MUKESH vs STATE

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on : 28.08.2025 % Pronounced on : 09.10.2025 + CRL.A. 713/2018 MUKESH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Nikhil Pillai, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Ms. Malvi Dedhia, Mr. Abhiroop Saha and Ms. Muskaan Garg, Advocates. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr Pradeep Gahalot, APP for State with SI Priyanshi Ms. Gayatri Nandwani, Ms. Dudita Sharda and Mr. Adrian Abbi, Advocates for prosecutrix. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been preferred to assail and set aside the impugned judgment of conviction dated 06.01.2018 and order on sentence dated 11.01.2018. Vide the impugned judgment, the appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 376(2)(f)(i) IPC. He was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for 10 years and fine of Rs.15,000/- for offence punishable under Section 376 (2)(f)(i) IPC and in default whereof, he was to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for a period 3 months. The benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. was given to the convict. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CRL.A. 713/2018 Pg.1 of 10 By:NIJAMUDDEE N ANSARI 2. Pertinently, the appellant has already undergone the entire sentence and is stated to be not traceable. 3. The criminal investigation was initiated when on 15.11.2013 at 11.35 P.M., the complainant Mandeep, alongwith one Dilip Singh brought the appellant and his minor daughter, aged around 5 years to the police station stating that the appellant used to drink and commit „galat kaam’ with his own daughter. DD No. 36A was recorded and investigation entrusted to SI Vijay Kumar and W/Ct. Pooja. After the child‟s medical examination was conducted, she was produced before Child Welfare Commission an