SHIV PRASHAD @ KARTARU vs STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 12.12.2025 Pronounced on : 15.12.2025 Uploaded on : 15.12.2025 + CRL.A. 653/2023 SHIV PRASHAD @ KARTARU .....Appellant Through: Mr. Bhavesh Seth and Mr. Siddharth Kaushal, Advocates versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State with SI Rinki Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) for victim CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been instituted against the impugned judgment dated 09.11.2022 and order on sentence dated 13.03.2023 passed by ASJ, FTSC (POCSO) District North, Rohini, New Delhi in SC No. 58889/2016 arising out of FIR No. 868/2015 under Sections 323/376/506 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act registered at PS. S.P. Badli, Delhi. 2. The applicant was convicted for offences under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 376/323 IPC and directed to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (R.I.) for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of ₹3,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo Simple Imprisonment Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI CRL.A. 653/2023 Pg. 1 of 10 Signing Date:15.12.2025 15:05:25 (S.I.) for a period of five days, for offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant was also directed to undergo R.I. for a period of two months for offence under Section 323 of the IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. The sentence of the appellant was suspended by this Court on 28.05.2025. 4. The prosecution case, in a nutshell was that the prosecutrix ‘S’ came to the police station on 17.07.2015, and gave a written complaint, in which she stated that the appellant used to frequent her neighbour and resided in a nearby Jhuggi. In November 2013, he took her to his