Delhi High Court – Orders
Vc vs State Nct Of Delhi on 17 April, 2025
Author: Amit Sharma
Bench: Amit Sharma
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 685/2024
VC .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Tushar Gupta and Mr. Parinay
Gupta, Advocates.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Laksh Khanna, APP for the State.
SI Paramjeet, PS Ranhola.
Ms. Bindita Chaturvedi and Mr.Sumit
Rohilla, Advocates for survivor.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
ORDER
% 17.04.2025
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
CRL.M.(BAIL) 1271/2024
2. The present application under Section 430 read with Section 528 of the
BNSS seeks suspension of sentence and release of the applicant/appellant on
bail during pendency of the instant appeal.
3. Vide the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the
appellant has been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(i)
& (n) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 9/10 of the
Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. The appellant has been sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years for offences
punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of the IPC along with fine of Rs.5,000/-
and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period
of 15 days. The appellant has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of 10 years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- for
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/04/2025 at 22:15:56
offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and in default of
payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. The
appellant has also been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 9 of the
Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. The appellant has also been sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of Rs.
5,000/- for offence punishable under Section 10 of the Prohibition of Child
Marriage Act and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of 15 days.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/applicant submits
that the marriage between the latter and the survivor in the present case is not
disputed, however, learned Trial Court while passing the impugned judgment
had relied upon the judgment of Raju Yadav & Anr. v. State of NCT of
Delhi, 2023:DHC:3392, wherein, it has been held that in case of bone
ossification test regarding the actual age of the survivor, the lower reference
has to be taken on record. It is pointed out that the Hon’ble Division Bench of
this Court in Court on its Own Motion v. State of NCT of Delhi,
2024:DHC:4915-DB, had since held as under: –
“46. As an upshot of our foregoing discussion, the Reference is answered
as under: –
(i) Whether in POCSO cases, the Court is required to consider the lower
side of the age estimation report, or the upper side of the age estimation
report of a victim in cases where the age of the victim is proved through
bone age ossification test?
Ans: In such cases of sexual assault, wherever, the court is called upon
to determine the age of victim based on ‘bone age ossification report’,
the upper age given in ‘reference range’ be considered as age of the
victim.
(ii) Whether the principle of ‘margin of error’ is to be applicable or not
in cases under the POCSO Act where the age of a victim is to be proved
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/04/2025 at 22:15:56
through bone age ossification test.
Ans: Yes. The margin of error of two years is further required to be
applied.”
(emphasis supplied)
5. In view of the above, the findings of the learned Trial Court with regard
to the age of the survivor are, therefore, incorrect. It is further submitted that
the applicant/appellant was initially charged for offences under Sections
361/366 of the IPC for which he has since been acquitted. It is pointed out
that the appellant has undergone incarceration for more than 7 years, out of
the 10 years of sentence awarded to him.
6. Per contra, learned APP for the State, assisted by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the survivor, submits that, in the present case, the
survivor has made serious allegations against the present appellant.
7. Nominal roll received from the Office of the Superintendent of Prison,
Central Jail No. 3, Tihar, New Delhi shows that as on 09.04.2025, the
applicant/appellant has undergone approximately 7 years of incarceration out
of 10 years of sentence awarded to him including the remissions earned by
the appellant/applicant during the said custody period.
8. In totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence
awarded to applicant/appellant, is suspended and he is directed to be released
on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned learned Trial
Court/Link Court, further subject to the following conditions: –
i. The appellant/applicant shall not leave the country without prior
permission of this Court.
ii. The appellant/applicant shall intimate this Court by way of an affidavit
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/04/2025 at 22:15:56
and to the Investigating Officer regarding any change in residential
address.
iii. The appellant/applicant shall appear before this Court as and when the
matter is taken up for hearing.
iv. The appellant/applicant shall provide his mobile number to the
Investigating Officer and intimate about any change.
9. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed and disposed of
accordingly.
10. Needless to state that, nothing mentioned hereinabove, is an opinion on
the merits of the case and any observations made herein are only for the
purpose of the present application.
11. Copy of the order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
necessary information and compliance.
12. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court forthwith.
CRL.A. 685/2024
13. Let a report be called from the Secretary, Delhi State Legal Services
Authority, West-District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, before the next date of
hearing with regard to the status of disbursal of the compensation amount of
Rs. 10,50,000/- awarded to the survivor vide order on sentence dated
07.06.2024.
14. List for report on 18.07.2025.
15. Copy of the order be sent to the Secretary, DSLSA, West District, Tis
Hazari Courts, Delhi for necessary information and compliance.
AMIT SHARMA, J
APRIL 17, 2025/sn Click here to check corrigendum, if any
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/04/2025 at 22:15:56
[ad_1]
Source link