Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Jagdish Khanduja & Anr. Vs State — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Delhi HC
2025
Jagdish Khanduja & Anr. Vs StateJagdish Khanduja & Anr. v. State

Disposed¶17

Jagdish Khanduja & Anr. v. State

Criminal Appeal – withdrawal by appellants in person

Delhi HC27 Nov 2025CRL.A./815/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, CRL.A. 815/2004 with CRL.M.A. 8913/2004, Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J., decided 27.11.2025. Appeal by Jagdish Khanduja & Anr. against conviction under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC and order on sentence dated 11.08.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi (fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 323 IPC and Rs. 1000/- each under Section 324 IPC, with default simple imprisonment). Both appellants appeared in person, stated the fines were deposited and sought withdrawal; appeal disposed of as withdrawn; pending application(s) disposed of. State represented by APP Mukesh Kumar with Advocates Naveen, Siddhanth Goyal and Arsalan Naik. No precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Leave effectively granted to withdraw the appeal; appeal disposed of as withdrawn and pending application(s), if any, disposed of.

Why is it important?

On the submissions of both Appellants, who appeared in person and stated they did not wish to challenge the impugned judgment and order on sentence (their statements being taken on record and fines stated as deposited), the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn, and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ¶17

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Leave effectively granted to withdraw the appeal; appeal disposed of as withdrawn and pending application(s), if any, disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal appeal against the judgment and order on sentence dated 11th August, 2004 should be disposed of in view of the Appellants' request to withdraw it.

Court's answer

On the submissions of both Appellants, who appeared in person and stated they did not wish to challenge the impugned judgment and order on sentence (their statements being taken on record and fines stated as deposited), the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn, and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal — withdrawal by appellants in person — Appellants convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC by judgment and order on sentence dated 11th August, 2004 (fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 323 IPC, in default simple imprisonment for 01 month; Rs. 1000/- each under Section 324 IPC, in default simple imprisonment for 02 months) — Appellants appeared in person, stated they did not wish to challenge the impugned judgment and order of sentence, and that the fines stood deposited — statements recorded — Held: appeal disposed of as withdrawn; pending application(s), if any, also disposed of. (Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.)

A

$~7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CRL.A. 815/2004 & CRL.M.A. 8913/2004

JAGDISH KHANDUJA & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Appellant No. 1 & 2-in-person.

versus

STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP with Mr. Naveen, Mr. Siddhanth Goyal and Mr. Arsalan Naik, Advs. for State.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA O R D E R % 27.11.2025

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellants challenging the Impugned Judgement and Order on Sentence both dated 11^th August, 2004, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi.

Both the Appellants are present in person and have submitted that they seek to withdraw the present appeal, as they do not wish to challenge the Impugned Judgment and Order of sentence dated 11^th August, 2004.

Perusal of the record shows that by the Impugned Judgment and Order on Sentence dated 11^th August, 2004, both the Appellants were convicted under Sections 323, 324 and 34 of IPC. Vide the Impugned Order on Sentence, both the Appellants were sentenced to a fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 323 IPC, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 01 month. Further, they were sentenced to a fine of Rs. 1000/- each under Section 324 IPC, in

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 01/12/2025 at 12:14:18

default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 02 months.

The Appellants further submit that the fines imposed upon them have already been deposited.

The statements of both the Appellants are taken on record.

In view of the submissions made by the Appellants, who are present in person, the present appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn. The Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J

NOVEMBER 27, 2025/ sds / isk

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 01/12/2025 at 12:14:18

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the criminal appeal against the judgment and order on sentence dated 11th August, 2004 should be disposed of in view of the Appellants' request to withdraw it.medium confidence¶10
The court held
On the submissions of both Appellants, who appeared in person and stated they did not wish to challenge the impugned judgment and order on sentence (their statements being taken on record and fines stated as deposited), the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn, and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶17

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Indian Penal Code323, 324, 34¶11 323¶11 324¶11

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment of conviction and Order on Sentence dated 11th August, 2004 convicting both Appellants under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC and sentencing them to a fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 323 IPC (in default simple imprisonment for 01 month) and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each under Section 324 IPC (in default simple imprisonment for 02 months); fines stated to have been deposited.¶9
Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi · 11th August, 2004

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Jagdish Khanduja & Anr.¶4
respondent
State¶6
Mukesh Kumar, Naveen, Siddhanth Goyal, Arsalan Naik

Coram

AI extract

Rajneesh Kumar Guptaauthor¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Delhi HC
Decided on: 27 Nov 2025 · November
Registered: 3 Nov 2004
Case no.: CRL.A./815/2004
CNR: DLHC010100812004
Bench: Rajneesh Kumar Gupta
Case type: CRL.A.

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Rajneesh Kumar Gupta

Sri Chand Vs Central Bureau of Investigation
24 Nov 2025
Mahesh & Ors. Vs State
21 Nov 2025
Rajeev Vs the State
19 Nov 2025
Nandke Vs State (Gnct) of Delhi
4 Dec 2025
Rajesh @ Raju Vs State
4 Dec 2025
Rakesh Vs the State
5 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

Jagdish Khanduja & Anr. v. State, CRL.A./815/2004 (DEL), decided on 27 November 2025.

The High Court of Delhi publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

Indian Penal Code323, 324, 34 · 323 · 324

View all statutes

Procedural history1

Judgment of conviction and Order on Sentence dated 11th August, 2004 convicting both Appellants under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC and sentencing them to a fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 323 IPC (in default simple imprisonment for 01 month) and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each under Section 324 IPC (in default simple imprisonment for 02 months); fines stated to have been deposited.Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi · 11th August, 2004

View full history

Bench / Coram

Rajneesh Kumar Gupta

Parties & counsel