Delhi High Court - Orders
Shreedhar Laxman Rangari vs State (Govt Of Nct), Delhi on 6 August, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 148/2025
SHREEDHAR LAXMAN RANGARI .....Appellant
Through: Appearance not given.
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT), DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the
State.
SI Rocky, PS: Swaroop Nagar.
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate for the
victim.
Ms. Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate for the
victim.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 06.08.2025
CRL.M.(BAIL) 258/2025
1. The Appellant seeks suspension of sentence in relation to proceedings emanating from FIR No. 457/2020 registered at P.S. Swaroop Nagar under Sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, I8601 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.2 The Appellant was convicted for the offences under Section 376(2) of the IPC and Section 5(1)(n) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act vide judgement on conviction dated 10th November, 2023. By order on sentence dated 2nd May, 2024, he 1 "IPC"
2"POCSO"
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 08/08/2025 at 23:11:32 was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 30 years for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, along with a fine of INR 2,000/- and rigorous imprisonment for one month in default of payment of fine.
2. Counsel for the Appellant has urged that the Appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the Appellant had objected to the Prosecutrix's relationship with her friend, and this objection is stated to have motivated the false implication of the Appellant in the present case. Further, reliance is placed on the Appellant's 'potency test,' which notes a history of erectile dysfunction, to support the contention that the Appellant was physically incapable of committing the acts of sexual assault as alleged by the Prosecutrix.
3. The Court has considered the aforenoted contentions. This case involves serious allegations of sexual assault by the Appellant, who was a family member of the Prosecutrix. The Prosecutrix has categorically deposed before the Trial Court that the Appellant had been committing rape on her for three years during the period when he was residing with her. She further stated that a similar incident of sexual assault occurred after the Appellant, having briefly separated from the Prosecutrix's family, returned to reside with them.
4. In light of the foregoing facts and circumstances, having regard to the gravity of the offence alleged against the Appellant and the consistent testimony of the Prosecutrix before the Trial Court, the Court does not, at this juncture, find any ground to suspend the Appellant's sentence during the pendency of the appeal.
5. The application is dismissed.
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 08/08/2025 at 23:11:32 CRL.A. 148/2025
6. List for arguments on 30th October, 2025.
SANJEEV NARULA, J AUGUST 6, 2025 d.negi 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 08/08/2025 at 23:11:32