N vs STATE & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~20 & 21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 04.03.2025 + CRL.REV.P. 601/2022 & CRL.M.A. 18561/2022 N .....Petitioner Through: Mr Zeeshan Diwan, DHCLSC and Mr. Harsha, Advocates. versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr Naresh Chahar APP for State with SI Pankaj Kumar PS Jyoti Nagar Mr. R.N. Dubey and Mr. Tarun Garg, Advs. for R-2. Mr. Deepak Prakash, Advocate/ Amicus Curiae. (21) + CRL.REV.P. 873/2023 & CRL.M.A. 22590/2023 THE STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) .....Petitioner Through: Mr Naresh Chahar APP for State with SI Pankaj Kumar PS Jyoti Nagar. versus PREMPAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. R.N. Dubey and Mr. Tarun Garg, Advocates Mr. Deepak Prakash, Advocate/Amicus Curiae. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN CRL.REV.P. 601/2022 & connected matter Page 1 of 8 Signing Date:02.04.2025 16:39:31 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA JUDGMENT SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. (ORAL) 1. By way of these petitions, the prosecutrix „N‟ as well as the State seek setting aside of the order 30.11.2021 [hereafter „the impugned order‟] passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Special Fast Track Court), East, North East & Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi [hereafter „Sessions Court‟]. 2. By way of the impugned order, the learned Sessions Court has discharged the accused/respondent for the commission of offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter „IPC‟] and charged him for commission of offence under Sections 354/354B/451/323 of IPC. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the prosecutrix „N‟ had lodged a complaint against the accused Prempal, alleging that she had known the accused, who is a member of the U.P. Police, for the past 5-6 years. During this period, the accused had allegedly establis