seized in FIR No. 369/2025 registered at Jagat Puri police station was directed to be released in favour of the accused, referred to as respondent no. 2. The revisionist, an animal welfare organisation, Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre argued that the magistrate’s order was contrary to the object and statutory framework of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, as the animals had been released to the accused himself. It was further submitted that a subsequent order dated December 24, 2025, had directed the revisionist to hand over custody of all ten dogs within seven days with police assistance, but compliance could not be effected due to practical difficulties.

Case Title: Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre Vs. State & Anr.

Bench: ASJ Surabhi Sharma Vats

Click here to read more 

2. [1984 Anti-Sikh Riots] A Delhi Court has acquitted former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar in two cases arising out of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, linked to the Janakpuri and Vikaspuri police stations in Delhi. Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh of Rouse Avenue Court pronounced the acquittal in cases investigated by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Central Government. The first case related to the killing of two Sikh men, Sohan Singh and his son-in-law Avtar Singh, who were allegedly murdered by a mob on November 1, 1984, within the jurisdiction of the Janakpuri police station. The second case, registered at the Vikaspuri police station, pertained to the burning of Gurcharan Singh on November 2, 1984, during the widespread violence that followed the assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Sajjan Kumar was tried in these cases after an SIT, set up to reinvestigate select riot cases, filed a chargesheet alleging his involvement. However, he had already been discharged of murder charges in August 2023. The trial thereafter proceeded on charges under several other provisions of the Indian Penal Code. Earlier, while framing charges, the Special Court had taken a prima facie view that an unlawful assembly comprising hundreds of persons, armed with deadly weapons such as iron rods, dandas, bricks and stones, had gathered near a Gurudwara situated in Gulab Bagh, Nawada, on November 1, 1984. The Court had observed that the common object of the mob was to set the Gurudwara on fire, loot and destroy property belonging to Sikhs, and to target members of the Sikh community residing in the locality.

Case Title: State v. Sajjan Kumar (Ex MP)

Bench: Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh

Click here to read more

3. [Dhaula Kuan BMW Case] A Delhi Court has taken cognisance of charges against a BMW driver accused of causing the death of a senior Finance Ministry official, after police submitted that the fatal accident was the result of rash driving and that the victim was deliberately taken to a faraway hospital, leading to a loss of crucial time for medical treatment. Judicial Magistrate Ankit Garg on Thursday heard submissions by the Delhi Police while considering the chargesheet filed against accused Gaganpreet Makkad in connection with the death of Navjot Singh, a 52-year-old Deputy Secretary in the Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance. Singh was run over near Dhaula Kuan in September last year. According to the prosecution, the accident occurred at around 1.30 pm when Makkad’s BMW X5, allegedly being driven at a speed of 100–110 kmph, crashed into a metro pillar near the Delhi Cantonment Metro Station on Ring Road, overturned, and rammed into Singh’s motorcycle. Singh died, while three others, including his wife, sustained injuries. Inspector Shyoram, appearing for the police, submitted that the accident took place due to the fault of the accused and that Makkad deliberately took the victim to a distant hospital instead of nearby trauma centres. The Court recorded that Makkad has been chargesheeted under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), along with Sections 281 (rash driving), 125B (act endangering life or personal safety of others), and 238A (causing disappearance of evidence).

Bench: Judicial Magistrate Ankit Garg

Click here to read more 

4. [Illegal Custody of Pet Dogs] A Delhi court has imposed a cost of ₹2 lakh on the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre (SGACC) for illegally assuming custody of pet dogs, transferring some of them to third parties without authority, and acting in blatant disregard of court orders and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Additional Sessions Judge Surabhi Sharma Vats of Karkardooma Court passed the order while dismissing a revision petition filed by SGACC challenging an earlier direction to release the dogs to their owner, Vishal, who is an accused in an FIR registered at Jagat Puri police station. Calling the conduct of the animal care centre “vexatious” and warranting exemplary costs as a deterrent, the court directed SGACC to deposit the amount within three days in a government animal welfare fund to be utilised for the National Livestock Mission. In a detailed order dated January 23, the Court observed that SGACC had “resorted to the weaponisation of laws, exploiting the legal process for strategic advantage rather than for legitimate legal recourse.”

Case Title: Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre Vs. State & Anr.

Bench: ASJ Surabhi Sharma Vats 

Click here to read more

5. [Chinese Visa Scam] Justice Girish Kathpalia of the Delhi High Court recused himself from hearing Congress MP Karti Chidambaram's petition in the alleged Chinese visa scam case. Earlier Justices Swarana Kanta Sharma and Anup J Bhambani had also recused themselves from hearing the case. The matter will now be heard on January 28, 2026. Chidambaram has approached the high Court against the framing of charges against him by the Rouse Avenue Court in connection with the alleged Chinese visa scam. He has argued that the trial court did not apply its judicial mind to the material and documents on record, completely ignoring evidence and statements of witnesses that demonstrate the absence of criminality. Special Judge (CBI) Dig Vinay Singh of Rouse Avenue Court directed that charges be framed against seven accused for the offence of criminal conspiracy, while discharging one accused, Chetan Shrivastava, from the case.

Case Title: Karti Chidambaram v. CBI

Bench: Justice Girish Kathpalia

Click here to read more 

6. [Mahua Moitra] The Delhi High Court allowed Lokpal of India two months time to decide on granting sanction to the Central Bureau of Investigation to file chargesheet against Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra in the cash for query scam. A division bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar has said that no further time shall be granted. The Lokpal had requested Delhi High Court to extend the time granted for considering grant of sanction to CBI to file a chargesheet against Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra in the cash-for-query scam under provisions different from those applied earlier, which were struck down by the high court earlier. Delhi High Court on December 19, 2025, had allowed Moitra’s petition challenging the Lokpal’s decision granting sanction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file a chargesheet against her in the cash for query case. High Court has set aside the Lokpal of India's order while holding that it erred in understanding the provisions of the Lokpal Act. A bench of Justices Anil Khetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar had reserved judgment after hearing submissions from Moitra’s counsel as well as Additional Solicitor General S V Raju appearing for the CBI.

Case Title: Mahua Moitra v. Lokpal of India 

Bench: Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar

Click here to read more 

7. [Newslaundry] The Delhi High Court has expressed concern over the language used by Newslaundry Managing Director Manisha Pandein a video commenting on content aired by the TV Today Network. Reportedly, Pande used the word "shit" to describe a television program. A Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla noted this could be considered offensive. Pande used the expression while referring to a video relating to Good News Today, a channel operated by TV Today. The Bench orally observed that such language was inappropriate and amounted to disparagement. The bench went on to caution that it may pass strong observations which could have serious professional consequences for the journalist. These observations were made while the high court was hearing cross-appeals filed by Newslaundry and TV Today against an order passed by a single judge in a suit alleging copyright infringement, defamation and disparagement. TV Today has challenged the refusal to grant interim relief, while Newslaundry has objected to the prima facie findings recorded against it.

Case Title: Newslaundry v. TV Today Network Pvt Ltd & Other Connected Matter

Bench: Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla

Click here to read more 

8. [Crypto-Cyber Probe] The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that investigative agencies cannot indiscriminately freeze entire bank accounts when the allegedly tainted amount is clearly identifiable. The court emphasized that while Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers police to seize property, this power must be exercised through the prism of proportionality to avoid causing financial paralysis to citizens. The order was passed by a bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh, while observing that Section 102 CrPC is intended as an evidentiary safeguard to preserve property connected to a crime, not as a punitive tool to choke a person's finances. The bench noted, “power to freeze a bank account, though undoubtedly available, is a drastic one and must, therefore, be exercised with due application of mind and for cogent reasons, which ought to be reflected, at least briefly, in the communication directing such freezing.”

Case Title: Yadhuvir Singh Manhas v. Kotak Mahindra Bank and Ors.

Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh

Click here to read more 

9. [T20 World Cup] The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a PIL petition seeking directions to ban Bangladesh from all cricketing competitions over violence against the Hindu community in the country. The petitioners argued that Bangladesh should not be allowed to participate in any cricketing till the violence against the Hindu community stops. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia today came down heavily on the petitioner, one Devyani Singh, for filing the frivolous writ petition. "What kind of petition is this? You are asking the court to take a policy decision in respect of foreign affairs. Let it be left to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. You are asking us to conduct some inquiry in Bangladesh? Our writ will go there?" the bench said today. Filed through advocate Pulkit Prakash, the PIL also sought directions to bar the Bangladesh cricket team from participating in the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup starting next month.

Bench: Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia 

Click here to read more 

10. [Kuldeep Singh Sengar] The Delhi High Court has rejected Kuldeep Singh Sengar's plea seeking suspension of his sentence in the custodial death case of Unnao rape victim's father. Sengar was convicted and sentenced to ten years in prison by a trial court in a custodial death case of the father of the Unnao rape case victim. Justice Ravinder Dudeja has dismissed the plea, noting Sengar's criminal antecedents. Earlier, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), had objected to Sengar’s plea seeking suspension in the custodial death case of the Unnao rape victim's father, a relief he sought on medical grounds. Kuldeep Singh Senger had previously been sentenced to life imprisonment in December 2022 for the rape of a minor girl in 2017. On 3 April 2018, when the family of the minor rape victim travelled to Unnao for a court hearing, during which her father, Surendra, was brutally assaulted in broad daylight by the accused. The following day, police arrested Surendra on allegations of illegal possession of arms. While in custody, he succumbed on 9 April 2018 to multiple injuries sustained during the assault.

Case Title: Kuldeep Singh Sengar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Bench: Justice Ravinder Dudeja

Click here to read more