Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up [November 24-30, 2025]

1. [Release of Dhurandhar] The parents of late Major Mohit Sharma, Ashoka Chakra awardee, have moved the Delhi High Court with a plea seeking to stop the release of the upcoming film Dhurandhar. The movie is directed by Aditya Dhar and stars Ranveer Singh, and is scheduled for release on December 5, 2025. Major Sharma lost his life during a counter-terrorism operation in Kupwara, Kashmir, in 2009. According to the plea, the film, based on its trailer, promotional material and public interviews, is widely being perceived as portraying the life, military service and martyrdom of Major Sharma. The family states that despite this, the filmmakers did not seek their permission or obtain the required clearance from the Indian Army before proceeding. The plea argues that this unauthorised portrayal infringes upon the right to privacy, dignity and reputation of both the martyr and his family under Article 21 of the Constitution. It also states that the posthumous personality rights of the late officer continue to exist in law and cannot be used without consent. The family has stated that the legacy of a decorated soldier “cannot be commercially exploited or fictionalised without the informed consent of his immediate family or compliance with constitutional and legal obligations relating to dignity, privacy and reputation.”

Click here to read more

2. [Delhi Air Quality] Amid rapidly deteriorating air quality in the national capital, a petition has been filed before the Delhi High Court seeking urgent directions to government authorities to implement effective, scientifically sound measures to control the city’s hazardous pollution levels and improve the Air Quality Index (AQI). The petition has been filed by a registered Residents’ Welfare Association of Greater Kailash–II, New Delhi, through Advocate Udian Sharma. It states that despite repeated administrative assurances, the situation has continued to worsen. "Over the past several years (2019–2024), the ambient air quality in Delhi and specifically in GK-II has deteriorated drastically, with AQI levels frequently entering the ‘very poor’, ‘severe’ and ‘hazardous’ categories, especially during winter months, resulting in persistent and serious pollution-related health issues among residents, including children, senior citizens and persons with pre-existing ailments," the plea states

Case Title: Greater Kailash-II Welfare Association Through its General Secretary: Mr. Sanjay Rana v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors

Click here to read more

3. [Yasin Malik] The Delhi High Court has directed Tihar Jail authorities to ensure that Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) terrorist Yasin Malik receives necessary medical care while serving his life sentence in a terror-related case. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while referring to a recent medical report submitted by the jail administration, observed that Malik does not currently appear to be suffering from any life-threatening illness. However, the Court clarified that if the treatment required for his condition is unavailable inside the prison, he must be referred to an appropriate hospital equipped to provide it. “The petitioner has relied on medical documents dating back to 2017. Based on the latest report from Tihar, there is no indication of a critical condition,” the Court noted, adding that the matter stands concluded with directions to provide suitable medical treatment either within the jail facility or at a hospital with the necessary expertise.

Case Title: Yasin Malik v. State

Bench: Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Manoj Jain

Click here to read more

4. [Ajay Devgan; Personality Rights] The Delhi High Court has passed an order protecting the personality rights of Bollywood actor Ajay Devgn, while directing the removal of obscene and objectionable deepfake material circulating online using his likeness. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora passed the order while hearing Devgn’s plea seeking safeguards against the unauthorized use of his name, pictures, and likeness, especially through AI-generated content. The Court restrained the defendants from misusing Devgn’s image, voice, and personal attributes without his permission. Appearing for Devgn, Advocate Pravin Anand argued that the actor, being a well-known public figure, has a sizeable fan base and a long-standing reputation, both of which are harmed when manipulated and offensive content is shared online. Anand also took the Court through examples of the content in question and the parties involved in sharing it.

Case Title: Ajay alias Vishal Veeru Devgan v. The Artists Planet & Ors.

Bench: Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Click here to read more

5. [Christian Michel’s Plea] The Delhi High Court on Monday, 24 November 2025, sought responses from the Centre, the CBI, and the ED on a petition filed by Christian Michel, an accused in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam, seeking a declaration that a provision of the India–UAE extradition treaty is unlawful. During the hearing, a bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain directed the Home Ministry, the Ministry of External Affairs, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to submit their objections on the maintainability of Michel’s plea. Michel had challenged Article 17 of the 1999 extradition treaty between India and the UAE. The provision permits India to prosecute an extradited person not only for the offences for which extradition was granted, but also for other “connected” offences arising from the same set of facts.

Case Title: Christian Michel James vs Union of India

Bench: Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain

Click here to read more

6. [Well-Known Trademark Status To Birkin Bag shape And Three Hermès Marks] The Delhi High Court recently recognised the three-dimensional shape of Hermès’ iconic Birkin bag, along with the “Hermès” name and its stylised logos, as well-known trademarks in India. The ruling was passed by Justice Tejas Karia while deciding a trademark infringement suit filed by Hermès International and its Indian subsidiary against Macky Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. Hermès had alleged that the defendants were using and advertising bags that appeared identical to its Birkin design. During the case, the defendants submitted an affidavit stating that they had closed their business, had not manufactured or sold any Birkin-like bags, and had only used images downloaded from the internet as reference pictures. Hermès accepted these statements in court.

Case Title: Hermes International & Anr. v. Macky Lifestyle Private Limited & Anr.

Bench: Justice Tejas Karia 

Click here to read more

7. [Wife's Pregnancy Cannot Erase Past Cruelty] The Delhi High Court has held that pregnancy or a brief phase of reconciliation cannot nullify earlier acts of cruelty if abusive conduct continued thereafter. “The occurrence of pregnancy or temporary reconciliation cannot erase antecedent acts of cruelty, particularly when the record demonstrates that the Respondent’s abusive conduct, threats, and denial of cohabitation persisted thereafter,” the Court observed.A Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Renu Bhatnagar made the remarks while overturning a family court ruling that had rejected a husband’s plea seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty by his wife.

Case Title: X vs Y

Bench: Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Renu Bhatnagar

Click here to read more

8. [Google Location-Sharing Bail Condition Illegal and Violative of Privacy] The Delhi High Court has ruled that asking an accused person to share their live Google location as a bail condition is illegal and violates their right to privacy. Justice Vikas Mahajan passed the order while hearing the case of Harinder Bashishta, Director of Vardhman Developers. A lower court had granted him bail but added a condition that he must share his real-time location with the investigating officer 24 hours a day using Google services. Justice Mahajan reiterated this principle, observing that such bail terms may effectively convert liberty granted by the court into a form of virtual confinement and undermine the presumption of innocence. Calling the condition “unsustainable,” the Court held that bail terms must be reasonable, lawful and proportional neither punitive nor based on surveillance. “In view of the law exposited by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Frank Vitus, this Court is of the view that the condition as noted above could not have been imposed,” the Court said.

Case Title: HARINDER BASHISHTA versus STATE NCT OF DELHI

Bench: Justice Vikas Mahajan

Click here to read more

9.  [Nitisha Kaul’s Plea Against OCI Cancellation] The Delhi High Court has issued notice on a petition filed by British academic Nitisha Kaul, challenging the cancellation of her Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) status by the Indian government. Justice Sachin Datta heard the matter and sought a response from the Union Government on the decision to revoke her OCI card. The Court has directed the Centre to file its reply and listed the case for further hearing.In her petition, Kaul has urged the court to set aside the cancellation, calling the order arbitrary and unsupported by law. She has argued that both the impugned OCI cancellation order and an alleged undisclosed blacklisting order have no legal or factual basis. Kaul states that she was not provided any reasons or material to justify the action taken against her. The matter will next be heard on January 22.

Case Title: Nitasha Kaul v. Union of India & Ors

Bench: Justice Sachin Datta

Click here to read more 

10 [HC Directs Accused to Pay ₹25,000 to Arya Kanya Sadan for Destitute Girls] The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR registered for offences of voluntarily causing hurt and criminal intimidation after the parties reached an amicable settlement, while directing the accused to contribute Rs 25,000 to Arya Kanya Sadan, a home for destitute girls. A bench led by Justice Amit Mahajan was hearing a plea seeking the quashing of the FIR registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar under Sections 324 and 506 IPC. “In the peculiar circumstances of this case, it is unlikely that the present FIR will result in a conviction when Respondent No. 2 does not wish to pursue the case. In such circumstances, continuance of the proceedings would only cause harassment and heartburn amongst the parties,” the Court noted. Finding the dispute to be private in nature and already resolved, the Court exercised its inherent power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), corresponding to erstwhile Section 482 CrPC.

Case Title: Jatinder Pal Singh vs State NCT of Delhi and anr

Bench: Justice Amit Mahajan

Click here to read more