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

february 2026

Delhi High Court · 2026-02-16

DHARMENDER SINGH vs STATE

Citation / case number
CRL.REV.P.-285/2014 2026:DHC:1323
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
DHARMENDER SINGH
Respondent
STATE

Judgment text excerpt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on : 18.12.2025 Judgment pronounced on : 16.02.2026 + CRL.REV.P. 285/2014 DHARMENDER SINGH .....Petitioner versus STATE ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr. Attin Shankar Rastogi, Mr. Archit Chauhan & Ms. Asmi Verma, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State SI Ashok, PS- Anand Vihar CORAM HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT 1. The present petition is filed against the judgment dated 22.03.2014 (hereafter ‘impugned judgment’) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (‘ASJ’), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 52/2014. 2. By the impugned judgment, the learned ASJ upheld the judgment dated 21.12.2012 and order on sentence dated 22.12.2012 passed by the learned Magistrate whereby the petitioner was convicted Signature Not Verified Signed By:SANJAY KUMAR CRL.REV.P. 285/2014 Page 1 of 14 Signing Date:16.02.2026 20:23:42 for the offence under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine of ₹2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months. 3. Briefly stated, on 01.04.2004, FIR No. 126/2004 was registered at Police Station Anand Vihar on a complaint given by one Kusum Verma for the offence punishable under Section 380 of the IPC regarding theft of Nokia 8310 mobile phone belonging to the then Presiding Officer, MACT Court, Karkardooma Court from the Chamber attached with Court No. 4. During the course of investigation, the details of the SIM used in the said mobile phone was obtained and the IMEI number of the stolen mobile phone was also found. 4. Thereafter, the phone was kept under surv

DHARMENDER SINGH vs STATE · Niyam