The Delhi High Court on 29 October 2026 partly allowed Pramod Kumar’s appeal while preserving his convictions for robbery and possessing a knife unlawfully.
Judge / Bench — Justice Madhu Jain.
The Court accepted corroborated portions of witnesses’ earlier testimony despite later retractions. However, Section 411 IPC targets receivers of stolen property, so the principal robber could not be separately convicted for retaining the same phone. The Section 27 Arms Act conviction also failed because the required contravention of Sections 5 or 7 was not proved.
The Section 411 sentence was removed. The remaining sentences under Sections 392 and 397 IPC and Section 25(1B)(b) Arms Act remain concurrent, with statutory set-off. Kumar must surrender within two weeks to serve the balance.
Advocates appearing — Appellant — Kashmir Singh, Advocate. State — Raghuvinder Verma, Additional Public Prosecutor.