STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PATEL RAMESH NANJIBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is filed by the appellant -State under section of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10 -3 -2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (fast Track Court) Dhangadhra, in Sessions Case No. 50 of 1998 (45 of 1995) whereby the accused have been acquitted of the charges levelled against them.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the complainant -Patel Rugnath Bhudarbhai -father of the victim girl before Halvad Police Station which has been registered as Crime Register No. I -215 of 1994 alleging inter alia that on 26 -12 -1994 between 8.30 and 10.30 hours, his daughter was kidnapped by the accused persons from his lawful guardianship and also committed theft of cash of Rs. 2,500/ - and ornaments worth Rs. 71,500/ - with the help of his daughter. In pursuance of registration of the said complaint, the police started investigation. At the end of investigation and on the basis of material collected against the accused, since a prima facie case was made out against the accused, a charge sheet was filed against the accused. As the offences alleged against the accused was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. Thereafter, charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. At the end of trial, after hearing the learned advocates appearing for the prosecution and the defence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge (fast Track Court) Dhangadhra, acquitted the accused of all the charges levelled against them, which is giving rise to the present appeal.

(3.) LEARNED advocate, Mr. M.J. Budhbhatti, on the other hand, submitted that the trial court has rightly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence appearing on the record and the reasons assigned for recording a finding of acquittal are reasonable and justifiable. According to him, there are glaring contradictions and conflicting statements regarding the age of the victim in the depositions of the complainant and the victim with that of the complaint and therefore, the trial court has rightly disbelieved the age shown in School Leaving Certificate and 'dakhla' issued by the nagarpalika and thereby both the accused were rightly acquitted by the accused. He further submitted that this being an appeal against the order of acquittal, the judgment delivered by the trial court deserves to be upheld as proper as plausible reasons for acquittal have been assigned. He, therefore, urged that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. In this connection, he relied on the decisions reported in : AIR 1994 SC 966 in the case of State of Karnataka v. Sureshbabu Puk Raj Porral and : AIR 1965 SC 942 (V 52 C 150) in the case of S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras.