MS. MXXXX vs THE STATE OF DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 04, 2025 + CRL.REV.P. 982/2023 MS. MXXXX .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Lohat, Advocate versus THE STATE OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP for the State SI Manisha, PS Punjabi Bagh. Mr. Jatan Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kartikeya Basoya, Advocate for R-2 & 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN AMIT MAHAJAN, J. (Oral) CRL.M.A. 25082/2023 (delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 131 days in filing the present petition is condoned. 2. The application is disposed of. CRL.REV.P. 982/2023 3. The present petition is filed challenging the order dated 25.01.2023 (hereafter ‘impugned order’), passed in SC No. 648/2022 arising out of FIR No. 505/2022, registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh, whereby the learned Trial Court discharged Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARMINDER CRL.REV.P. 982/2023 Page 1 of 10 KAUR Signing Date:09.12.2025 13:05:24 Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 of the alleged offences. 4. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 4.1. The subject FIR was registered on 30.07.2022 on a complaint made by the petitioner wherein she made allegations of gang rape against Respondent Nos.2 and 3. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner is a singer and she had met Respondent No.2 on 01.12.2021, who asserted that he is a Hotelier with multiple hotels in Dubai, after she had performed at a program. Allegedly, Respondent No.2 praised the petitioner’s performance and offered a job to the petitioner at a new Hotel that was going to open soon. Respondent No.2 asked the petitioner to contact him in 2-4 days to discuss the formalities, whereafter, he exchanged his contact number and Snapchat ID with the petitioner. Pursua