Delhi High Court - Orders
Salma Through Pairokar Asif Ali vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 16 January, 2026
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~2 & 3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 214/2025
SALMA THROUGH PAIROKAR ASIF ALI .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Mr. Rishabh Bhati,
Mr. Swapnil Krishna, Mr. Prakhar
Bhardwaj, Advs.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with
Ms. Divya Yadav & Mr. Lalit Luthra,
Advs.
Insp. Brahma Dutt Vishnoi, P.S.
Ghazipur, Delhi
Ms. Babita, Adv. for Complainant
(3)
+ CRL.A. 272/2025
SOHAIL .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Mr. Rishabh Bhati,
Mr. Swapnil Krishna, Mr. Prakhar
Bhardwaj, Advs.
Mr. B. Badrinath (DHCLSC) and Mr.
Dhruv Bhardwaj, Advs.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with
Ms. Divya Yadav & Mr. Lalit Luthra,
Advs.
Insp. Brahma Dutt Vishnoi, P.S.
Ghazipur, Delhi
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
ORDER
% 16.01.2026 CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 1 of 8 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43 CRL.M.(BAIL) 357/2025 in CRL.A. 214/2025 CRL.M.(BAIL) 497/2025 in CRL.A. 272/2025
1. The present application has been filed by the Appellants under Section 430 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
2. The background of the case is that on the intervening night of 5th and 6th January, 2014, the first information relating to an incident was given by one Pran Singh, landlord of the premises located at B-198 Rajbir Colony Delhi, at around 10:48 AM. With respect to the said information received, DD No. 22B records as under:
s
3. Upon receiving the said information, one Kuldeep Singh, SI, reached B-198, Rajbir Colony, Delhi, where a person was lying dead on a cot inside a room, identified as Asir D. Ahmad. SI Kuldeep Singh took him to LBS Hospital, Delhi, where Asif D Ahmad (hereinafter, 'the deceased') was declared to be brought dead.
CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 2 of 8This 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43
4. Upon a complaint filed by Nasrin Bano, sister of the deceased, FIR No. 10/2014 was registered at PS Gazipur u/s 302/120B/34 IPC. Thereafter, charges were framed against the Appellants- Salma and Sohail and they were finally convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 302/34, r/w Section 120, IPC vide the order of conviction dated 21st September, 2024 (hereinafter, 'the order of conviction'), passed by the ld. Additional Session Judge, NDPS, East, Karkardooma Courts, New Delhi. Relevant portion of the order of conviction reads as under:
"83. From the facts proved by the prosecution, it is established that both the accused persons entered into criminal conspiracy to cause the death of deceased Asir Ahmad. PW1 has deposed that she saw accused Sohail entering the house of deceased on 05.01.2014. PW1 and PW6 has deposed that accused Sohail and Salma were having an affair. PW3 has proved that the accused Sohail strangulated the deceased while accused Salma held the deceased by his legs,which shows the physical manifestation of the agreement between the accused persons namely Salma and Sohail, who in furtherance of common intention caused the death of deceased Asir Ahmad.
84. The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubts that accused Sohail and accused Salma have committed the offences under Section 302/34 IPC and section 120B IPC.
85. Accordingly, accused Sohail and accused Salma are convicted for the offence under Section Section 302/34 IPC and section 120B IPC
86. Copy of the judgment be provided to the accused persons free of cost against due acknowledgment.
87. Let accused persons be heard on point of sentence."
5. Following the said order of conviction, an order of sentence was passed CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 3 of 8 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43 on 13th January, 2025, wherein the Appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each.
6. It is this order of conviction, as also the order of sentence, that stands challenged by the Appellants in the present appeals. At present, however, the Court is only considering the applications for suspension of sentence filed by the Applicants.
7. The deceased in this case is the husband of one of the Appellants- Salma. The two were stated to be married for some years and had four children. They were residing at the premises located at B-198 Rajbir Colony Delhi, which was owned by Mr. Pran Singh, who had made the phone call to the police to report the incident.
8. The Court notes that there are different versions of the incident which are recorded in the depositions given by the witnesses. However, a perusal of the post mortem report dated 8th January, 2014 would show that in the initial report, the concerned hospital was unable to give a proper opinion as to the cause of death. The said post mortem report records as under:
9. The said post mortem report dated 8th January, 2014, however, does record that there were several injuries on the body of the deceased. Thereafter, a further subsequent opinion was given in respect of the death of the deceased vide report dated 10th July, 2014, which reads as under:
"In my opinion, to the best of my knowledge and CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 4 of 8 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43 belief death in this case was due to Asphyxia consequent upon manual strangulation. All injuries are antemortem in nature and recent induration injuries no. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10,13,14 are collectively sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature."
10. The doctor who prepared the report dated 10th July, 2014, i.e. Dr. Vinay Kumar Singh, is examined as PW-11 before the Trial Court, and clearly states that the deceased had suffered 15 injuries. A perusal of his cross examination would show that he is also unable to categorically assert whether the death of the decease was a suicidal or a homicidal death.
11. It is also an admitted position on record that the viscera report has also not been produced. In addition, the case of the defence, before the Trial Court was that the deceased had committed suicide, as is recorded in the statement of DW-1/Appellant- Salma.
12. Another important issue which has been highlighted by the ld. Counsel for the Appellants is that two exhibits which were taken into custody by the police upon investigating the crime scene, i.e. a silver colour string (rassi) and one purple colour chunni, have both neither been produced, nor analysed by the FSL. The said exhibits were not even deposited in the Malkhana.
13. In the opinion of this Court, all these facts and inconsistencies in the investigation, as also the subsequent trial, as pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the Appellants would show that the appeals would require detailed consideration.
14. Upon issuing notice in these applications, the nominal roll of the Applicants were also requisitioned. The said latest nominal roll of Appellant- Salma shows that she has served more than six years in custody and that of CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 5 of 8 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43 the Appellant- Sohail reveals that he has spent 9 years in custody. 15. Out of the 4 children of Appellant- Salma, one is stated to be living with his Bua and the other children are stated to be living with their paternal grandparents i.e. Dada and Dadi.
15. The Court is of the opinion that since all the four children of the Appellant- Salma are minors and their father has already passed away, the Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of Appellant- Salma, given that she has already spent 6 years in custody.
16. In so far as the Appellant-Sohail is concerned, one of the important facts that has been highlighted is that though PW-3, the minor son of the Appellant- Salma and the deceased, as also DW-1 clearly and categorically state that one of the nieces of the deceased i.e. Gudiya was present at the time of the incident, she has not been examined in this case as a witness at all. Considering the above stated inconsistencies pointed out in the course of trial, the Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of Appellant- Sohail as well during the pendency of the appeal.
17. Under these circumstances, the sentence of both the Appellants- Salma & Sohail shall stand suspended during the pendency of their appeals, subject to the following conditions :-
i. The Appellants shall be released upon furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- each, along with 2 sureties each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. Amongst the said 2 sureties, one shall be a resident of Delhi, and the other residing in the city where the respective Appellants will be residing; ii. The Appellant shall not leave the country without prior permission of this Court;CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 6 of 8
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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43 iii. The Appellants shall intimate the concerned SHO, PS Ghazipur, as also the SHO at their respective jurisdictional police stations regarding the residential address where they would be residing upon release and shall also intimate the SHO in case of any change in their residential address;
iv. The Appellants shall provide their mobile numbers to the concerned SHO, PS Ghazipur as also the SHO at their respective jurisdictional police station and intimate about change in the number, if any; v. A copy of this order shall be communicated to the concerned SHO at the jurisdictional police station of both the Appellants for necessary information and compliance;
vi. The Appellants shall report at their respective jurisdictional police station on first Monday of every month at 11:00 a.m. and they shall be discharged by 12 noon, after recording their presence and completion of all the necessary formalities;
vii. The Appellants shall not indulge in any illegal or unlawful activity including criminal activity and upon any such activity being discovered or indulged into, the present suspension of sentence shall automatically stand cancelled.
viii. The SHO, P.S. Ghazipur, Delhi shall obtain a regular report from the concerned SHO of the respective jurisdictional police stations of the Appellants, at least on a quarterly basis.
18. The applications are allowed in the above terms and disposed of accordingly.
19. The observations made in this order shall not affect the final hearing in the appeals.
CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 7 of 8This 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43
20. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for necessary information and compliance.
21. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court forthwith. CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A.272/2025
22. Let Trial Court record and paperbook be obtained by the ld. Counsel for the parties, who shall then file their written submissions at least one week before the next date of hearing.
23. List in due course at its own turn.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J MADHU JAIN, J JANUARY 16, 2026/ys/ss CRL.A. 214/2025 & CRL.A. 272/2025 Page 8 of 8 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 16/01/2026 at 20:48:43