Harsh Kumar @ Honey v. The State (Govt of NCT) Delhi

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

3. The present appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment dated 22.08.2025 (‘impugned judgment’) and order on sentence dated 19.09.2025 (‘impugned order on sentence’), passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Specia Court- POCSO) South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in SC NO. 74/2024 arising out of FIR No. 611/2023 registered at police station Ambedkar Nagar.

4. By the impugned judgment, the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). By the impugned order on sentence, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been rightly acquitted for the offence under Section 376 IPC, however, still convicted for offence under Section 363 of the IPC. He submits that the victim in her deposition had categorically stated that she was in romantic consensual relationship with the appellant. However, she got angry on reading the chats of the appellant with his sister-in-law. He submits that even if the case of the prosecution is taken at the highest, it is apparent that the victim had eloped with the appellant on her own free will and thus the conviction under Section 363 of the IPC is unsustainable.

6. The matter requires consideration.

7. The appeal is therefore admitted.

8. List in due course. CRL.M.(BAIL) 2119/2025 (for suspension of sentence)

9. The present application is filed by the appellant seeking suspension of sentence till the pendency of the present appeal.

10. As noted above, the appeal is not likely to be taken up for hearing in near future.

11. The appellant has spent almost 02 years in custody out of 05 years of imprisonment. In the opinion of this Court, the appellant has made a case for being released.

12. In view of the above, the present application is allowed. The impugned order on sentence is suspended till the pendency of the present appeal. The appellant is directed to be released on furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and on the following conditions: a. The appellant shall pay the fine amount as imposed by the impugned order on sentence, if not already paid, within a period of three weeks of his release. Proof of deposit of fine to be furnished to the concerned IO/SHO; b. The appellant shall provide the address where he would be residing after his release and shall not change the address without informing the concerned IO/ SHO; c. The appellant shall, under no circumstances, leave the country without the permission of the Court; d. The appellant shall, upon his release, give his mobile number to the concerned IO/SHO and shall keep his mobile phone switched on at all times; e. The appellant shall appear before this Court as and when directed. f. The applicant shall not reside within 5 kms radius of the locality where the prosecutrix resides;

13. It is pointed out that the victim compensation amount is still not paid. Delhi State Legal Services Committee is directed to expedite the payment of compensation to the victim and a compliance report be filed within four weeks from today.

14. This Court appreciates the efforts put in by Ms. Divya Yadav, learned Amicus Curiae who addressed arguments on behalf of the victim on the request of this Court.

15. The Delhi High Court Legal services Committee is directed to pay the fees of the learned Amicus Curiae as per its scheduled rates and rules.