FAHIM @ CHIKNA vs STATE

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decided on : 06.08.2025 + CRL.A. 177/2020 FAHIM @ CHIKNA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Kartickay Mathur, Advocate (DHCLSC) versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr.Pradeep Gahalot, APP for State with ASI Deepak and SI Amit Beniwal CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. By way of the present appeal, the appellant seeks to assail the judgement of conviction dated 09.10.2019 vide which he has been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 392 IPC and Section 411 IPC and order on sentence dated 10.10.2019 vide which he has been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years for the offence punishable under Section 392 IPC alongwith payment of fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof he was directed to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month and undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Sections 411 IPC. Benefit of Section 428 CrPC has been provided to the appellant and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. The brief facts of the case, is that on 16.07.2017, DD No.44B came to be recorded at P.S. MS Park, Delhi with the information that one boy had entered a parlour at D-401, Gali No.5, Hardev Puri at about 6:25 P.M and Signature Not Verified CRL.A. 177/2020 Page 1 of 5 Digitally Signed By:GAUTAM ASWAL has robbed one gold chain in the parlour shop. HC Mahesh Pal reached at the spot and recorded statement of the complainant. Initially, the FIR came to be registered under Sections 392/34 IPC read with Section 27/54/59 Arms Act. During the investigation, the appellant came to be identified by the complainant after photographs of various criminals were shown and he was arrested in the present FIR. He disclosed