Skip to main content
Court Order

Interim Order 2

CNR DLCT02021093202518 Feb 2026
Tis Hazari, CMM Court
delhi · Delhi (DL)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Interim Order 2 · 18 Feb 2026 · CNR DLCT020210932025

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 27
Cr. Case 6749/2025
STATE Vs. SHUMAIL
FIR No. 118/2024
PS (Chandni Mahal)
18.02.2026
Present. Sh. Amit Yadav, Ld. APP for the State.
Accused in person.
Sh. Suhail Azhar, Ld. Counsel for the accused via VC.
Let the copy of the charge-sheet be supplied to the
accused person against acknowledgment.
Accused submits that he does not wish to contest the
matter and was willing to plead guilty.
A prima facie case for offence punishable U/s 3 DPDP
Act is made out for which notice is framed separately against the
accused person, the same has been read over and explained to the
accused person, to which he pleads guilty and does not claim trial.
Considering the admission of guilt by the accused, he is
hereby, convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the
Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007.
The offence arises from allegations that the accused had
affixed a poster advertising his fitness gym at ‘Government
Building/Rain Basera’, thereby defacing public property without any
lawful permission. Such acts, though seemingly minor, cause visual
pollution and diminish the aesthetic appearance of public spaces,
besides reflecting disregard for the law meant to maintain civic
discipline.
At the stage of consideration on the point of sentence, the
accused has submitted that he is a first-time offender, belongs to a
-- 1 of 2 --
humble background, and has realized his mistake. He prays for a
lenient view, expressing remorse and an undertaking not to repeat such
conduct in future.
The Ld. APP for the State, on the other hand, submits that
though the offence is minor, it adversely affects the city’s cleanliness
and therefore deterrence should be kept in mind.
I have considered the rival submissions and the
circumstances of the case. The accused has voluntarily pleaded guilty
at the very threshold, thereby saving valuable judicial time. There is
nothing on record to suggest any prior criminal antecedent. The plea
of guilt appears to be made in good faith and with genuine remorse.
Considering the nature of the offence, the mitigating
factors, and the spirit of reformative justice, I am of the view that ends
of justice shall be adequately met if the accused is given an
opportunity to atone through a token punishment.
Accordingly, the accused is sentenced to pay a fine of ₹
500/-. Fine paid. Receipt issued accordingly.
Be put up the matter for consignment of the file before
the National Lok Adalat on 14.03.2026.
(HARSHITA MISHRA)
CJM/(Central)/THC/Delhi
18.02.2026
-- 2 of 2 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.