AMRATJI MANSUKHJI THAKOR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these three Criminal Appeals arise out of the judgment and order delivered by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Fast Track Court, Banaskantha at Deesa [for short 'the Ld. Trial Judge'] on 27/2/2003 in Sessions Case No. 127/2001. The present appellants who were original accused nos. 2, 4 and 5 challenged the legality and validity of the impugned judgment by preferring these appeals.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in nut shell, is as under :-

(3.) ON behalf of the appellants, learned advocate Mr. US Brahmbhatt and Mr. PB Goswami argued that the Ld. Trial Judge erred in convicting the appellants for the offences charged against them. That as a matter of fact, the first informant did not lodge the FIR immediately, but it was a delayed FIR. No explanation is forthcoming for the delay. That all the material witnesses turned hostile. That even considering the deposition of victim Gomatiben, no reliance can be placed upon her deposition. That as a matter of fact the prosecution miserably failed to prove that at the time of incident Gomatiben was aged about 12 years. That considering the medical evidence in form of ossification test, there is a clear medical opinion that Gomatiben was aged about 16 years of age. That 3 appellants accused were totally unknown to Gomatiben. No test identification parade was conducted. The evidence adduced by Gomatiben regarding identification of the appellants for the first time during her deposition in the Court cannot be believed. The deposition of Gomatiben is full of material contradictions and improvements. Medical evidence does not support the theory of gang rape. That therefore, it is submitted that the appeals be allowed and the order of conviction recorded by the Ld. Trial Judge be set aside and the appellants be acquitted.