NEUTRAL CITATION NUMBER 2023:DHC:3076

CRL.A.1268/2010

Page 1 of 35

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Reserved on: 18.01.2023

Pronounced on: 01.05.2023

+

CRL.A. 1268/2010

SANJEEV KUMAR

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. L.S. Chaudhary, Dr. Ajay

Chaudhary,

Mr.

Vishesh

Kumar, Ms. Vinita & Ms.

Monika, Advocates.

versus

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar,

APP for State with SI Mohit,

P.S. Swaroop Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

JUDGMENT

1.

The present appeal has been filed by appellant under Section 374

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C’) challenging the

impugned judgment dated 22.09.2010 and order on sentence dated

25.09.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (North West-

04), Rohini, Delhi in case FIR bearing no. 85/2008 whereby learned

Additional Sessions Judge has convicted both the accused persons for

committing offences punishable under Section 363/365/34 of the Indian

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:08.05.2023

21:36:56

Signature Not Verified

NEUTRAL CITATION NUMBER 2023:DHC:3076

CRL.A.1268/2010

Page 2 of 35

Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’).They were also convicted for committing

offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.

2.

At the outset, it is pertinent to note that State had preferred an

appeal i.e. Crl. A. 1067/2013 seeking enhancement of sentence to life

imprisonment. The co-accused Naresh expired during the pendency of

the appeal and his appeal as well as the appeal filed by the State stood

abated. The present appeal as well as appeal of the State qua appellant

Sanjeev Kumar remained pending. The appellant Sanjeev Kumar also

passed away on 15.05.2021, however wife of the appellant vide Crl.M.A.

No. 4464/2022 sought leave of the Court to continue the appeal under

provision of Section 394-C of Cr.P.C and the Division Bench of the

Court vide order dated 13.09.2022 granted leave to the wife of the

appellant to continue the present appeal. The present appeal was to be

heard by a Single Bench, therefore, the present appeal was directed to be

listed before this Bench.

3.

Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on 24.04.2008, the

prosecutrix had lodged a complaint with the police on the allegations

that she had visited Hanuman temple at Nangli Puna, Delhi from

Mahendipur Balaji, Mandir (Rajasthan) along with her family. Her

parents had gone inside the temple while she was left outside along with

the luggage in front of a government school. In the meanwhile, a white

color car with two boys, one driving the car and other sitting in the rear

seat had stopped the car in front of the prosecutrix. The boy driving the

car had dragged the prosecutrix inside the car and the petitioner who was

sitting on the rear seat had committed sexual assault upon her while the

car continued to move. After about two hours, the prosecutrix was

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:08.05.2023

21:36:56

Signature Not Verified

NEUTRAL CITATION NUMBER 2023:DHC:3076

CRL.A.1268/2010

Page 3 of 35

dropped at the same place from where she was dragged inside the car.

After that, she had narrated the entire incident to her father who had

informed the police. Police had reached at the spot and upon

investigation, the car used to commit alleged offence had been found

parked near the street and the two boys who had committed rape were

also present there. The prosecutrix had identified the boys who were

apprehended by the police and they had disclosed their names as Sanjeev

Kumar and Naresh. Thereafter, FIR was registered and after

investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

4.

Learned Trial Court vide order dated 10.09.2008 proceeded to

frame charges against the accused persons punishable for offences under

Section 363/365/376(2)(g)/34 of IPC. Relevant portion of the