These notes are written for litigants and for younger members of the Bar. They explain procedure as it operates in the Delhi courts — the sequence of steps, the timelines that matter, and the points at which a matter is commonly lost. They are general information, not advice on any particular case.
Section 42 NDPS: Substance Over Form – Advocate Manish Jha
Upholding a conviction for 200 kg of poppy husk, the Supreme Court in Kashmir Ram v. State of Punjab (2026 INSC 854) explained when substantial compliance with Section 42 NDPS Act suffices — and when its breach remains fatal.
Read → 16 August 2026 · Civil & PropertyAgreement to Sell Does Not End a Tenancy – Advocate Manish Jha
In Nazim Shaikh Hasan v. Nasir Mushtaq Shaikh (2026 INSC 853), the Supreme Court held that an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not by itself determine the tenancy, and unregistered agreements offer no part-performance shield.
Read → 16 August 2026 · Criminal LawJuvenility Found Late: What Survives? – Advocate Manish Jha
In Dinesh Kumar v. State of Haryana (2026 INSC 842), a juvenility finding placed on record decades after a 1998 murder left the conviction intact — but every adult sentence was set aside as incapable of operating.
Read → 16 August 2026 · Criminal LawBail When Trial Evidence Weakens: DHC – Advocate Manish Jha
Two Delhi High Court orders of 13 August 2026 granted bail in a stabbing and a firing case after the trial record itself weakened the prosecution — a complainant who resiled and a ballistics report matching a different weapon.
Read → 15 August 2026 · Criminal LawAnticipatory Bail in Fraud FIRs – Advocate Manish Jha
Two Delhi High Court orders of 13 and 14 August 2026 — one refusing anticipatory bail in a ₹1.65 crore gold fraud, the other directing notice before arrest in an online investment scam — show that pre-arrest protection turns on the state of the evidence and the real need for custody.
Read → 15 August 2026 · Commercial & CorporateCheque Cases and Resigned Directors – Advocate Manish Jha
The Delhi High Court quashed four cheque bounce complaints against a director who had resigned before the cheques were issued, holding that Section 141 NI Act requires specific averments of role and yields to unimpeachable ROC records.
Read → 15 August 2026 · Commercial & CorporateGST for Insolvency Professionals – Advocate Manish Jha
A Division Bench held that an advocate acting as an interim resolution professional supplies insolvency and receivership services taxable on forward charge — the reverse charge dispensation covers only legal services rendered as counsel.
Read → 15 August 2026 · Matrimonial & FamilyChild Custody in Delhi Family Courts – Advocate Manish Jha
A practice guide to guardianship and custody petitions in the Delhi Family Courts: statutes, jurisdiction, interim visitation, counselling and mediation, evidence, final orders and appeals.
Read → 14 August 2026 · Criminal LawNDPS Bail: Two Delhi HC Orders – Advocate Manish Jha
On 12 August 2026 the Delhi High Court granted bail in two NDPS cases from the same investigation — one because call records and co-accused disclosures alone could not establish complicity, the other because custody of almost five years with 8 of 22 witnesses examined violated the right to a speedy trial.
Read → 14 August 2026 · Criminal LawNotice Before Arrest: Delhi HC – Advocate Manish Jha
Where the accused had joined the investigation and the IO saw no present need to arrest, the Delhi High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail plea by directing two weeks' prior notice before any arrest, preserving recourse to the Sessions Court.
Read → 14 August 2026 · Commercial & CorporateSection 34 Is Not an Appeal: DHC – Advocate Manish Jha
Dismissing the Union of India's challenge to an award that quashed a Rs 8.55 crore telecom demand against Sterlite Technologies, the Delhi High Court restated that a plausible arbitral view cannot be substituted under Section 34.
Read → 14 August 2026 · Civil & PropertyTransfer of a Suit for Bias: DHC – Advocate Manish Jha
The Delhi High Court dismissed a Section 24 CPC petition to transfer a commercial suit, holding that oral observations during hearings, without any adverse adjudication, cannot establish bias — and imposed Rs 25,000 costs.
Read →What Is Covered Here
The chamber writes on the areas in which it appears: criminal procedure under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, bail practice, matrimonial and family proceedings before the Delhi Family Courts, cheque dishonour and recovery, and proceedings before the NCLT and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals. Notes on reported judgments of the Supreme Court of India and the High Court of Delhi are published with a link to the official text of the decision, so that a reader can verify the position rather than rely on a summary.
No article on this page identifies a client or discusses a pending matter conducted by the chamber. Where a statutory provision is cited, the section number is given so that a reader can verify it against the bare Act.