AMIT vs STATE

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 18.02.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 23.02.2026 + CRL.A. 173/2020 AMIT .....Appellant Through: Mr. Adit S. Pujari, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Mr. Bhavesh Seth, Advocate versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State with SI Geetam Singh. Mr. Vaibhav Tomar, Ms. Heena Khan, Mr. Prabhjot Singh Dhillon and Mr. Hriman Dhaka, Advocates for Prosecutrix CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA JUDGMENT CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J. 1. This appeal under Section 374(2) read with Section 383 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Cr.P.C.) has been filed by accused no. 1(A1) in Sessions Case No. 1653/2016 (Old Case No. 169/2013) on the file of Additional Session Judge-01, Signature Not Verified CRL.A. 173/2020 Page 1 of 18 Signed By:KOMAL DHAWAN Signing Date:24.02.2026 10:54:04 (POCSO), South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, assailing the judgment dated 04.10.2019 and order on sentence dated 18.10.2019 as per which he has been convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the PoCSO Act). 2. The prosecution case is that on 24.07.2013 at about 04:00 pm, A1 and accused no. 2 (A2), in furtherance of their common intention, kidnapped PW5 and PW9 from their lawful guardianship and took them to Suratgarh, Rajasthan, where A1 committed penetrative sexual assault on PW5. It is also alleged that accused no. 3 (A3) wrongfully confined PW5 and PW9 at his house and abetted the commission of the penetrative sexual assault. Hence, the accused persons are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 368, 376 read with 34 IPC and Se