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.
NDPS Bail and Section 37 Conditions – Advocate Manish Jha
Dismissing bail in a commercial quantity heroin case at IGI Airport, the Delhi High Court restates the twin conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act and why procedural objections rarely open that gate.
Read → 9 August 2026 · Criminal LawTestimony of a Prosecutrix: Delhi HC – Advocate Manish Jha
Upholding a rape conviction, the Delhi High Court explains why minor omissions do not demolish credible testimony, why belated medical silence proves little, and what a plea of alibi requires.
Read → 8 August 2026 · Criminal LawSuccessive Anticipatory Bail Pleas – Advocate Manish Jha
The Delhi High Court dismissed a third anticipatory bail application where the Supreme Court had already declined relief and nothing had changed since — and flagged the police failure to arrest.
Read → 8 August 2026 · Criminal LawSanction for Former Public Servants – Advocate Manish Jha
A Division Bench answers a criminal reference: the 2018 amendment to Section 19 PC Act protects retired public servants, but only where cognizance was yet to be taken as on 26 July 2018.
Read → 8 August 2026 · Criminal LawFood Safety Cases: The Maggi Quashing – Advocate Manish Jha
The Delhi High Court quashed the 2015 Maggi noodles prosecutions after referral laboratory testing and a decade of judicial scrutiny discredited the analyst reports at their foundation.
Read → 7 August 2026 · Criminal LawUAPA Extension Orders: No Appeal Lies – Advocate Manish Jha
A Delhi High Court Division Bench holds that an order extending UAPA investigation time under Section 43D(2)(b) is interlocutory and not appealable under Section 21 NIA Act; the remedy is Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS.
Read → 6 August 2026 · Criminal LawAcquittal After 22 Years in Prison – Advocate Manish Jha
In Arjun Jani @ Tuntun v. State of Orissa (Crl.A. 3639/2026, 4 August 2026), the Supreme Court acquits a man who spent twenty-two years in prison for a triple murder, holding that a sole eyewitness must inspire confidence and that jail appeals cannot be dismissed on delay alone.
Read → 5 August 2026 · Criminal LawBreach of Contract Is Not Cheating: SC – Advocate Manish Jha
In G. Saminathan v. The State (2026 INSC 772, 31 July 2026), the Supreme Court quashes a cheating and criminal breach of trust case born of a failed joint development agreement, holding that dishonest intention must exist at the inception and that Sections 406 and 420 IPC cannot co-exist on the same facts.
Read → 5 August 2026 · Criminal LawWhen an Acquittal Stands: SC on Evidence – Advocate Manish Jha
In Nirmala Bai Devidas Chavhan v. State of Maharashtra (2026 INSC 787), the Supreme Court upholds the acquittal of twenty accused, explaining when identical testimony suggests tutoring, when medical evidence displaces ocular accounts, and how investigative lapses weigh.
Read → 4 August 2026 · Criminal LawSection 498A and Live-In Relationships – Advocate Manish Jha
In Dr Lokesh B.H. v. State of Karnataka (3 August 2026), the Supreme Court holds that Section 498A IPC extends to live-in relationships in the nature of marriage between consenting adults, while mandating strict Arnesh Kumar safeguards.
Read → 4 August 2026 · Criminal LawEvidence Against an Absconder: SC Limits – Advocate Manish Jha
Acquitting a man convicted of a 1999 murder, the Supreme Court holds that a deposition recorded in an absconder's absence is inadmissible against him unless a formal Section 299 CrPC order was passed at the time.
Read → 3 August 2026 · Criminal LawLimits on Quashing an FIR: Supreme Court – Advocate Manish Jha
Restoring quashed corruption FIRs in State of Karnataka v. Prabhu Shankar (30 July 2026), the Supreme Court reiterates that a High Court cannot conduct a mini-trial at the threshold: the only question is whether the FIR prima facie discloses a cognizable offence.
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.