Disposed¶17

Satender @ Bablu v. State

Delhi HC25 Aug 2025CRL.A./611/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Satender @ Bablu v. State; CRL.A. 611/2008; High Court of Delhi; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.; decided 25.08.2025; Section 376 IPC conviction; Section 374 CrPC appeal; Session Case No. 94/2007; FIR No. 332/2004, P.S.-Rohini; Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini Courts; judgment dated 19.03.2008; order on sentence dated 27.03.2008; appellant in person; appeal not pressed as infructuous; appellant served sentence and released 24.04.2013; pending applications disposed of.

What did the court decide?

After questioning the Appellant, the Court was satisfied that he was making the statement (of not pressing the appeal) knowingly, having been made aware of its consequences. ¶11

Satender @ Bablu Vs State — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.A. 611/2008 SATENDER @ BABLU .....Appellant Through: Appellant in person. versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for State with SI Chitra, PS-South Rohini.

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA O R D E R

¶5

% 25.08.2025

¶6

This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant – Satender @ Bablu under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order on sentence dated 19^th March, 2008 and 27^th March, 2008 respectively, passed by ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini Courts, Delhi, in Session Case bearing No. 94/2007 arising out of FIR bearing No.332/2004 under Section 376 IPC registered at Police Station-Rohini.

¶8

The Appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC. It is submitted that the Appellant was released from jail on 24^th April, 2013 after completing the sentence awarded to him.

¶9

The Appellant states that he does not wish to press this appeal on the ground that it has become infructuous as he has already served his sentence.

¶10

The Appellant has been identified by SI Chitra, PS-South Rohini.

¶11

After questioning the Appellant, this Court is satisfied that he is making the statement after knowing the consequences of the same as he has been made aware of the consequences of his statement.

¶12

The Trial Court Record (TCR) and Nominal Roll perused. The

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 27/08/2025 at 12:41:20

¶15

Nominal Roll is set out below:

¶16

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 27/08/2025 at 12:41:20

¶17

Keeping in view the statement of the Appellant, which is taken on record, and the fact that the appellant has already served the sentence awarded by the Trial Court, the present appeal is disposed of as not pressed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶18

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent as well as to the concerned Trial Court for information.

¶19

RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J

¶20

AUGUST 25, 2025/ nd/ik

¶21

Satender @ Bablu v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satender @ Bablu v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of NCT of Delhi Vs Goldi

Ms R Vs State & Anr.

Satish Bhati Vs State

Vipin Malhotra Vs Special Director Enforcement Directorate

Raju Vs State

State Vs Om Prakash Maan