$~3, 4, 9, 10 & 57 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 354/2016 JOGINDER SINGH SODHI @ VICKY .....Appellant versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent + CRL.A. 754/2016 STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Appellant versus JOGINDER SINGH SODHI @ VICKY .....Respondent + CRL.A. 1154/2017 KANTA DEVI .....Appellant versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents + CRL.A. 1155/2017 STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Appellant versus NARENDER MANN & ORS .....Respondents + CRL.L.P. 334/2022 STATE .....Petitioner versus SHIV CHARAN BANSAL & ORS. .....Respondents Appearances: For Accused:

Mr. Himanshu Naliwal, Advocate, for Mr. Shiv Charan Banal.

Mr. Rashid Hasmi, Advocate, for Mr. Lalit Mann & Mr. Shailender Singh Mr. Anupam S Sharma, Ms. Harpreet Kalsi, Mr. Ripudamn Sharma, Mr. Vashisht Rao, Ms. Riya Sachdeva, Ms. Amisha P Dash, Advocates for Mr. Joginder Singh Sodhi.

For State:

Mr.Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with Ms. Vibha and Mr. Lalit Luthra, Advocates For Complainant:

Mr. Kartickay Mathur, Advocate (9899036093)

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

O R D E R

% 15.01.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CRL.L.P. 334/2022

2. The present application has been filed by the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgement dated 24th June, 2020 passed by the ld. ASJ/Special Judge (NDPS), North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 49605/2015. (hereinafter, ‘impugned judgement’)

3. Vide the impugned judgement, the accused persons Shiv Charan Bansal, Lalit Mann and Shailendra Singh have been acquitted by the Trial Court.

4. A brief background of the present case is that, an FIR No. 200/2006 dated 21st March, 2006 was registered under Sections 302/120B/201/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, ‘IPC’) and 25/27 Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter, ‘Arms Act’) at P.S. Mangol Puri, Delhi against the following accused persons namely:

(i) Mr. Narender Mann (ii) Mr. Joginder Singh Sodhi (iii) Mr. Sachin Bansal (iv) Mr. Lalit Mann (v) Mr. Rajbir Singh (vi) Mr. Shiv Charan Banal (vii) Mr. Shailender Singh

5. Chargesheet was filed against the accused persons for offences punishable under Sections 302/120B/201/34 of the IPC. However, vide order dated 17th March, 2008 the Trial Court directed charges to be framed against Mr. Narender Mann for offences punishable under Section 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. Charges were also framed against Mr. Joginder Singh Sodhi, for offences punishable under Section 302 and 34 of the IPC. Further, charges were also framed against Mr. Sachin Bansal and Mr. Shailender Singh for offences punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act.

6. Accused persons namely, Mr. Lalit Mann, Mr. Rajbir Singh and Mr. Shiv Charan Bansal were, however, discharged. The order of discharge was challenged by the prosecution in a revision petition before this Court.

7. In separate revision petitions being CRL. REV. 430/2008, CRL REV.P. NO. 405/2008 and CRL REV.P. NO. 342/2008, Mr. Shailender Singh, Mr. Sachin Bansal and Mr. Narendra Mann had challenged the charges framed against them.

8. In these revision petitions, vide common order dated 29^th May, 2009 this Court had held that Mr. Narender Mann, Mr. Joginder Singh Sodhi, Mr. Sachin Bansal were to be charged for offences under Section 302/34 read with Section 120B of IPC and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act. The discharge of Mr.Lalit Mann, Mr. Rajbir Singh and Mr. Shiv Charan Banal was affirmed by the Court. Mr. Shailender Singh’s revision petition CRL. REV. 430/2008 was also allowed by the Court and he was ordered to be discharged.

9. Pursuant thereto, the State and the Complainant preferred an appeal against the order of discharge against Mr.Lalit Mann, Mr. Rajbir Singh and Mr. Shiv Charan Banal and Shailendra Singh, before the Supreme Court.

10. The Supreme Court vide order dated 5^th December, 2019 had decided the appeal and passed