Delhi High Court has sought answers from the Central Government and Delhi Police in a case related to the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. This notice was issued on the application of Delhi Government Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa, in which he has demanded to present the old report of a police officer in the court.

Delhi government minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa says that during the riots, Kamal Nath was present at the site of violence at Gurudwara Rakab Ganj Sahib and this is recorded in the police records. He told the court that the report submitted by the then Additional Police Commissioner Gautam Kaul to the then Police Commissioner should be included in the record.

Delhi High Court sought answers from Center and Delhi Police

During the hearing of the case in Delhi High Court, Justice Ravinder Dudeja issued notice to Delhi Police and Central Government asking them to file their reply by January 15, 2026. On behalf of Manjinder Singh Sirsa, senior lawyer H.S. Phulka said that there were clear reports published in police records and many newspapers regarding Kamal Nath’s presence. But these things have not been included in the status report of the government.

The application was filed in the court in the year 2022

This application is part of Sirsa’s main petition filed in 2022 in the Delhi High Court. In which he had demanded to investigate the alleged role of Kamal Nath and arrest him. In this case, five people were made accused in the FIR lodged at Parliament Street Police Station. It is alleged that all these accused were staying in Kamal Nath’s house. Later he was acquitted due to lack of evidence. According to the petition, during the riots, the Gurudwara was attacked by a mob and two Sikhs died tragically.

The Delhi High Court, while giving a big verdict, said that the widowed daughter -in -law after her husband’s death has every right to get maintenance from her father -in -law’s ancestral property. The Delhi High Court clarified that this right will only apply to the ancestral property and not on the property made by the father -in -law.

Actually, this case is related to the petition filed by a woman in the Delhi High Court. Whose husband died in March 2023. The woman filed an application in the court for maintenance, although her father -in -law had already died in December 2021. His petition was dismissed by the Family Court and a single judge. He challenged the order to dismiss the petition filed under sections 19, 21, 22 and 23 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956.

Decision of Delhi High Court

Now a bench of Justice Anil Kshetrapal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar in the Delhi High Court said that the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956 under Section 19 and 21 of the 1956, the widow daughter-in-law has a legal right to get maintenance from her father-in-law. This responsibility will be limited only to ancestral property. If the father -in -law does not have ancestral property and only has assets acquired by his own earnings, then the widow daughter -in -law does not have any legal right.

‘So that widowed daughter-in-law is not deprived of maintenance’

This responsibility will be applicable to his abandoned property even after the father -in -law’s death. The court said that this law has been made for social welfare so that no widowed daughter-in-law is deprived of maintenance. The court warned that if the narrow interpretation of Section 19 (1) is made, it will be against the intention of Parliament.

The widow of the deceased’s son also included among the dependent persons

The Delhi High Court said that Section 7 of the provision shows the definition of dependent persons, according to which the widow of the deceased’s son is also included. Provided that when she is unable to get maintenance from her husband’s property or her son-daughters or their property, then she will get this right from her father-in-law’s property.

The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to former Delhi Chief Minister Atishi and Sanjay Singh on a defamation petition filed by Congress leader Sandeep Dixit.

In the Delhi High Court, a bench of Justice Ravindra Dudeja has directed the AAP leaders to file a reply by December 4 on the plea of Sandeep Dixit, filed against the order of the Rousse Avnu Court.

Rouus Avonu Court’s decision was challenged in High Court

The revision petition against Sandeep Dixit’s decision has been filed in the Delhi High Court. In this petition, their complaint against AAP leaders was dismissed by the Rousse Avenue Court. The court dismissed the petition, saying that the alleged defamation factors were given during the election, the allegations were part of the transplant.

Sandeep Dixit’s lawyer made serious allegations

The lawyer appearing on behalf of Sandeep Dixit in the Delhi High Court said that the way the allegations made by the AAP leaders appear to be personally. And this false allegation somewhere caused their client’s reputation and their electoral loss. This case is equal to defamation.

Relief was not provided from Rouse Avnu Court

In fact, the Rousse Avnu Court rejected Sandeep Dixit’s petition on 3 April. In the application filed in the Rousse Avnu Court, Sandeep Dixit had said that AAP leaders Atishi and Sanjay Singh held a press conference on 26 December 2024 alleging that Sandeep Dixit had taken crores of rupees from BJP.

‘Allegations are baseless’

In this press conference, it was alleged that in association with BJP, he is involved in plotting to defeat AAP. It was said in the petition that whatever Atishi Marlena and Sanjay Singh said in the press conference are lies and baseless.

Delhi high court news: The Delhi High Court, underlining the ‘purity and discipline’ of the examination, refused to give relief to the student who appeared with a delay of six minutes in the ‘CUT’ (CUET). The 18 -year -old student claimed that on May 13, she reached the examination center at around 8.36 am after six minutes from the scheduled time of the examination, but was not given admission.

Gates closed around 8.30 am

The bench of Justice Pratibha M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta was hearing a student’s plea against the order of a single judge refusing to intervene in the case. The bench found that very clear instructions were given about reaching the center at around 7 am before the start of the examination in the information bulletin and admit card of the National Examination Authority and it was told that the gates would be closed around 8.30 am. The bench said that negligence in conducting such a big examination will create chaos and ‘discipline of the examination should be maintained’.

The court said on May 31, “CUET is an important entrance examination and arriving in the examination hall on time, reaching the seat on time and being in the center before the closure of the gate, all these are part of the discipline and ethos of the examination system, which should not be relaxed. Because this can create huge inequality among students with similar conditions. ”

Student’s appeal rejected

The bench rejected the student’s appeal and said, “Anyone may feel that it was only six minutes of case, but the authorities cannot be blamed for strictly implementing the rule at the time of the gate.”

The court said, “CUET UG exam is an examination that includes more than 13.54 lakh students from across the country. If exceptions are placed, and discipline is not followed in such an examination, timely conducting of examination, timely announcement of results and timely entry into colleges and universities can all be in danger and will have a widespread impact. In such cases, court intervention should be minimized. ”

Education loan information:
Calculate Education Loan Emi

Delhi hc news: The Delhi High Court, while hearing a PIL, has issued a notice to the Central Government, National Examination Agency and UGC on Friday. In the PIL filed in the Delhi High Court, it has been demanded that women should be exempted from fees for examinations conducted by central autonomous institutions like IIT, AIIMS.

Central government order mentioned in Delhi High Court

In fact, this PIL has been filed in the Delhi High Court by a social worker named Mona Arya. In the petition filed in the Delhi High Court, he says that an office memorandum was issued by the Central Government’s gradual and training department on 3 August 2010. In which women were instructed to give exemption from fees for any examination or interview. But according to the RTI, it has been revealed from the information that many central agencies are still charging examination fees from women, which clearly violates this order.

Millions of women of the country will get opportunities

In the petition filed in Delhi High Court, petitioner Mona Arya said that if this government order is fully implemented, then it can emerge as a new opportunity for millions of women of the country. Especially those women who are very weak financially, who do not get family support, will be able to move towards higher education without worrying about fees.

Violation of the fundamental rights of the constitution

In the petition filed in the Delhi High Court, the petitioner has also said that Article 15 (3) of the Constitution allows the government to make special provisions for women and children. In such a situation, not implementing this order is a violation of women’s rights to education. However, while hearing the case, the Delhi High Court has issued a notice to the concerned parties. In such a situation, it will be very important to see that after the notice issued by the Delhi High Court, all the agencies including the central government file their reply.

Also read: Waving pistols on social media, was giving pose in a domineering style, Delhi Police took big action

Gurjar regiment in Indian Army: The Delhi High Court rejected the PIL seeking the formation of the Gurjar Regiment in the Indian Army. A public interest litigation was filed in the Delhi High Court, demanding the central government to direct the formation of the Gurjar Regiment in the Indian Army.

The bench of Justice DK Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Balla in the Delhi High Court refused to hear this petition as baseless. Actually, a person named Rohan Basoya filed this public interest in the Delhi High Court.

The petition filed in the Delhi High Court claimed that Gurjars of rich military heritage were not given dedicated regiments like other communities like Jat, Sikh, Gorkha and Dogra.

Delhi High Court made important comments

During the hearing of the case in the Delhi High Court, the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court raised strict questions and asked the petitioner’s lawyer what is the basis of the hearing on your petition. You should have any law under constitution or legislation.

The Delhi High Court said that which is the law that gives you the right to make such a regiment. Where is that right, the Delhi High Court also asked during the hearing in this case which provision of the Constitution of India or any other Act gives the right to a particular community to make a regiment. However, the Delhi High Court advised the petitioner’s counsel that there is a great need to do deep research before filing such a petition.

Stated in petition filed in Delhi HC

The petition filed in the Delhi High Court stated that the Indian service has historically maintained a regiment on an ethnic basis, which always recognizes the contribution of various communities in the national defense. However, the Gurjar community is excluded from this system that creates an imbalance in representation and or their constitutional rights, especially the Constitution, violates Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution.

It was also said in the petition that the establishment of the Gurjar Regiment will give the same opportunity to the army recruitment and national security will be strengthened. The petition also argued that in view of the strong presence of the Gurjar community in the border areas like Jammu and Kashmir, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Punjab, the establishment of the Gujjar Regiment will meet the anti -rebellion and strategic military interests in border security operations. At the same time, the petition filed in the court also said that the demand for the Gurjar Regiment has been raised many times before, but the government did not take any concrete steps in this direction.

Court warns the petitioner

The Delhi High Court warned the petitioner’s counsel that in -depth study of legal basic grounds is necessary before filing such a petition. The court also indicated that if the petition was carried forward, the petitioner could also be fined. However, after this warning, the petitioner withdrew his petition from the Delhi High Court.

Also read: MCD News: MCD Ward Committee will vote on June 2, all parties except Congress filled leaflets

Delhi high court news: The Delhi High Court has once again made it clear that there is no place for negligence in any pillar of democracy. The court took cognizance of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (DSGMC) elections, taking cognizance of the Chief Secretary of the Delhi government and gave clear instructions to expedite the electoral process.

Commenting in a very strict tone, Justice Mini Pushkarna of Delhi High Court said, “This court is giving instructions again and again, yet the process of preparing the voter list has not started. Such messing cannot be tolerated with electoral transparency. In 2022, the court gave clear instructions that new photo lists of all 46 wards are prepared on time after two years. It started, nor any concrete time limit was fixed. “

Court raised questions on 12 months demand
The Gurudwara Election Directorate claimed in the court that it would take 12 months to prepare the voter list. On this, the petitioners lodged a protest and said that it was clearly stated in the order of 2022 that this work could be completed in only five months. The court termed this delay as administrative apathy.

Responsibility entrusted to Delhi Chief Secretary
The Delhi High Court has directed the Chief Secretary to hold a meeting with the officials concerned within 4 weeks, decide a certain timeline and present its report in the court. Also, it should be ensured that the necessary manpower is made available immediately so that the process is not further delayed.

Next hearing on 20 May
The next hearing of this entire case will now be held on May 20, but the court has made it clear that if the fixed deadline is not followed, then the Delhi government may have to face serious consequences.

Delhi hc news: Delhi High Court has rejected a person’s bail plea, which has serious allegations of sexual harassment with his minor daughter. The court said in its judgment that protecting the rights of children is the essential duty of the judiciary. Especially when their parents themselves do not stand in their support. The petitioner father claimed that the case was coined due to personal disputes by his wife. However, the marital dispute between husband and wife was already resolved.

Delhi HC’s strict comment

Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court said that the victims of sexual harassment, especially minors, have independent legal rights, which cannot be ignored due to mutual quarrels of parents. The Delhi High Court said in its judgment that the rights of every child are legally recognized. If parents are not supporting their child themselves, it is the responsibility of the court to listen to their voice and protect their rights.

13 -year -old emphasis on victim’s rights

The victim of the case is only 13 years old. The court clarified that he could not be denied his right to demand justice because there was a dispute between his parents. Only on the basis that there was tension in the relationship of parents, the victim’s complaint cannot be denied. Especially when the crisis was called by the minor himself and his mother was also accused of not reporting the incident of sexual harassment to the police.

Delhi HC’s trend on serious allegations

The Delhi High Court clarified that even in cases related to intimate relations, the victim has every right to file a complaint. An earlier agreement does not affect serious allegations and the accused does not get any legal immunity. The case reflects a very sad and serious situation, where a minor girl has not only suffered a victim of her parents, but is also accusing her own father of being a victim of sexual harassment. At present, the court rejected the bail plea of ​​the accused keeping in mind all the facts.

Also read: Delhi: 4 new ‘start libraries’ will start, 24 hours will be opened with special facilities and open seven days