STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VIPULBHAI TRIKAMBHAI BHOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated 06.11.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Anand (hereinafter referred to as "trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 54/2007 by which the learned trial Court has acquitted the original accused for the offences punishable under sections 376, 313, 406, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC"), the State has preferred the present Criminal Appeal under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "CrPC").

(2.) The prosecution case is that the complainant - prosecutrix Anuben had friendship with accused No. 1 which was converted into love. It is further case of the prosecution that accused No. 1 and victim used to meet each other regularly. That on 16.12006, accused No. 1 made telephonic call on mobile of the prosecutrix and called her at Railway Station at 8.00 a.m. in the morning where accused received her and they went to Rajdeep Guest House and accused No. 1 had booked Room No. 10 It is further the prosecution case that thereafter accused made fascinating promise to the prosecutrix and accused No. 1 forcefully committed rape on the prosecutrix for three times. It is further the case of the prosecution that on 05.01.2007, prosecutrix came to know that she was pregnant. It is further case of the prosecution that the prosecutrix was given some pills and the pregnancy was terminated. It is further case of the prosecution that the prosecutrix returned to her home where she informed about the same to her parents. It is further case of the prosecution that the prosecutrix and her family member went to the house of the accused No. 1 for talking about the marriage of the prosecutrix and the accused No. 1 but accused Nos. 2 and 3 got angry with accused No. 1 and threatened to kill if the prosecutrix come earlier at the house of the accused persons. It is thus the case of the prosecution that prosecutrix was raped by the accused No. 1 and was threatened by accused Nos. 2 and 3 and it is under these circumstances the FIR being I-CR No. 51/2007 came to be registered with Anand Town Police Station, Anand.

(3.) Shri K.P. Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned trial Court has committed a grave error in acquitting the original accused.