STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAHUL NILAMBARBHAI JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State is before this Court challenging the order dtd. 29/7/2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case Nos. 112 of 2017 and 294 of 2016, below Exhs. 9 and 7 respectively, whereby, through the order, accused Piyush Vaktajibhai Rathod (Sargara), and Ajay Rameshbhai Gohel, original accused Nos. 2 and 3 of Sessions Case No. 294 of 2016 and Rahul Nilambarbhai Jha, Pushpendrasingh Mahipalsingh Chauhan and Sandeepkumar Babubhai Rathod (Rahul Pandey) - original accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of Sessions Case No. 112 of 2017 were discharged from an offence punishable under Sec. 376 read with Sec. 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ).

(2.) The applicant - State has raised the ground, inter alia, that there are specific allegations against the respondents that they had concealed the identity of principal accused namely Akshay and facilitated his ill intention, who, thereby, had given information to the victim about principal accused as being unmarried and that, he was serious in his relation, with an intention to solemnize marriage with the victim. The State alleges that the respondents - accused gained trust of the victim for the principal accused which has resulted into development of physical relationship and thus, there is a specific case of abetment against all the respondents - accused in committing alleged offence punishable under Sec. 376 IPC read with Sec. 114 IPC, as for active complicity as the abettors, at a time prior to the commission of offence, would be, prima facie, found from the statement of the victim which shows that the abettors had substantially assisted the principal culprit in commission of offence to convince the victim to marry the main accused.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the applicant - State has submitted that it is a clear case of Cheating and on the basis of the false information and assurance of the respondents - accused, the victim girl had initiated relationship with the principal accused, which had ended into physical relations which was on the pretext of marriage and hence, the main case under Sec. 376 IPC of rape by the accused would get reflected from the facts of the case and the abetment of the accused for the commission of the offence would also get reflected from the statement of the victim and thus, she stated that discharge of the respondents - accused would not be in accordance with the provisions of law and thus, made a prayer for quashing and setting aside the impugned order.