TAHIR ALI vs THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 11, 2025 + CRL.REV.P. 1189/2023 & CRL.M.A. 30299/2023 TAHIR ALI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mohd. Asif, Mr. Sushant Pal & Mr. Sanskar, Advs. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP for the State SI Jitendra, PS- Malviya Nagar Ms. Janki Raman Jha, Adv. for complainant with complainant in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN AMIT MAHAJAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition is filed against the order dated 21.09.2023 (hereafter ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (‘ASJ’), South District, Saket Court, Delhi in Case No. 445/2021 arising out of FIR No. 507/2020 (‘FIR’) dated 27.11.2020, registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar for offences under Sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). 2. By the impugned order, the learned ASJ framed charges Signature Not Verifiedagainst the petitioner for the offences under Sections Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Date:17.12.2025 CRL.REV.P. 1189/2023 Page 1 of 15 18:06:44 376(2)(n)/323/509/506 of the IPC. 3. Succinctly stated, the FIR was registered on a complaint given by the prosecutrix alleging that she knew the petitioner since the last 4 years. It is alleged that the petitioner represented that he needed children, and on the assurance of marrying the prosecutrix, he established physical relations with her. It is alleged that the prosecutrix also gave a written complaint in relation to cheating and physical exploitation by the petitioner on 18.10.2020. It is alleged that the petitioner pressurised the prosecutrix to withdraw the complaint and also threatened her of dire consequences should she not withdraw the complaint. It is further alleged that on 27.10.2