Disposed¶21

Ravi v. State of Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC8 Apr 2026W.P.(CRL)/1120/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Plea of guilt; voluntariness of plea; compounding of offence; BNSS statutory remedy; appeal maintainable as to legality of sentence; writ petition withdrawn as not pressed; liberty to approach Court of Sessions; Appellate/Revisional Court; Delhi High Court; Manoj Jain, J.; plea recorded 18.12.2025; sentencing order 24.02.2026; co-accused Amit; complainant ASI Rajesh.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn (not pressed) with liberty to invoke appropriate jurisdiction before the learned Court of Sessions; all rights and contentions of the parties reserved. ¶21

Ravi Vs State of Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition withdrawn (not pressed) with liberty to invoke appropriate jurisdiction before the learned Court of Sessions; all rights and contentions of the parties reserved.

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner had ever made a plea of guilt, much less a voluntary one, before the learned Trial Court - as contended by counsel, who further asserted that the complainant's prayer for compounding of the offence went unaddressed. +1 more

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Where there is a plea of guilt, an appeal is maintainable, at least to the extent of the legality of the sentence.

¶17

Key takeaways

A convict who contends that no voluntary plea of guilt was recorded before the learned Trial Court should invoke the appropriate statutory jurisdiction (as provided in BNSS) rather than file a writ petition before this Court.ratio¶18
Compounding of the offence can always be considered, even by the learned Appellate Court/Revisional Court.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Manoj Jain, J.), W.P.(CRL) 1120/2026, order dated 08.04.2026: Petitioner Ravi, held guilty alongwith co-accused Amit on a plea of guilt recorded by the learned Trial Court on 18.12.2025 and sentenced vide order dated 24.02.2026, sought writ relief contending that no voluntary plea of guilt was ever recorded and that the complainant's prayer for compounding of the offence was ignored. The Court observed that (i) where a plea of guilt exists, an appeal is maintainable at least to the extent of the legality of the sentence; (ii) a convict disputing a voluntary plea of guilt should invoke the appropriate statutory jurisdiction as provided in BNSS instead of filing a writ petition; and (iii) compounding can always be considered even by the Appellate/Revisional Court. On counsel's request, the petition was withdrawn and disposed of as not pressed, with liberty to invoke appropriate jurisdiction before the learned Court of Sessions and with all rights and contentions of the parties reserved.

¶1

$~76

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1120/2026 & CRL.M.A. 10610/2026 RAVI

¶4

.....Petitioner Through: Ms. Shaivani Gupta and Mr. Bipin Vinayak Chandan, Advocates alongwith Mr. Ravi petitioner in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

¶7

.....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for the State with Ms. Amisha Gupta and Mr. Abhijeet Kr., Advocates. ASI Rajesh. Complainant in person.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶9

O R D E R % 08.04.2026

¶10

The petitioner-Ravi, alongwith one Amit, has been held guilty on the basis of plea of guilt, which was recorded by the learned Trial Court on 18.12.2025.

¶11

Based on such plea of guilt, they both have been sentenced vide order dated 24.02.2026.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was never any plea of guilt, much less a voluntary one. She submits that on the contrary, the concerned complainant had appeared before the learned Trial Court and had prayed for compounding of the offence and instead of recording his statement

¶13

W.P.(CRL) 1120/2026 1

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 13/04/2026 at 12:55:14

¶16

to said effect, the learned Trial Court has recorded the plea of guilt and has sentenced him.

¶17

Admittedly when there is a plea of guilt, an appeal would be maintainable to the extent of legality of the sentence.

¶18

At the same time, if according to convict, there was never any voluntary plea of guilt before the learned Trial Court, the petitioner, in such a situation, ideally speaking, should invoke the appropriate jurisdiction by taking course to statutory remedy as provided in BNSS, instead of filing a writ petition before this Court.

¶19

Moreover, the aspect of compounding can always be considered, even by the learned Appellate Court/Revisional Court.

¶20

In view of the above, after hearing arguments for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition with liberty to invoke appropriate jurisdiction before the learned Court of Sessions.

¶21

The present petition stands disposed of, as not pressed.

¶22

Liberty, as prayed, is granted.

¶23

All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.

¶24

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶25

APRIL 8, 2026/ss/js

¶26

W.P.(CRL) 1120/2026 2

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 13/04/2026 at 12:55:14

Ravi v. State of Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi v. State of Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj Kumar Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Alliance Polychem Private Limited Vs Government of NCT of Delhi, through Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mehrauli and Ors.

Shashi Bhushan @ Bitu Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Divyansh Goel & Anr. Vs Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.

Dharmendra Yadav Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Anita Vs State of NCT Delhi & Ors.

Amit Kumar & Ors. Vs State (the NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Vishnu Devi Vs State through SHO Ps Narela & Ors.

Alliance Polychem Private Limited Vs Government of NCT of Delhi, through Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mehrauli and Ors.

Salman and Others & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Suresh Kumar Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Mohd Suhail Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ms Bhanu Chaudhary Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sujata Yadav Vs State NCT of Delhi