Delhi High Court Upholds Life Sentence of Man for Gang Rape of 14-Year-Old
Court held that “the evidence of the Prosecutrix, which is reliable and trustworthy, inspires confidence, and is also corroborated by her medical evidence,” and therefore proved beyond reasonable doubt that she had been kidnapped and sexually assaulted by the appellant;
The Delhi High Court has recently upheld the conviction and life sentence awarded to Praveen @ Lallu for kidnapping and gang raping a 14-year-old girl in 2018. The court found the survivor’s evidence to be “clear and unimpeaching” and sufficient to sustain a conviction.
A division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta said,” ...We are of the opinion that the evidence of the Prosecutrix, which is reliable and trustworthy, inspires confidence, and is also corroborated by her medical evidence. Thus, it stands proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she was kidnapped and sexually assaulted by the Appellant.”
The ruling came in response to an appeal filed by Praveen challenging the judgment and order of sentence passed by the trial court.
The trial court had convicted him for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376DA, 377 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
In the present proceedings, the appellant sought to set aside both his conviction and the sentence imposed by the trial court.
According to the prosecution, on 12th November 2018 at about 9:00 p.m., Praveen kidnapped the survivor from the lawful guardianship of her parents with the intention to commit illicit intercourse.
After kidnapping the survivor, Praveen, along with co-accused Kalu (who was absconding), took the prosecutrix to a jungle and committed gang rape and carnal intercourse with her.
Thereafter, Praveen was arrested on 29th November 2018. However, the co-accused Kalu was not arrested as he had absconded and subsequently passed away on 20th October 2020.
The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined 13 witnesses. The statement of Praveen was recorded, wherein he denied the incriminating evidence, pleaded innocence, and claimed false implication.
Opposing the same, the APP for the State and the counsel for the survivor argued that the Trial Court had passed the impugned judgment after considering the evidence on record. It was further contended that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant.
However, the counsel appearing for Praveen argued that the Trial Court had passed the judgment based on surmises and conjectures, which were against the facts of the case. It was contended that there was no reliable evidence on record on behalf of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
He further argued that there were material inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecutrix and that there was also no scientific evidence to link the appellant to the commission of the alleged offence.
The counsel for the appellant also argued that since the alleged co-accused, Kalu, had not been arrested and only the appellant had been convicted for the alleged offences, it could not be treated as a case of gang rape.
Rejecting the argument, the Court said, “For the offence to be a gang rape, it must be that the prosecutrix has been sexually assaulted by more than one person. This argument is without any merit, as one offender can be convicted for gang rape if the other offender managed to escape and could not be apprehended.”
Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court’s judgment in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar, wherein it was held that the appellant can be convicted on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if it is unimpeachable, consistent, and without any ambiguity.
Upholding the conviction order, the High Court said, “Thus, the conviction of the appellant by the Trial Court does not warrant any interference by this Court. The conviction and the sentence of the appellant are maintained.”
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
For Appellant: Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal & Mr. Rahul Bhaskar, Advs.
For Respondent: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with Ms. Divya Yadav & Mr. Lalit Luthra, Advs. Mr. Zishaan Iskandari & Mr. Madhur Mittal, Advs. for Complainant. Insp. Harish Kumar, P.S. Karawal Nagar
Case Title: PRAVEEN @ LALLU versus STATE NCT OF DELHI
Judgement Date: 20 August 2025
Bench: Justices Prathiba M Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta