MERUBHAI LAKHMANBHAI MOKARIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 09.06.2011 passed by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar. By the said judgment, the accused was held guilty for offences punishable under Ss. 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") and ordered to undergo imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and, in default of payment of fine, the accused was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. For offence punishable under Sec. 376 of IPC, the accused was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 10,000/ - and, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment of one year was imposed. The accused was also convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, "Atrocity Act") and ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - and, in default of payment of fine, the accused was ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment of one year. All the sentences were to run concurrently. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the accused has preferred present appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the complainant was residing with his family in a hut on the banks of the river Aaji and was doing labour work. It is alleged that, on 1.6.2009, when the complainant went for labour work, the accused had kidnapped his four year old daughter and committed rape on her. It is alleged that though the accused was knowing that she belongs to 'adivasi', she was raped and thereby the accused had also committed an offence under the Atrocity Act. With these allegations, a complaint was filed against the accused before Jodiya Police Station.

(3.) Mr. K.I. Kazi, learned advocate appearing for the appellant -accused has taken us through the evidence and submitted that the impugned judgment and order is against the evidence on record. He submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. He also submitted that a false case is filed against the accused. He also submitted that there are discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses and panchas before the police and in their deposition before the Court. He further submitted that this case is based on circumstantial evidence and the prosecution has failed to complete the chain, therefore, the accused is wrongly convicted by the trial Court. He also submitted that no independent witnesses have been examined by the prosecution in support of its case. He also submitted that there is no direct evidence connecting the accused with the crime and the trial Court has committed an error in convicting the accused. He submitted that the accused also belongs to Socially and Economically Backward Class. He submitted that the certificates produced at Exh. 18 and 19 by the prosecution in support of its case are of State of Madhya Pradesh and the trial Court has committed an error in basing the conviction of the accused on these certificates. In view of above submissions, he prayed this appeal may be allowed, by setting aside the impugned judgment and the accused may be acquitted.