LawLoveLegal

Introduction In a significant ruling reinforcing the primacy of natural justice and procedural fairness, the Delhi High Court has restrained the Central Government from demolishing structures in and around the historic Ajmer Sharif Dargah without giving affected individuals an opportunity to be heard. The order came while hearing a petition challenging a November 22, 2025 notice issued by the Centre-appointed Nazim directing removal of alleged encroachments inside the Dargah premises. The court categorically observed that the Centre “cannot just go with a bulldozer and raze everything” without following due process. This judgment adds to the growing judicial scrutiny of arbitrary demolitions and underscores the constitutional obligation to ensure fairness even in matters involving encroachments and security considerations. “YOU JUST CAN’T GO WITH A BULLDOZER…” – COURT’S STRONG OBSERVATION Judicial Concern Over Vague Notice Justice Sachin Datta remarked that the November 22 no...

The Delhi High Court has delivered a significant ruling in a 2017 unnatural-death case involving a 23-year-old hotel manager, Arnav Duggal. The court sharply criticised the Delhi Police for a “lackadaisical” and “myopic” investigation and transferred the matter to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). This article explains the facts, court’s findings, statutory basis, constitutional principles, and judicial precedents relevant to this case. Background of the Case Death of Arnav Duggal in 2017 Arnav Duggal, aged 23, employed as a manager at a luxury hotel, was found dead in a flat in 2017. The only person present at the time of his death was a woman with whom he was allegedly in a relationship. The Delhi Police, from the very beginning, treated the death as suicide. Petition Filed by the Mother Allegation of Faulty Investigation Arnav’s mother approached the Delhi High Court seeking transfer of the investigation from Delhi Police to the CBI. She argued: The police pre...

Introduction The Delhi High Court has delivered a significant ruling reinforcing the constitutional right to property and the statutory safeguards built into the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The court held that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot freeze or attach property based merely on suspicion; instead, it must show valid and recorded “reasons to believe” supported by material evidence. The judgment provides important clarity on the limits of ED’s powers and the legal standards required for deprivation of property. Statutory Framework Under PMLA Section 17(1): Search and Seizure – Requirement of “Reasons to Believe” Section 17(1) of the PMLA empowers ED officers to enter and search premises and seize records or property. However, this power is conditional. The officer must possess “reasons to believe” that: A person has committed an offence under the Act, or The person is in possession of proceeds of crime. These reasons must be recorded in wr...

In a landmark ruling that addresses the mental health and academic rights of students, the Delhi High Court has held that no law student across India can be prevented from appearing for examinations on the ground of attendance shortage. The decision comes nearly nine years after the tragic death of Sushant Rohilla , a law student who died by suicide in 2016 after being barred from sitting for his semester exams due to insufficient attendance. Background: The Sushant Rohilla Case and Judicial Intervention In August 2016 , Sushant Rohilla , a third-year law student at Amity Law School, Delhi , took his own life after being denied permission to sit for his semester exams. His death raised serious questions about the rigidity of attendance norms and their impact on students’ mental health. Following the incident, a suo motu petition was initiated by the Supreme Court of India in September 2016 to examine the broader issue of attendance-related restrictions in law colleges. In March...

Introduction The Delhi High Court has permitted JTNL Consumer Health , a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson , to continue marketing its electrolyte drink under the registered trademark “ORSL” , despite the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) issuing a ban on the use of the term ‘ORS’ in beverage branding. The High Court order places the FSSAI directive in temporary suspension only with respect to JTNL , until the authority decides on the company’s representation. This interim protection addresses concerns surrounding regulatory compliance, consumer protection, and market impact. Background: FSSAI’s Prohibition on Use of “ORS” On October 14 and 15, 2025 , the FSSAI issued orders directing Food Business Operators (FBOs) to refrain from using the term ORS : In product names On packaging labels In advertisements As part of trademarks The regulator reasoned that electrolyte drinks marketed as “ORS” or similarly named alternatives misled consumers i...

Court Emphasizes Procedural Safeguards Under PMLA The Delhi High Court has ruled that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) must strictly follow the procedures laid down in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) when seeking to retain seized or frozen property. The judgment reinforces that procedural safeguards are crucial to protect individuals’ rights from arbitrary retention of property. A bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vadiyanathan Shankar delivered the verdict on Friday, making it clear that ED cannot directly seek the adjudicating authority’s approval for retention without first issuing a formal order. Requirement of a Formal Order Before Retention According to the court, before the ED approaches the adjudicating authority, an authorised officer must pass a formal order explaining why retention for up to 180 days is necessary. Without this essential step, the adjudicating authority has no legal basis to determine whether the seized property is ...

Introduction The Delhi High Court has issued a significant ruling safeguarding the personality and publicity rights of actor Aishwarya Rai Bachchan , restraining multiple entities from using her name, image, and voice without prior consent. The judgment reinforces the legal protections available to celebrities against unauthorized commercial exploitation of their identity. Background of the Case Aishwarya Rai Bachchan filed a petition before the Delhi High Court, alleging that several individuals and organizations were illegally using her name, voice, and videos for commercial purposes. The unauthorized usage also included morphed images created using artificial intelligence , some of which were circulated in a pornographic context , thereby causing severe reputational and personal harm. She argued that such actions infringed upon her publicity rights, privacy, and dignity , and sought judicial intervention. The Court’s Observations Justice Tejas Karia delivered a 16-page or...

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a husband’s increased income and the rising cost of living are valid factors to enhance the maintenance payable to his separated wife, even if he is retired and drawing a pension. Background of the Case The case involved a 60-year-old woman who challenged a family court’s order that had refused to increase her monthly maintenance. The couple married in April 1990 but separated just two years later, after the woman alleged dowry demands and harassment . In 2012 , a family court directed the husband to pay ₹10,000 per month in maintenance. In 2018 , the woman sought an enhancement, citing her husband’s promotion from Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) to Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) , which increased his salary before retirement. Plea of the Wife The woman argued that: The maintenance was originally fixed based on her husband’s ₹28,000 monthly salary in 2012, but by the time of her petition, his salary had risen to ₹40,000 . He...

The Delhi High Court has upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s (CAT) December 2024 order, directing the Centre to promote Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer Sameer Wankhede to the post of Joint Commissioner (JC) of Customs and Indirect Taxes , provided he is found eligible by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). Background: Wankhede’s Role in Aryan Khan Drug Case Sameer Wankhede, a 2008-batch IRS officer, served as the Zonal Director of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in Mumbai and gained national attention in October 2021 when he supervised the high-profile arrest of Aryan Khan , son of Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan , in a drugs-on-cruise case. However, in July 2023 , Wankhede himself came under scrutiny after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) initiated probes into allegations that he demanded a ₹25 crore bribe from Shah Rukh Khan in exchange for not implicating Aryan Khan in the case. Sealed Cover Proc...

The Delhi High Court has raised significant questions over the legality of restaurants charging customers beyond the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) of goods under the guise of ambience costs and service charges. The observations came during hearings on appeals filed by the National Restaurant Association of India (NRAI) and the Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations of India (FHRAI) challenging earlier court orders restricting automatic service charges. Court Observations: Charging Beyond MRP Under Scrutiny A division bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela expressed strong reservations about the practice of levying extra charges on goods, citing the Legal Metrology Act , which prohibits selling items above their declared MRP. To drive the point home, the bench presented a striking illustration: A ₹20 MRP water bottle billed at ₹100 in a restaurant, broken down as ₹80 for ambience and ₹10 as service charge. The Court questioned the leg...

In a key development for India's cinematic and legal landscape, the Central Government has withdrawn its July 21 directive recommending six cuts in the controversial film Udaipur Files . The move came during the hearing of two petitions before the Delhi High Court, which questioned the Centre's authority to override or direct the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) in matters of certification and content modification.

  🔹 Case Title : Ferrero SpA & Ors v. M.B. Enterprises 🔹 Judgment Date : 28 July 2025 🔹 Court : Delhi High Court 🔹 Presiding Judge : Justice Saurabh Banerjee 🔹 Suit No. : CS(COMM) 593/2021 🔍 Background: From Raids to the Courtroom The global confectionery giant Ferrero SpA, known for its beloved hazelnut cocoa spread Nutella , filed a trademark infringement suit against M.B. Enterprises after receiving a notification from Maharashtra's FDA. A raid at the Thane facility uncovered: Over 9.5 lakh units of counterfeit Nutella Approximately 4 lakh packaging components (jars, lids, labels) Products manufactured under unhygienic conditions , raising serious public health concerns ⚖️ Court’s Observations and Key Legal Findings 1. Trademark Infringement & Passing Off The Court found M.B. Enterprises guilty of copying Nutella’s label, trade dress, and packaging with the clear intention of deceiving the public and cashing in on Ferrero’s reputation. It s...

Public Appeal to Delhi Home Minister Against Reconsideration In a powerful letter addressed to Delhi Home Minister Ashish Sood , Hemant Mattoo , brother of Priyadarshini Mattoo , along with concerned citizens and activists, has urged the government to reject any reconsideration for the premature release of life convict Santosh Kumar Singh . The appeal follows the Delhi High Court’s decision to set aside the Sentence Review Board (SRB)’s earlier rejection , asking it to review the matter afresh. Context of the Conviction: Brutal Rape and Murder Priyadarshini Mattoo , a law student, was brutally raped and murdered by Santosh Kumar Singh on January 16, 1996. Singh, the son of a senior IPS officer, had allegedly stalked and harassed Mattoo for months. Despite multiple police complaints lodged between February and November 1995, including incidents of stalking, attempted break-in, and assault, the authorities failed to act effectively. Her repeated pleas for protection were ignored....

High Court Rejects Bail in Espionage Case Involving Indian Army Secrets On 22 May 2025 , the Delhi High Court denied bail to Mohsin Khan , accused in a major espionage case concerning the transfer of classified information about the Indian Army to Pakistan . The court emphasized the gravity of the offence, stating that it impacted the sovereignty and integrity of India , and could not be treated with leniency. The case was registered under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 by the Delhi Police Crime Branch in 2021, following intelligence alerts about a spy syndicate operating across Delhi, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. Court’s Observations: Security Over Individual Liberty Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma , in her judgment, stated that the case involved national security , and thus could not be treated as a routine matter of bail. She observed: “The offence is not merely one against an individual or group, but an offence against the very integrity, sovereignty, and security of Bhar...

Landmark plea raises concerns on digital inclusion and rights of persons with disabilities Background of the Case On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court issued notices to food delivery giants Swiggy and Zepto , along with the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) , in a significant case concerning digital accessibility for visually impaired users . The petition, filed by the NGO Mission Accessibility , alleges that these companies' mobile applications are not designed to be accessible to persons with visual impairments, thereby violating multiple legal and constitutional provisions. The case was heard by Justice Sachin Datta , who directed all respondents to file their replies within four weeks . The matter will next be taken up on May 28, 2025 . Key Allegations by the Petitioner The petition, filed through advocates Sarah and Taha Bin Tasneem , with advocate Rahul Bajaj appearing for the petitioner, outlines specific issues related to the user interface...

Delhi HC Sets Aside FIR Orders in Loan Dispute Case In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has quashed two trial court orders that directed the registration of First Information Reports (FIRs) , citing the absence of a mandatory affidavit as required under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) . This decision reinforces the procedural necessity of affidavit submission when seeking an investigation by law enforcement. Case Background: Loan Dispute Leading to FIR Request The case pertains to a loan-related dispute involving petitioners Rajat Bhagat and Sarika Bhagat , who were accused of fraudulent activity. The complainant, Chetna Kalra , had approached the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), Tis Hazari Courts, in 2016 , seeking the registration of an FIR against them. The complaint invoked multiple provisions under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) , including: Section 420 – Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property Section 463 –...