Read Time: 01 hours
1. [Minor's rape allegedly by Women & Child Development Dpt. officer] The Delhi High Court has taken suo-motu cognizance of an incident wherein a minor girl has allegedly been raped several times by the suspended Delhi government’s Women and Child Development Department Officer, Premoday Khakha. The minor was allegedly impregnated and Khakha’s wife, Seema Rani (an accused in the case) gave medicine to her to terminate the pregnancy. Currently, the couple is in judicial custody and was arrested earlier, this month. During the hearing, the Delhi Police informed the court that the minor victim is currently admitted to a hospital in Delhi. The counsel also informed that the child is in a critical state and had seizure yesterday. The division bench said, "Keep her there. Make sure her name is masked on all the FIR and other documents". The bench directed the Delhi Police to ensure that the child's name is not disclosed. The court was apprised by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has also taken cognizance of the matter.
Bench: CJ Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula
Case Title: Court in its own motion v. Department of Women and Child Development
Click here to read more
2. [Financial Assistance & Gadgets to accused with special needs] The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi government to provide infrastructural and financial assistance to procure essential electronic gadgets so that the accused persons with special needs can participate equally in the judicial proceedings with assistance of such assistive technology. The bench said, “The installation of such gadgets and infrastructure will ensure that persons with disabilities will be able to better understand and meaningfully participate in the judicial proceedings, whether criminal or civil”. The judge said that it would be a step towards the long-cherished goal of extending complete justice to every citizen since justice should not only be done but also seem to be done. She observed, “No citizen in this country should feel that due to his physical or mental disability, justice was not done to him either due to lack of material infrastructure or moral, ethical, sensitive and understanding by the judicial system and court”. The court opined that active judicial conduct to ensure access to persons with disabilities in the judicial process will ensure achieving the constitutional vision of justice of ensuring fundamental and human rights of persons with disabilities and their actual, practical and meaningful participation in the judicial process and fair trial. Justice Sharma made the observations in a plea by Rakesh Kumar Kalra, a deaf divyang, seeking directions to constitute a Special Court as per Section 84 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and to make arrangements for the petitioner during the criminal trial he is facing. “There is a need to acknowledge that persons with disabilities do not need pity or patronization based on stereotypical false assumption that they are less capable and valuable compared with persons without disabilities”, the court.
Bench: Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Case Title: Rakesh Kumar Kalra Deaf Divayang v. State Govt of NCT Delhi
3. [AI tools cannot substitute human intellect] In a recent challenge by Christian Louboutin, famous for its red sole shoes, the Delhi High Court passed a direction restraining the defendants from copying or imitating any of their designs. With respect to responses produced by the plaintiff to establish goodwill of the brand, it was added that ChatGPT and other AI tools cannot be used as a substitute for human intellect. “Responses from ChatGPT as also the one relied upon by the Plaintiffs shows that the said tool cannot be the basis of adjudication of legal or factual issues in a court of law… At best the tool can be utilised for preliminary understanding or for preliminary research and nothing more”, Court observed. The Judge, while allowing the petition, held, “Upon perusing the shoes of the parties and the comparative chart of a large variety of product designs which have been imitated by the Defendant that this Court arrives at the conclusion that there has been a clear intention to imitate and gain monetarily on the strength of the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiffs. This Court has no doubt that the products of the Defendant are knock-offs or look-alikes of the Plaintiffs’ distinctive shoes and footwear.” Defendant has reproduced all distinguishing characteristics of Plaintiff's shoes, including the prints and 'RED SOLE' and 'SPIKED SHOE STYLE, it was added. An undertaking was agreed to by the plaintiff, in light of which no amount was imposed as damages, however, breach of the same would result in damages of Rs. 25 lakh, as cautioned by the Court.
Bench: Justice Prathiba M. Singh
Case Title: Christian Louboutin v. Shoe Boutique
4. [Attempt to rape case] While upholding the conviction of a man for attempting to rape a 7-year-old girl child the Delhi High Court observed, “It is essential to acknowledge that even minimal penetration is sufficient to establish sexual intercourse”. "...The nature of the offense needs to be carefully considered, whether it constitutes rape or an attempt to commit rape. It is essential to acknowledge that even minimal penetration is sufficient to establish sexual intercourse”, the single judge bench stated in its order dated August 21. As per the prosecution, the convict, a neighbour had taken the seven-year-old girl along with her younger sister to a room and forcibly established physical relations with her while confining her in a room and making the younger child wait outside. The court noted that it was clear that although rape had been ruled out because there had been no penetration, there had been an attempt of rape because the appellant tried to penetrate, causing tenderness, because of which the victim had felt pain. The court made the observations in an appeal filed by a man against the trial court order which sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 and in default of the fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 342 IPC and, for the same, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
Case Title: Rahul v. State of Delhi
5. [Divorce granted on ground of cruelty & desertion] While granting divorce to a woman on the grounds of cruelty and desertion by her husband, the Delhi High Court held “No law gives the right to a husband to beat and torture his wife”. The division bench said, in this case, it has been proved that the man failed to resume companionship with his wife and not only did there exist physical separation but it was also coupled with “animus” of not bringing her back to the matrimonial home. Taking into account the medical documents of the woman, the court said in the absence of any rebuttal by the man, it has to be held that the woman’s testimony of being subjected to physical assault stands corroborated by the medical documents. “Merely because the parties got married and the respondent was her husband, no law gave him the right to subject his wife to beatings and torture. Such conduct of the respondent necessarily qualifies as physical cruelty entitling the appellant to divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955”, the bench said. The court was hearing an appeal by a woman challenging the decision of the trial court, whereby it has dismissed her petition seeking divorce from the man on the ground of cruelty and desertion.
Bench: Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna
Case Title: Smt. Rekha Sehrawat v. Sh. Amarjit Singh
6. [Fact finding committee to inspect sanitation, drinking water in Tihar Jail] The Delhi High Court has constituted a four-member independent fact-finding committee to inspect the condition of drinking water, sanitation, overall hygiene, and the maintenance of washrooms/toilets within the Tihar jail complex. Recognizing the pressing nature of this issue, the bench said that it was necessary to authorize an independent committee for a meticulous inspection of Tihar Jail. The division bench of CJ Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula said, “We establish a Fact-Finding Committee consisting of Dr. Amit George, Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Ms. Nandita Rao, and Mr. Tushar Sannu. Their mandate is to impartially evaluate the present conditions and update us on the status of drinking water, sanitation, overall hygiene, and the maintenance of washrooms/toilets within the complex”. “The Director General (Prison) of Tihar Jail is directed to facilitate the Committee's work, providing all requisite resources and support to enable a thorough examination of the jail premises”, the court stated in its order dated August 23. The court further sought a detailed status report from both the committee and the Delhi government before the next date of hearing i.e. October 18, 2023. The court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC), wherein it addressed the pressing issue of supply of clean drinking water and maintaining hygienic-sanitary conditions within the Tihar Jail Complex.
Case Title: Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee v. Government of NCT of Delhi
7. [Central Ridge forest] The Delhi High Court has asked authorities to explain as to why 63 structures were present inside the 864-hectare Central Ridge forest and made it clear that those lacking protection from coercive action “have to go”. “'How can you choke the lungs of the national capital”, the bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh remarked orally. The judge also directed authorities to not allow the dumping of any waste in the area and sought a reply to know the reason behind such a large number of structures in the Central Ridge forest and asked the authorities to explain what these structures were. "Sixty-three is not a small number. It is a huge number. How can they have protection? I am not able to understand. These 63 structures have to go. Find out if there is any stay order by any court on these structures. You (Delhi government) file an affidavit as to what these structures are along with photographs and you remove them”, the court said. The judge also said, “It is in the larger interest of the people of the state. These (ridge areas) are the lungs of Delhi. How can there be 63 structures on the ridge? You find out what these structures are and what is the protection available with each of these structures. If there is no protection, the structure has to go. Do the needful in four weeks”. "Ridge”, which is the rocky outcrop of Aravali hills in Delhi, has been notified as a reserved forest.
Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh
Case Title: Anjali College of Pharmacy and Science through its founder -cum-chairman Devendra Gupta v. Dr. Montu M Patel President, Pharmacy Council of India & Anr.
8. [Royal Challengers Sports Ltd's plea against the makers of the film ‘JAILER’] In a suit by Royal Challengers Sports Ltd. against the makers of the film ‘JAILER’, the Delhi High Court recently directed the defendants to abide by the settlement agreement and digitally alter the clippings in a manner that the primary colours of the RCB jersey, as also the branding of the sponsors, gets faded or diminished. The directions were issued to be carried out in a time bound manner, that is, until September 1, 2023. The Court, while disposing of the petition, observed, “The Defendants shall ensure that after 1st September, 2023, none of the theatres would exhibit the RCB jersey in any form whatsoever. Insofar as television, satellite or any OTT platform is concerned, prior to the release thereof, the altered version of the film shall be broadcasted/telecasted.” Since the matter was decided on the very first date of listing, full court fee was directed to be refunded to the plaintiff in view of the judgment in Nutan Batra v. Buniyaad Associates, (2018) 255 DLT 696.
Case Title: Royal Challengers Sports Private Limited v. Sun Pictures
9. [2019 Lok Sabha Election] The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea that challenged the election of Meenakshi Lekhi, the Union Minister of State for External Affairs and Culture. This is pertaining to the 2019 Lok Sabha Elections. The bench said, “sans any underpinning material, the petitioner’s broad averments are insufficient to sustain the allegations of electoral corrupt practices”. “The incurable defect in the affidavit accompanying the petition (as stipulated under Rule 94A of the 1961 Rules), further fortifies the Respondent’s case for rejection of the petition. Therefore, the application is allowed and disposed of”, the Judge added. The petitioner, Ramesh had contested against Lekhi as who had contested as an independent candidate from the “New Delhi Constituency in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections”. Lekhi was accused of discrepancies in her poll expenditure and was alleged to have been involved in corrupt electoral practices. She had allegedly crossed the ceiling amount of Rs. 70 lakhs in the campaigning and had spent over Rs. 1 crore in a big event.
Bench: Justice Sanjeev Narula
Case Title: Ramesh v. Smt. Meenakshi Lekhi
10. [ESewa Kendra to give assistance to visually impaired] The Delhi High Court has directed the eSewa Kendra of the High Court and District Courts to extend necessary assistance to specially abled or visually impaired advocates and litigants in converting non-OCR files to accessibility compliant format. “eSewa Kendra of this Court and Delhi District Courts shall render necessary assistance to specially abled/visually impaired Advocates/litigants in person, in converting the non-OCR filed to accessibility complaint format. The contact details of eSewa Kendra be also mentioned on the website of this court and Delhi District Courts for rendering necessary assistance in this regard”, the officer order read. An administrative order, issued by the High Court’s Registrar General Ravinder Dudeja, asked the Principal District and Sessions Judges of all the district courts and the registrar (IT) of the high court to ensure that this facility is made available at the e-Sewa Kendras and the contact details be uploaded on their respective websites.
11. [Bail granted to 63-yr old man accused of flashing private parts to a minor girl] The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Police to arrange counselling for a minor girl, who was traumatized after a 63-year old man showed his private parts to her. The court was dealing with a bail plea filed by the 63-year old man, on the ground that he was mentally unstable and was in custody since June 24, 2023. The counsel for the man submitted that even as per the status report, there is no history of physical assault, sexual assault, videography, or pornography. There is neither history of touching of the victim by the accused nor any report of verbal abuse. “The only allegation against the accused is that he opened the gate of his house and took down his underwear and showed his private part to the complainant”, he submitted. The father of the victim who appeared through VC stated that the incident has severely disturbed and traumatized the victim. The Judge noted that there is no doubt that such incidents leave a deep trauma on the victim and said, “but at the same time, the Court has to strive to maintain a balance. The accused herein is an old man aged 63 years. The accused is stated to be mentally unstable. It is also pertinent to mention here that there is no report or history of touching of victim and verbal abuse”. The case was registered against the man on June 23 at Okhla Industrial Area, Police station on the basis of a statement by the victim, who was studying in Class III.
Bench: Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Case Title: Kishan Lal v. The State
12. [FIR quashed against BJP's Vijay Jolly]The Delhi High Court has recently quashed a FIR against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Vijay Jolly who was accused of vandalising the house of former Tehelka managing editor Shoma Chaudhury. The bench said, “Since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the case pending. It will be nothing but abuse of the process of law”. “Consequentially, this petition is allowed and FIR No.521/2013, under Sections 143/149/341/427 IPC and Section 3 of the Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007, registered at Police Station-Saket, Delhi, and all proceedings emanating there from shall stand quashed. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly”, the Judge ordered. The court was hearing a plea seeking quashing of FIR registered at Saket police station under Section 143, 149, 341, 327 of IPC and Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007.
Bench: Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar
Case Title: Vijay Jolly & Anr. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
13. [2024 Lok Sabha Elections] The Delhi High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to carry out fresh 'First Level Checking' of EVMs & VVPATs in the presence of the authorised representatives of the Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee for their use in the 2024 Lok Sabha Elections. The plea also sought directions to supply the details of the EVMs & VVPATs, like making, serial numbers and manufacturing companies, etc. The division bench said, “The safeguards and checks embedded in the guidelines are sufficient to ensure the integrity of FLC process”. “The inclusion of political representatives in sealing the EVMs is a significant step towards mutual accountability. Every recognized political party was given an equal opportunity to be a part of the process. Thus, there participation in this democratic process plays a pivotal role in ensuring its sanctity. The petition, in our considered view, lacks substantive ground. Consequently, the Court is not inclined to accede to the relief sought by the Petitioner”, the court said.
Case Title: Shri Anil Kumar v. Election Commission of India & Anr.
14. [Stem cell therapy for 2 children suffering from Autism] The Delhi High Court has allowed two children suffering from autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to undergo stem cell therapy for treatment of their condition. The family members of the two children had moved the high court earlier this year with a petition after children's treatment was stopped by their doctors on account of a recommendation by the Ethics and Medical Registration Board (EMRB) of National Medical Commission (NMC) dated December 6, which said that the use of stem cell therapy shall amount to “professional misconduct”. A division bench said that there was “no law banning the use of stem cell therapy” for ASD and even the NMC was yet to take a final decision on the recommendation. "No fruitful purpose would be served by stopping the treatment that is going on at present and therefore the petitioners are permitted to continue the treatment”, the bench said. It also clarified that this was an interim order and that they did not want the treatment to be stopped right now. Further, the court clarified that the treatment would be at the risk of the petitioners.
Case Title: Dalip Kaur & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.
15. [Sexual Assault on 3-year old] In a suo moto case pertaining to sexual assault on a three-year-old girl allegedly by a cleaner working in a school in South Delhi, the Delhi government's standing counsel, Santosh Tripathi on Friday proposed before the Delhi High Court that it should constitute a “permanent child safety monitoring committee”. Tripathi submitted, "It is my request. We need a permanent child safety monitoring committee with the support of the Department of Education (DoE) because this is needed. This incident should not happen again. It was very traumatic". A division bench comprising of CJ Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula said, "...to monitor implementation of circular dated 07.11.2017 issued by the Government of National Capital of Delhi, which is in respect of minimum standards of school safety. Mr. Tripathi seeks two weeks' time to suggest names of independent persons/ government officials who will be members of the said committee". "We will put names of one or two retired judges of this court too", Justice Narula remarked orally.
Case Title: Court on its own motion v. Government of NCT of Delhi
16. [Arms Act] While observing that “conscious possession” is a significant factor in prosecuting cases under the Arms Act, the Delhi High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings against an individual who was found with a live cartridge at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in 2016. The bench highlighted that the recovered cartridge had been inadvertently left in the petitioner's bag during travel. "It has been held in a plethora of judgments including in Gunwant Lal vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (1972) 2 SCC 194 and Sanjay Dutt vs. State through CBI Bombay (II) Crimes 1994 (3) 344 (SC), that 'conscious possession' is the most significant ingredient for prosecution under the Arms Act, 1959. The possession herein is not mere custody of the arms but such possession supported by mens rea or intention," the judge noted. Since it was clear that the petitioner had “no intention” of transporting the ammunition, the court said that this case was appropriate for quashing the First Information Report (FIR).
Bench: Justice Saurabh Banerjee
Case Title: Mohd. Nazim v. State
17. [POCSO Act] The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Registrar (Vigilance) to seek an explanation on the administrative side from the Trial Court Judge, as to the reasons for passing the non-reasoned order granting bail to an accused under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and the Indian Penal Code. A bench has asked the report to be placed before the Inspecting Judges Committee of the Delhi High Court within one week for consideration. The bench was hearing a plea challenging a Trial Court's order, which granted bail to an accused under Section 10 (aggravated sexual assault) of the POCSO Act and Sections 342 (wrongful confinement), 354, 354-B (assault or using criminal force on woman) and 363 (kidnapping) of IPC. It has been alleged that the Trial Court failed to consider the gravity and heinousness of the offence involved while granting bail to the accused and no reasonable amount of time to enter appearance and make submissions opposing the grant of bail was given to anyone on behalf of the child involved. Additionally, it was argued, "that the impugned order is unreasoned and not apposite in law."
Case Title: Ms. N Vs. State & Anr.
18. [Shibu Soren's plea against Lokpal's notice] Solicitor General of India (SGI) Tushar Mehta has concluded his submissions before the Delhi High Court in a plea filed by Jharkhand Mukti Morcha President Shibu Soren against Lokpal's notice in a disproportionate asset case directing a preliminary inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation.During the hearing, SG Mehta submitted, "When the Lokpal calls upon the alleged delinquent, he can always raise this plea before Lokpal. Otherwise, what will happen? Your Lordships entertaining the writ petition at this stage would be yet another level not contemplated by law who will examine whether Lokpal should hear or not". The SG contended, "Complainant might be wrong, might be right...Whether the property belongs to the party is the question. Two of the properties were obtained within two years. The only argument is whether they belong to the party and whether they were purchased from his disproportionate assets or his accounted money is a matter of investigation. Merely saying that the property belongs to someone does not absolve me from my responsibility of facing the Lokpal and if the Lokpal directs facing the investigation. From where these properties were purchased is the question". "Ultimately, it's his party. He has created the party. It's not the party which was in existence like Indian National Congress for 100 years and he became a President", he added. He also gave an illustration, "If I earn say Rs. 100 crore illegal money, obviously I'll not deposit it in my savings account. There would be a layer of companies". SG said, "Amit Aggarwal is a close friend of Soren's. He is also a purchaser of the party property". "The persons who are under the purview of the Lokpal Act are members of Parliament but suppose there is an allegation that I, as a Member of Parliament, have amassed wealth in the name of my son, my wife, my trust, my companies, etc, then the property may not be belonging to me but others can always be investigated and there are properties not in the name of the petitioner (Shibu Soren), but others within 7 years. This will be gone into by the Lokpal", the SG concluded.
Bench: Justice Subramonium Prasad
Case Title: Shibu Soren v. Lokpal of India & Anr.
19. [Former J&K CM Omar Abdullah to pay enhanced Maintenance amount to his estranged wife] The Delhi High Court has directed former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah to pay Rs. 1.5 lakh per month to his estranged wife, Payal Abdullah as maintenance. The bench also ordered Abdullah to pay Rs. 60,000 per month for his son’s education. Notably, on April 26, 2018, a trial court had ordered the former CM to pay interim maintenance of Rs 75,000 per month to Payal Abdullah and Rs 25,000 to their son. Payal had moved the High Court challenging the same order, seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount. She claimed that the maintenance awarded was “too low” and that her sons were not old enough to take care of their expenses.
Case Title: Payal Abdullah v. Omar Abdullah
Please Login or Register
