STATE vs HANS RAJ SAINI

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 13.08.2025 + CRL.A.1270/2019 STATE .....Appellant Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State versus HANS RAJ SAINI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rakesh Chahar and Mr. Naveen Chauhan, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. By way of the present appeal filed under Section 377 Cr.P.C, the State, being aggrieved by the inadequacy of sentence imposed on the respondent by the Trial Court, seeks enhancement of the same. 2. Pertinently, the respondent faced trial in FIR No. 374/2014, registered at P.S. Swaroop Nagar under Sections 308/427/34 IPC and was convicted on 10.07.2019, for the offence punishable under Sections 308/34 and 427 IPC. Vide the order on sentence dated 19.07.2019, the Trial Court, while taking into account the time spent in custody and other mitigating factors, granted the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, and directed that the respondent be released on probation for a period of two years, to receive the sentence if called upon during the said period and, in the meanwhile, to maintain peace and good behaviour. The release was made subject to his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CRL.A 1270/2019 Page 1 of 4 By:GAUTAM ASWAL surety of like amount, and to the further condition under Section 5 of the Act that he shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the victim. 3. Learned APP for the State contends that the testimony of the victim/complainant (PW-9), duly establishes the identity of the respondent and his role in the commission of the offence. The respondent has been convicted under Section 308 IPC. The complainant had received injury on his head and the same is corroborated by the MLC