STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KADVABHAI BECHARBHAI SAVALIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeals assail the judgment and order dated 30/09/2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 155 of 2007, whereby the learned trial Judge was pleased to convict the original accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, 'the IPC') and for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 50,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further simple imprisonment for one year and for the offence punishable under Section 506(2) of the IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further simple imprisonment for three months. All the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that when the complainant - victim was along at her home, the accused, taking advantage of her loneliness, forcibly raped her, against her will and thereafter, threatened her to kill his brother and thereby, made her to conceive and for the said alleged offence, a complaint came to be lodged against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity, 'the IPC').

(3.) WE have examined the matter carefully and gone through the evidence on record. We have appreciated, re -appreciated and re -evaluated the evidence on the touchstone of the latest decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court. We find that the trial Court while considering the evidence on record, has very elaborately discussed the evidence adduced before it and the prosecution has successfully proved the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Further, the learned advocates for the accused are not in a position to show any evidence to take a contrary view in the matter or that the approach of the Court below is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the decision is perverse or that the Court below has ignored the material evidence on record. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the Court below was completely justified in passing impugned judgment and order.