Delhi Courts Weekly Round Up [September 22-28, 2025]
A weekly wrap of key developments from Delhi courts between September 22 and 28, 2025
1. [Land for Job Scam] A Delhi Court has ordered day-to-day hearings in the money laundering case against RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav and his family members in connection with the alleged land-for-jobs scam. The Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne directed that hearings will be held daily from October 13 to resolve issues related to providing the accused with clear copies of case documents. “The matter shall next be taken up on day-to-day basis to address any concerns or objections raised by the accused relatable to section 207 Cr.PC… In order to ensure quick resolution of any probable grievance of the accused persons relating to non-supply of legible copies of the supplied documents, it is directed that the counsel for the ED and the respective counsels for the accused persons, along with the IO, shall be at liberty to inspect the original court record in the presence of the Ahlmad,” the Court said in its order. The order came while issuing summons on the second supplementary chargesheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which named seven additional accused. The Court directed the ED to file an amended memo of parties with appropriate renumbering of all accused persons. Copies of the supplementary complaint and sanction orders relating to A-8 (Lalu Prasad Yadav) were also ordered to be supplied to the accused already summoned.
Case Title: ED v. Amit Katyal
Bench: Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne
Click here to read more
2. [Adani Defamation Case] Digital news platform Newslaundry moved a Delhi Court challenging a gag order restraining it from publishing allegedly defamatory content against businessman Gautam Adani’s Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL). The matter came up before District Judge Sunil Chaudhary of Rohini District Court who directed that the case be listed before District Judge Ashish Aggarwal. Judge Aggarwal had last week lifted a similar gag order in an appeal filed by journalists in the same matter. Though counsel for Adani objected to the matter being heard by the same judge, Judge Chaudhary overruled the objection, stating: “Let matter be heard by the same judge. This is being done to avoid any contradictory view by this court. It is appropriate if the case is heard by the same judge.” The Court ordered that the matter be listed on Tuesday (September 23) at 10 am. before Judge Aggarwal. However, when the matter was taken up on September 23, the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Rohini Court declined to transfer the appeals filed by journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and digital news platform Newslaundry against an ex-parte gag order restraining reporting on Adani Enterprises Limited, keeping the matters with District Judge Sunil Chaudhary. Principal District and Sessions Judge Gurvinder Pal Singh observed that since arguments in Paranjoy’s appeal had already been advanced before Judge Chaudhary, it was appropriate that the matter remain with him.
Bench: District Judge Sunil Chaudhary
Click here and here to read more
3. [Protest Case against Sajjan Kumar] The Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi has acquitted Delhi Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa, Senior Akali leader Manjit Singh GK, and several others in a 12-year-old case connected with allegations of unlawful protest outside the All India Congress Committee (AICC) headquarters against former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar. The case dates back to May 2, 2013, when members of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) and their supporters staged a protest at 24, Akbar Road, the central office of the Congress party, demanding action against Sajjan Kumar for his alleged role in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. An FIR was registered in 2013 at Tughlak Road Police Station under Sections 147 (rioting), 149 (unlawful assembly), 188 (disobedience of public order), and 427 (mischief causing damage) of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that around 500–600 supporters, led by the accused, gathered with placards, shouting slogans such as “Hang Sajjan Kumar,” “Congress Haye-Haye,” and “Sonia Gandhi Haye-Haye.” According to the police, the protestors, despite warnings that Section 144 Cr.P.C. prohibiting assembly was in force in the area, breached barricades near Kothi No. 26, Akbar Road, and moved towards the AICC office. The prosecution further claimed that in the scuffle between police and protesters, the glass of a government bus was broken.
Case Title: State v. Manjeet Singh Sirsa & Ors.
Bench: ACJM Neha Mittal
Click here to read more
4. [Newslaundry vs Adani] A Delhi Court has asked Adani Enterprise to file its response to Newslaundry’s appeal challenging an ex-parte gag order that restrained reporting against the company. The plea is being heard before District Judge Sunil Chaudhary, who directed the corporate entity to submit its reply affidavit and listed the matter for hearing on October 15, 2025. The case follows relief granted to four other journalists, who had successfully challenged the same gag order before District Judge Ashish Aggarwal. Newslaundry, a digital news platform, contends that the order violates the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression and hampers independent reporting on corporate affairs.
Bench: District Judge Sunil Chaudhary
Click here to read more
5. [CM Attack Case] In an order reinforcing the rights of the accused, a Delhi Court on Wednesday directed the Delhi Police to provide a copy of the First Information Report (FIR) to Rajesh Bhai Khimji Bhai Sakariya, the man accused of attacking Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta during a public grievance session at her Civil Lines residence on August 20, 2025. The direction was issued by Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Gaurav Goyal of the Tis Hazari Courts, who cited the settled principle laid down by the Supreme Court that an accused is entitled to a copy of the FIR against him. “In view thereof, the instant application is allowed and IO concerned is directed to supply the copy of FIR within 24 hours against due acknowledgment. Application stands disposed of. Accused is also directed not to publish, circulate or disseminate the contents of the FIR in the public domain or to any third party without the permission of this court,” the Magistrate ordered. The direction came after Sakariya moved an application before the trial court alleging that despite being arrested and charged with serious offences, he had not been provided a copy of the FIR, thereby violating his rights as an accused. The case stems from a shocking incident on August 20, 2025, when Sakariya, a 41-year-old autorickshaw driver from Rajkot, Gujarat, posed as a complainant during a grievance redressal session at CM Gupta’s Civil Lines residence. Once inside, he allegedly assaulted the Chief Minister. He was immediately overpowered by security personnel, arrested, and subsequently booked under multiple provisions of law, including attempted murder, assaulting a public servant, and obstructing public duty.
Bench: Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Gaurav Goyal
Click here to read more
6. [Rape Case; Lalit Modi] A Delhi Court has granted bail to Samir Modi, a relative of fugitive businessman Lalit Modi, who was arrested in connection with a rape case dating back to 2019. Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Vipin Kharb of Saket District Court allowed Modi’s release on a bond of Rs. 5 lakh along with other conditions. The detailed order is awaited. The FIR alleges that Samir Modi repeatedly raped, threatened, and cheated the complainant since 2019. According to the complaint, Modi had approached the victim under the guise of offering career opportunities in the fashion and lifestyle industry. In December 2019, he allegedly forced himself on her at his residence in New Friends Colony.Previously on September 20, the Court had deferred the hearing of businessman Samir Modi’s bail plea to Monday, i.e September 22, after his counsel sought time as he remains in police custody till Sunday. The ASJ had heard initial arguments from the defence team led by Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta, who was joined by Advocates Arshdeep Khurana, Shailendra Singh, and Surya Pratap Singh.
Case Title: State v. Samir Modi
Bench: ASJ Vipin Kharb
Click here to read more
7. [BMW Crash Case] A Delhi court has reserved its order on the bail plea of Gaganpreet Kaur, the woman accused of driving a BMW car that fatally struck a senior finance ministry official and left his wife critically injured. Judicial Magistrate Ankit Garg of Patiala House Court reserved the verdict for Saturday (September 27) after hearing detailed arguments from both sides. Kaur was initially remanded, two days Judicial Custody by the Court. Notably, on September 17, the Delhi Court had extended till September 27 the judicial custody of Gaganpreet Kaur. The Judge had passed the order while also issuing notice on an application moved by Kaur seeking preservation of CCTV footage from the accident site. The plea will be heard on Thursday (September 18).
Bench: Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Ankit Garg
Click here to read more
8. [Paranjoy vs. Adani] In a major relief to journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, a Delhi district court has set aside a civil court’s gag order that had restrained him from reporting on Adani, directing the trial court to pass fresh orders after hearing him on September 26. A gag order imposed by the civil court on September 6 had restrained Thakurta from publishing or reporting on Adani. Challenging the same, Thakurta approached the district court. District Judge Sunil Chaudhary of Rohini District Court held that the journalist cannot be compelled to follow the earlier order until the trial court hears him and decides the matter afresh. “Needless to say that the Ld. trial court while passing the fresh orders on the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC will consider the principles of law settled qua the grant of interim injunction. The appeal is disposed of accordingly and the appellant will not be liable to follow the order dated 06.09.2025 till fresh orders are passed by the court of Ld. Senior Civil Judge upon hearing him,” the order reads.
Bench: District Judge Sunil Chaudhary
Click here to read more
9. [Swami Chaitanyananda Saraswati] A Delhi Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by Swami Chaitanyananda Saraswati in connection with a criminal case involving allegations of fraud, forgery, criminal breach of trust, and misappropriation of funds belonging to the Sri Sri Jagadguru Shankaracharya Mahasamsthanam Dakshinamnaya Sri Sharada Peetham, Sringeri. Additional Sessions Judge Hardeep Kaur at Patiala House Court observed that the offences were serious in nature and required custodial interrogation to establish the full chain of alleged criminal acts. The bail application, filed under Section 482 BNSS (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), was vigorously opposed by the investigating officer and the complainant. Swami Chaitanyananda, a senior monk of the Arsha Vidya Order and a disciple of Pujya Swami Dayananda Saraswati, is an internationally recognized scholar, author, and educationist.
Case Title: State v. Swami Chaitanyananda Saraswati
Bench: ASJ Hardeep Kaur
Click here to read more
10. [Gaganpreet Kaur; Bail Plea] A Delhi Court has granted bail to Gaganpreet Kaur, accused in the Dhaula Kuan BMW accident case that claimed the life of a senior Finance Ministry official and left his wife grievously injured. The order was passed by Judicial Magistrate Ankit Garg at Patiala House Court after hearing arguments from both the prosecution and the defence. The Court directed that Kaur be released on a personal bond of Rs. 1 lakh along with two sureties of the same amount.
Bench: Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Ankit Garg
Click here to read more
11. [Sameer Wankhede against “Ba**ds of Bollywood”] The Delhi High Court has rejected the defamation suit filed by IRS officer Sameer Wankhede against the Netflix series “Ba**ds of Bollywood”, ruling that the plaint, in its current form, was “not maintainable.” Wankhede had filed the suit against both Red Chillies Entertainment and Netflix, seeking damages of ₹2 crore. He further requested that any compensation, if awarded, be donated to Tata Memorial Cancer Hospital for the benefit of cancer patients. The plea sought a permanent and mandatory injunction, along with a declaration and damages, against Red Chillies Entertainment, Netflix, and others associated with the show.
Case Title: Sameer Dnyandev Wankhede v. Red Chillies Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Bench: Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav.
Click here to read more
12. [Uniform Civil Code] The Delhi High Court has asked whether it is not time for India to move towards a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), stressing the need for a single legal framework where personal or customary laws do not override national legislation. Justice Arun Monga’s observations came while reflecting on the recurring conflict between Islamic personal law and statutory law, noting that “under Islamic law, a minor girl attaining puberty may lawfully marry, but under Indian criminal law such a marriage renders the husband an offender under the BNS and/or POCSO or both.”“This raises a stark dilemma viz. should society be criminalized for adhering to long-standing personal laws ? Is it not the time to move towards a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), ensuring a single framework where personal or customary law does not override national legislation?” the judge observed. Underlining that such conflicts between personal and criminal law demand urgent legislative clarity, the Court said: “Before parting, it would be apposite to observe that this conflict warrants legislative clarity. The Legislature must decide whether to continue criminalizing entire communities or to promote peace and harmony through legal certainty.” Justice Monga. Court made the observations while granting bail to Hamiz Raza, who had been accused of marrying a minor girl. While the girl herself claimed to be 20 years old, the prosecution maintained she was a minor, relying on her school records. The FIR was lodged by her stepfather, but in her statement the girl disclosed that the stepfather had sexually assaulted her, leading to a pregnancy and the birth of a child in 2023. That child was later given up for adoption. She further said that Raza later agreed to marry her.
Case Title: Hamid Raza v. State of NCT of Delhi
Bench: Justice Arun Monga
Click here to read more
13. [Defamatory Posts on Gaurav Bhatia] The Delhi High Court has held that “attacking the dignity of a person using obscene and sexually suggestive language under the guise of free speech cannot be permissible under any circumstances”, as it directed the removal of certain defamatory social media posts targeting Senior Advocate and BJP spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia. The order was passed by Justice Amit Bansal on a suit filed by Bhatia seeking the removal of allegedly derogatory and obscene content posted online after a live television debate featuring him went viral. Court found that certain posts, mainly those by Defendant No.1 (Samajwadi Party Media Cell) and Defendant No.11 (Sandeep), fell outside the bounds of permissible speech.The judge directed that Defendants No.1 and 11 must take down their impugned posts within 24 hours. If they fail, X must de-index and remove them within 72 hours. Additionally, X was directed to immediately remove Vish Patel’s post.At the same time, the Court refused to injunct other posts, noting that satire and humorous commentary fall within the ambit of free speech. Relying on its earlier decision in T.V. Today Network Limited v. NewsLaundry Media Private Limited, the Court reiterated that satire is a form of fair comment under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
Case Title: Gaura Bhatia v. Samajwadi party Media Cell & Ors.
Bench: Justice Amit Bansal
Click here to read more
14. [Sunjay Kapur’s Assets in Sealed Cover] The Delhi High Court has permitted Priya Sachdev Kapur, the third wife of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, to submit a list of his movable and immovable assets in a sealed cover. Justice Jyoti Singh was hearing Kapur’s application seeking permission to place on record Sunjay Kapur’s asset details confidentially, with an undertaking that the parties would not disclose information to the media. Recording the consensus between counsels, the Court said, “After canvassing arguments it is agreed that the list of assets of Sunjay Kapur, both movable and immovable, will be filed in court in a sealed cover, copies will be shared with the parties in the lis…” Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Priya Kapur, submitted that neither he, nor other senior counsel, nor the client would make any press statement or leak any information concerning the case. The Court also noted a similar assurance from Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, counsel for Karisma Kapoor’s children, as well as from Rani Kapur and her counsel. Earlier, the Court had observed that such an arrangement could be “problematic.” The judge noted, “As alleged beneficiaries to the estate of late Sunjay Kapoor, they have the right to question the assets disclosed. If tomorrow they have to verify the assets and they are bound by a confidentiality clause, how will they ever defend this case? If they are part of a confidentiality club, they will be circumscribed by confidentiality completely. I am happy to accept any suggestion that does not hamper the rights of any party to this case.”
Case Title: Ms. Samaira Kapur & Anr. v. Mrs. Priya Kapur & Ors.
Bench: Justice Jyoti Singh
Click here to read more
15. [Tahir Hussain] The Delhi High Court has dismissed the bail plea of former Aam Aadmi Party councillor Tahir Hussain, accused in the murder of Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Ankit Sharma during the February 2020 Northeast Delhi riots. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while pronouncing the judgment, said: “Bail application dismissed.”On March 12, 2025, the trial court refused to grant bail to Hussain, stating that it was not convinced by the applicant's argument that there had been a significant change so as to warrant reconsideration of previous court rulings. The court therefore rejected the bail plea. The case pertains to a FIR registered at Dayalpur Police Station on the basis of the complaint made by Ankit Sharma’s father, Ravinder Kumar. He alleged that on February 25, 2020, his son, who was posted in the Intelligence Bureau (IB), had come back from the office and gone out, and did not return after a long time. The complainant father came to know from local boys that his son Ankit Sharma had been “thrown” into Khajuri Khas “nala” (drain) from the masjid in Chand Bagh pulia after “he was killed.” His body was recovered from the nala.On March 24, 2023, a Delhi court framed murder charges against former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain and ten others for “killing an Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer, namely, Ankit Sharma” during the Northeast Delhi riots of 2020.
Case Title: Mohd Tahir Hussain v/s State of NCT of Delhi Judgmen
Bench: Justice Neena Bansal Krishna.
Click here to read more