Raj Kumar @ Rajman v. State
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RAJ KUMAR @ RAJMAN .....Appellant Through:
Mr.
Saurabh Kansal, Ms.
Pallavi Sharma Kansal, Mr. Suraj Kumar, Mr.
Raghav Vij and Mr. Pratham Malik, Advs.
versus STATE .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for State with Mr. Sunil Singh Rawat, Mr.
Arsalan Naik and Mr.
Siddharth Goyal, Advs.
Mr. Parminder Singh G. and Ms.
Seema Singh, Advs.
for R2/Complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
O R D E R
% 17.12.2025 1.
This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. 2.
The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant - Raj Kumar @ Rajman, under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the Judgment of conviction dated 26th June 2014 and the order on sentence dated 01st July, 2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge - 01, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, in Sessions Case No. 110/2013 arising out of FIR bearing No. 94/2013 of Police Station Chankya Puri. 3.
The Appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 354-B IPC.
4.
It is stated that the Appellant was released from jail on 16th January 2016 after completing the sentence awarded to him. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
5.
Learned counsel for the Appellant, on instructions from the Appellant, submits that since the Appellant has already undergone the complete sentence awarded to him, he does not wish to press the present appeal, as the same has become infructuous.
6.
The Nominal Roll of the Appellant has been filed today on behalf of the State and is taken on record. The same is reproduced hereinbelow: The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
7.
The Trial Court Record (TCR) and the Nominal Roll have been perused.
8.
After questioning the Appellant, this Court is satisfied that he is making the statement with full understanding of its consequences, the same having been duly explained to him.
9.
Keeping in view the statement of the Appellant, which is taken on record, as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Appellant, and considering the fact that the Appellant has already served the sentence awarded by the learned Trial Court, the present appeal is disposed of as not pressed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 10.
Learned counsel for the prosecutrix submits that prosecutrix be granted liberty to move the application for grant of compensation before the competent authority, in accordance with law.
11.
The liberty as prayed for is granted.
12.
Learned counsel for the Appellant also submits that e-copy of the TCR be supplied to him to enable him to move an appropriate application. 13.
The registry is directed to supply the e-copy of the TCR to the learned counsel for the Appellant, on request.
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J DECEMBER 17, 2025/sds/abk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.