PARMOD @BIHARI vs STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 12.11.2025 + CRL.A.1189/2024 PARMOD @ BIHARI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Zeeshan Diwan, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Mr. Harsha, Advocate. Versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State with SI Chetan P.S. Paschim Vihar West. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant came to be tried and convicted in the context of FIR No. 1453/2020 registered under Section 379 IPC at P.S. Paschim Vihar (West). He was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 5 years along with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default whereof he would undergo SI for 3 months, for the offence under Section 394/34 read with Section 397 IPC. 2. The investigation began with the registration of the aforesaid FIR, wherein it was alleged that on 06.12.2020 at about 07:30 AM at Railway Lines, Nangloi, the appellant had robbed one Vinod Kumar of Rs.500/- in cash and a mobile phone of the make OPPO A12. The appellant further caused injuries to the complainant with a brick, and also pointed a knife and injured the complainant on his palm. During investigation, the appellant Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI CRL.A. 1189/2024 Pg. 1 of 4 Signing Date:17.11.2025 18:40:42 came to be arrested in connection with another FIR, was found to be in possession of the complainant’s mobile phone, and disclosed his involvement in the present case. 3. On the chargesheet being filed, charges came to be framed under Sections 392/394/397/411 IPC, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. Mr. Diwan, learned counsel for the appellant, contends that the testimony of the complainant/Vinod Kumar does not inspire confidence, as the same is contradictory to the histo