State vs Rinku

STATE vs RINKU

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 10, 2026

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1267479

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1267479
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Prathiba M. Singh,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Madhu Jain
Decided On: Apr 10, 2026
Case Number: CRL.A./88/2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

STATE

Advocate Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, Ms. Divya Yadav, Mr. Lalit Luthra

Respondent

RINKU

Advocate Mr. Ajay Verma Amicus Curiae, Ms. Smriti, Ms. Sneha Sejwal

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi+ crl.a. 88/2012 state .....appellant through: mr. ritesh kumar bahri, app with ms. divya yadav & mr. lalit luthra, advs. si vishwas.versusrinku .....respondent through: mr. ajay verma amicus curiae) with ms. smriti s nair and ms. sneha sejwal, advocates.coram:justice prathiba m. singh justice madhu jainorder% 10.04.20261. this hearing has been done through hybrid mode.2. the present appeal has been filed by the state under section 378(1)read with section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 challenging the impugned judgment dated 25th august, 2010 passed by ld. asj-02, tis hazari courts, delhi arising from fir no. 338/2007 registered at p.s. chandni mahal for offences punishable under section 376/506(ii)/201 of the indian penal code, 1860.3. vide the impugned judgement, the respondent had been acquitted by the trial court.4. however, during the pendency of the present appeal, the respondent passed away on 22nd august, 2025 and the factum of his death has also been verified by the state.5. in view thereof, the appeal is abated and is accordingly disposed of.prathiba m. singh, j.madhu jain, j.april 10, 2026/mr/sm

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 88/2012 STATE .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with Ms. Divya Yadav & Mr. Lalit Luthra, Advs. SI Vishwas.
versus
RINKU .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Verma Amicus Curiae) with Ms. Smriti S Nair and Ms. Sneha Sejwal, Advocates.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

ORDER

% 10.04.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378(1)

read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the impugned judgment dated 25th August, 2010 passed by ld. ASJ-02, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi arising from FIR No. 338/2007 registered at P.S. Chandni Mahal for offences punishable under Section 376/506(ii)/201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. Vide the impugned judgement, the Respondent had been acquitted by the Trial Court.

4. However, during the pendency of the present appeal, the Respondent passed away on 22nd August, 2025 and the factum of his death has also been verified by the State.

5. In view thereof, the appeal is abated and is accordingly disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

MADHU JAIN, J.

APRIL 10, 2026/MR/SM

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2026 Same Parties STATE vs RINKU Same Subject Education Same Judge Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Prathiba M. Singh,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Mad...