Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

december 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-12-20

SACHIN @ ATUL vs STATE

Citation / case number
CRL.A.-755/2018 2025:DHC:11702
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
SACHIN @ ATUL
Respondent
STATE

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20.12.2025 + CRL.A. 755/2018 SACHIN @ ATUL .....Appellant Through: Mr. Archit Upadhayay, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Ms. Muskan Aggarwal, Advocate versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State with Insp. Deepak CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C against the judgment of conviction dated 09.01.2017 and the order on sentence dated 20.01.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, North East District, Karkardooma Courts in SC No. 74/2016 in proceedings arising out of FIR No. 64/2016 registered under Sections 392/394/397/411/34 IPC at P.S New Usmanpur. Vide the impugned order on sentence, the appellant was sentenced to Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY CRL.A. 755/2018 Pg. 1 of 8 Signing Date:20.12.2025 22:38:56 undergo RI for 7 years along with payment of fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default whereof he would undergo 6 months SI, for the offence punishable under Sections 392/34 read with 397 IPC. The fine amount was directed to be paid to the complainant/victim as compensation and the benefit under Section 428 Cr.P.C was granted to the appellant. 2. The appellant’s latest nominal roll on record reflects that he has completed the substantive sentence imposed upon him in the present case and was released from jail upon payment of fine at jail gate on 25.06.2021. A status report under the signatures of the concerned DCP has been handed over in Court, stating that efforts were made to reach the appellant at his given address and inquiries were made even from neighbors; however, the appellant could not be traced. A perusal of proceedings shows that the appellant has remained unt

SACHIN @ ATUL vs STATE · Niyam