MD vs STATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 07.11.2025 % Pronounced on: 10.11.2025 + CRL.A. 572/2023 MD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aman Panwar, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Manav Kaushik, Ms. Rishika Choudhary, Advocates versus STATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State with SI Vishnu Singh PS Badarpur, Delhi Mr. Kumar Shailabh, Advocate for victim CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. The appellant vide the present appeal, filed under Section 374(2) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeks to challenge the impugned judgment dated 05.07.2022 and order on sentence dated 28.04.2023 passed by learned ASJ- 01, Special Court (POCSO Act), South-East District, Saket Courts, Delhi in FIR No. 188/2018 dated 24.05.2018 registered under Sections 376/506 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act at P.S. Badarpur, Delhi. 2. The appellant has been convicted under Sections 376(2)(f) and (n) and 506 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 6 POCSO Act along with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CRL.A. 572/2023 Page 1 of 10 By:NIJAMUDDEE N ANSARI payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months and to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 506 IPC. The sentences were to run concurrently. Benefit of Section 468 CrPC was extended to the appellant. 3. The wheels of investigation were put in motion when on 24.05.2018, the child victim, who was 13 years old, accompanied by her mother came to the police station and gave her complaint (Ex. PW1/A). The complaint disclosed that the appellant, who was the real fat