$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 113/2026 BHARAT SHARMA @ DEEPAK @ TUTAN .....Appellant Through: Mr. Varun Derwal, DHCLSC and Mr.

Danish Khan, Adv.

versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with Ms. Divya Yadav & Mr. Lalit Luthra, Advs.

SI Ekta, P.S. Sector-23, Dwarka.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

O R D E R

% 30.01.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CRL.M.A. 3269/2026 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 3270/2026 (for lengthy synopsis and list of dates and events.) 3. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 3271/2026 (for condonation of delay)

4. This is an application filed by the Appellant seeking condonation of delay of 24 days in filing the present appeal.

5. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned.

6. The application is allowed and accordingly disposed of.

CRL.A. 113/2026

7. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 415(2) read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 challenging the impugned judgement dated 17^th October, 2025 and the order on sentence dated 28^th October, 2025 passed by ld. ASJ-03 and Special Judge, South West District, Dwarka Courts District, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 441276/2016 arising out FIR No. 104/2016 registered at P.S Dwarka, Sector-23,DelhiforoffencespunishableunderSection302/307/201/34ofthe Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, ‘IPC’).

8. Vide the impugned judgment, the Appellant has been convicted under Sections 302/307/34 of IPC. He has been acquitted under Section 201/34 of IPC.

9. Videtheimpugnedorderonsentence,theAppellanthasbeensentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine has also been imposed in the following terms:

“15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and after weighing the circumstances as discussed above, the convicts Vinay and Deepak @

Tutan @ Bharat Sharma are sentenced as under:

(i) to rigorous imprisonment for life and fineof Rs.10,000/-andindefaultofpaymentoffine, to undergo SI for three months for committing the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC.

(ii) to rigorous imprisonment for two years and fineofRs.10,000/-andindefaultofpayment of fine, to undergo SI for three months for committing the offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC.

14. Both the substantive sentences awarded for committing the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and 307/34 IPC shall run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 CrPC shall be given to the convicts. However, the sentence awarded in default of payment of fine for both the offences shall run consecutively.”

10. Admit.

11. IssueNotice.Mr.RiteshKumarBahri,ld.APPacceptsnoticeonbehalf of the State.

12. The Registry is directed to requisition the TCR and prepare the appeal paperbookwithproperindexing,paginationandbookmarksexpeditiouslyand provide digitized copies thereof to ld. Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, upon request. Let the TCR be tagged along with this appeal by the next date of hearing.

13. Let the physical TCR be requisitioned to the Court on the next date of hearing by the Registry.

CRL.M.(BAIL) 213/2026 (for suspension of sentence)

14. The present application has been filed by the Appellant under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking suspension of sentence and release of Appellant on bail during the pendency of the present appeal.

15. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, ld. APP for the State.

16. Let the State file a status report/reply by the next date of hearing.

17. Vide the impugned order on sentence, the matter has been recommended to the Delhi Legal Services Authority (hereinafter, ‘DLSA’), Dwarka Court for awarding final compensation to the parents of the deceased Mukesh and the injured Kanhaiya Kumar under the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme in the following terms:

“17. Now com