State v. Sunil Kumar
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed the State's leave to appeal against acquittal. The court upheld the trial court's findings that the prosecutrix was not a minor and testimony was unreliable, noting gaps in her version and lack of documentary proof.
What did the court decide?
Leave to appeal against acquittal is declined. The petition stands dismissed.
What the court decided
$~8
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 29.01.2024
- CRL.L.P. 83/2022 & CRL.M.A. 2700/2022 STATE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for State with SI Pankaj Kasana
versus
SUNIL KUMAR ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Advocate (DHCLC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CRL.M.A. 2700/2022 (Condonation of Delay)
- Petitioner has moved an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for condonation of delay of eight days.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to appeal against acquittal should be granted given inconsistencies in prosecutrix testimony regarding age and circumstances of the incident.
Whether prosecution could establish that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of the alleged offence based on available documentary and testimonial evidence.
Whether the trial court's finding that the act was consensual and that prosecutrix was over 18 years of age constitutes perversity in appreciation of evidence.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
STATE
- respondent
SUNIL KUMAR
Coram
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court