MS S vs STATE AND OTHERS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 08.04.2025 + CRL.REV.P. 629/2024 MS S .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ranbir Singh, Mr. Harsh Vardhan Sharma and Mr. Harsh Saini, Advocates. versus STATE AND OTHERS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State. + CRL.REV.P. 1167/2024 & CRL.M.A. 28708/2024 THE STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State. versus SATYA PRAKASH .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA JUDGMENT DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J 1. These criminal revision petitions have been preferred by the prosecutrix „S‟ as well as the State, assailing an order dated CRL.REV.P. 629/2024 & connected matter Page 1 of 10 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:09.04.2025 14:39:24 19.03.2024 [hereafter „the impugned order‟] passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (S.F.T.C.)-01, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi [hereafter „Sessions Court‟], by way of which the accused Satya Prakash has been discharged in case arising out of FIR No. 388/2021, registered for offence punishable under Sections 354/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter „IPC‟] at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the present FIR was registered on 18.06.2021, on the basis of the statement of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix had alleged that two-three years prior to the date, she used to live with her husband and children in a flat situated in Mundka, Delhi; however, the maternal uncle of her husband i.e. accused Satya Prakash had fraudulently got the same registered in his name. She disclosed that in April 2021, her husband had got infected with Covid-19 and the accused Satya Prakash, had go