ALOK KUMAR DUBEY vs STATE

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 06.11.2025 Pronounced on : 06.02.2026 Uploaded on : 06.02.2026 + CRL.A. 280/2020 ALOK KUMAR DUBEY .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Kajla with Mr. Aakash, Advocates (M: 9811239251). versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr Pradeep Gahalot, APP for State with SI Anisha, P.S. Bindapur. Ms. Neelampreet Kaur, Advocate (Amicus Curiae, pro bono) for the victim. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal arises out of the conviction rendered by the Court of Sessions in proceedings arising out of FIR No. 132/2013 registered under Sections 376/120B/506 IPC at P.S. Bindapur. 2. The appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 328/506 IPC and Section 6 POCSO. He, however, was acquitted of the offence under Section 384 IPC. 3. Vide the order on sentence passed on 05.02.2020, the appellant was directed to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default whereof he would undergo SI for 6 months, for the offence Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI CRL.A. 280/2020 Page 1 of 18 Signing Date:06.02.2026 19:13:51 punishable under Section 6 POCSO; undergo RI for a period of 5 years and pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default whereof he would undergo SI for 6 months, for the offence under Section 328 IPC; and undergo RI for a period of 6 months, for the offence under Section 506 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently and the benefit under Section 428 Cr.P.C. was provided to the appellant. 4. The investigation in the present case commenced when a complaint from the prosecutrix was received on 19.03.2013, resulting in the registration of the subject FIR. In the complaint, it was claimed that the prosecutrix and her