Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police Constable brutally raped his three-and-a-half-year-old neighbour 'V' in Shikarpur village, leaving vaginal tears that hospitalised the child for eleven days. The trial court convicted him under sections 376 and 354 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment with a Rs 50,000 fine as victim compensation. The High Court held that the appellant, himself a member of the law-enforcing agency, had perpetrated a ghastly crime on a helpless child, and upheld the conviction. It reduced the sentence to a net twelve years' rigorous imprisonment without remission, recording his undertaking to pay the fine, shift his family out of Shikarpur and never contact the victim's family. Scope note: a neighbourhood (non-custodial) rape by a serving constable, so the subcategory is recorded as other rather than custodial rape. The convicted Delhi Police constable in this record is a different man from the convicted Delhi Police constable of Andha Mugal police post covered in companion records of this dataset; this judgment gives the unit only as Delhi Police. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →By judgment dated 7 July 2008 in Crl.A. No. 740/2001 (with Crl.A. Nos. 5/2000, 813/2001 and 719/2002), the Delhi High Court (Coram: Manmohan Sarin, S.L. Bhayana, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Constable, Delhi Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 50,000.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Delhi High Court judgment dated 7 July 2008 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Holding not recorded separately.
“We, accordingly, uphold the conviction but reduce the sentence to a net term of 12 years of RI exclusive of remissions.” (para n/a (paras unnumbered in this judgment; operative order at p.16 of 56))
The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.