* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 16^th January, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF:

+ CRL.A. 756/2013, CRL.M.(BAIL) 1200/2013 & CRL.M.(BAIL)

794/2014 IMRAN HUSSAIN .....Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma and Ms. Seema, Advocates along with Appellant-in-

person. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for the State with SI Amit Kumar, PS Dabri.

Prosecutrix in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV JUDGMENT (ORAL)

VIMAL KUMAR YADAV, J.

1. The Appellant was held guilty and convicted vide Judgment dated 13.05.2013 under Section 376 IPC and through Order on Sentence dated 18.05.2023, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 07 years with fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

2. In the appeal preferred on behalf of the Appellant, his sentence was suspended to facilitate his marriage with the prosecutrix inasmuch as in the application seeking suspension of sentence dated 28.05.2013, he has categorically stated that the matter has been amicably resolved between the Appellant and the complainant/prosecutrix and they want to marry.

3. The application for suspension of sentence was supported by the prosecutrix and her affidavit was also filed alongwith the application as Annexure A-2 to the application seeking suspension of sentence, together with certain other records i.e. messages exchanged between the Appellant and the prosecutrix since they knew each other before the incident and there was some sort of familiarity if not relationship between them.

4. Considering the entire gamut of facts and circumstances, the sentence of the Appellant was suspended vide Order dated 16.09.2013 for a period of two months to facilitate the marriage between the parties, which was extended for some more time.

5. Subsequently, another application for regular suspension of sentence dated 16.04.2014 was moved with the prayer that the sentence may be suspended inasmuch as the parties got married on 13.12.2013 according to Special Marriage Act, 1954 and the parties have started cohabitating with each other as husband and wife. As such the sentence was suspended.

6. Against the backdrop of these facts and circumstances, the Appellant alongwith the prosecutrix has appeared before the Court and submitted that they are residing as husband and wife happily and peacefully and have been blessed with three children. The Appellant wants, to which the prosecutrix has no objection, that the appeal may be disposed of in view of developments as aforesaid, the sentence awarded may be reviewed and may be reduced to the period of custody already undergone by the Appellant, inasmuch as the judgment of conviction is no longer challenged.

7. The prosecutrix, who is now the wife of the Appellant and has appeared in Court today, duly identified by the learned counsel for the Appellant, supported the Appellant and filed an affidavit alongwith documents qua her identity and about her three children born out of the wedlock with the Appellant, has categorically stated that the prayer of the Appellant to reduce the sentence, may be considered in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances as has been sought by the Appellant as well.

8. Having gone through the contents of the affidavit filed today by the prosecutrix, the earlier application for suspension of sentence and the supporting documents i.e. marriage certificate and the factum of marriage being verified by the State/Police as has been found mentioned in the Order dated 15.07.2014, there appears no reason to derail the life of the Appellant and the prosecutrix. As jointly submitted by them that they are living happily and peacefully with their children, so a case is made out for sympathetic consideration.

9. The Nominal Roll filed on record reflects that out of the 07 years of sentence, the Appellant has already spent 01 year and 18 days in custody.

10. In view of the aforesaid facts an