Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

september 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-09-22

STATE vs PRATEEK KATHPALIA

Citation / case number
CRL.A.-261/2025 2025:DHC:8407
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
STATE
Respondent
PRATEEK KATHPALIA

Judgment text excerpt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 22.09.2025 + CRL.A. 261/2025 STATE ..... Appellant versus PRATEEK KATHPALIA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for the State SI Sanjeev Kumar, PS-Janak Puri For the Respondent : Mr. Anish Kumar Singh, Adv. with respondent in person CORAM HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 10.05.2018 (hereafter ‘impugned judgment’), in Sessions Case No. 73172/2016 arising out of FIR No. 202/2011, registered at Police Station Janakpuri, whereby the learned Trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent for the offences under Sections 279/338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). Signature Not Verified Signed By:KAMALDEEP KAUR CRL.A. 261/2025 Page 1 of 8 Signing Date:23.09.2025 20:35:34 2. The brief facts are that on 29.06.2011 at around 3:00 p.m., the complainant Lt. Col. Renu Kumari while riding her scooty bearing No. DL-4SAK-7160 was allegedly hit by a car bearing No. HR-26- BE-2510 being driven by the accused/respondent in a rash and negligent manner. 3. It is alleged that due to the impact, the complainant was thrown off from her scooty and sustained grievous injuries on her left shoulder and knee, whereafter, the complainant was taken to Army Base Hospital. 4. The police after recording the statement of the complainant, registered FIR No. 202/2011 under Sections 279/337 of the IPC. 5. Subsequently, the accused/respondent was arrested in the present case. The learned Trial Court vide order dated 03.03.2012 framed charges under Sections 279/338 of the IPC against the accused/respondent to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 6. The accused/respondent in his statement under Sectio

STATE vs PRATEEK KATHPALIA · Niyam