SONU CHOUDARY versus STATE OF NCT DELHI

SONU CHOUDARY versus STATE OF NCT DELHI

The conviction and sentence under Section 324 IPC were upheld because the prosecution proved voluntarily causing hurt to the injured (supported by injured's testimony and medical record). The conviction and sentence under Section 452 IPC were set aside because the incident occurred in a restaurant which the Court held was not a building used as a human dwelling, place of worship, or place for custody of property, and therefore the essential ingredient of 'house-trespass' under Section 442 was not proved.

Parties
Appellant: Sonu Choudary; Respondent: State of NCT Delhi
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court From High Court Judgment; Final Judgment Delivered by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Voluntarily Causing Hurt (section 324 Ipc), House Trespass After Preparation (section 452 Ipc), Criminal Trespass and House Trespass (sections 441 and 442 Ipc), Place Used for Dwelling or for Worship or for Custody of Property, Conviction and Sentencing
Criminal Law Indian Penal Code Voluntarily Causing Hurt (section 324 Ipc) House Trespass After Preparation (section 452 Ipc) Criminal Trespass and House Trespass (sections 441 and 442 Ipc) Place Used for Dwelling or for Worship or for Custody of Property Conviction and Sentencing

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sonu Choudary

Appellant

State of NCT Delhi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court From High Court Judgment; Final Judgment Delivered by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction under Section 324 IPC is sustainable
  2. 2 Whether a restaurant can be a place used for human dwelling or for worship or for the custody of property for the purpose of convicting under Section 452 IPC

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction and sentence under Section 324 IPC were upheld because the prosecution proved voluntarily causing hurt to the injured (supported by injured's testimony and medical record). The conviction and sentence under Section 452 IPC were set aside because the incident occurred in a restaurant which the Court held was not a building used as a human dwelling, place of worship, or place for custody of property, and therefore the essential ingredient of 'house-trespass' under Section 442 was not proved.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • Conviction and sentence under Section 324 IPC are confirmed.
  • Conviction and sentence under Section 452 IPC are set aside and the appellant is acquitted for the offence under Section 452 IPC.