DAYA NAND vs THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI()

Judgment text excerpt

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 16th, 2025 + CRL.REV.P. 691/2023 & CRL.M.A. 16862/2023 DAYA NAND .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sahil Malik and Mr. Aditya Jain, Advs. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI() .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with SI Nisha, PS Mohan Garden and SI Sunita. Ms. Tanya Agarwal, Mr. Krishna Kumar Keshav and Mr. Ankush Khanna, Advs. for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN AMIT MAHAJAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under section 397/401 read with sections 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (‘CrPC’) seeking setting-aside of the order dated 13.03.2023 (‘impugned order’), passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (‘ASJ’), whereby charges for the offences under sections 376(2)(n)/506/509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) have been framed against the Petitioner. 2. Succinctly stated, the FIR dated 24.10.2021, was registered under sections 376/506/509 of the IPC, at the behest of Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARMINDER the prosecutrix stating that she is a divorcee, separated vide KAUR Signing Date:18.12.2025 CRL.REV.P. 691/2023 Page 1 of 12 15:17:43 personal settlement, and has been residing with her parents. The parents of the prosecutrix, saw the ID of the accused/Dayanand at Jeewansathi.com, who also had his marital status as “Divorcee”. The accused also invited the parents of the prosecutrix to his home and had also visited her house, by introducing himself as a Divorcee to the prosecutrix as well as her parents. Allegedly the prosecutrix and the accused developed a bond and started talking to each other. 3. It is alleged that on 22.06.2021, the accused, on a false promise to get the admission of the