JOGINDER vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 04th December, 2025 Date of Decision: 09th December, 2025 + CRL.A. 228/2004 JOGINDER .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.S. Haider, Advocate along with Appellant in person. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for State with Mr. Sunil Singh Rawat, Mr. Arsala Naik, Mr. Siddharth Goyal and Ms. Astha Dhingra, Advocates along with SI Aarti, PS-Delhi Cantt. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is filed against judgment of conviction dated 21st February 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the “impugned judgment”) and against order on sentence dated 23rd February 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order on sentence”) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “trial court”) in Sessions Case bearing no. 290/2002, arising out of the FIR bearing no. 221/2002, registered at P.S. Delhi Cantt. 2. The appellant vide the impugned judgement was held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Signature Not Verified CRL.A. 228/2004 Page 1 of 11 Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:09.12.2025 16:34:25 (hereinafter referred to as the “IPC”). The appellant vide the impugned order on sentence was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 (ten) years under Section 376 IPC, along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 05 (five) months. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28th June 2002, the prosecutrix along with her husband Ramu approached PS Delhi Cantt and made her statement to SI Rajiv Kumar, w