SHANABHAI DULABHAI NAYAK Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant herein who was the original accused in Sessions Case No. 110 of 2001 preferred this appeal, challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment and order rendered by Presiding Officer, 3rd Fast Track Court, Panchmahal at Godhra ('learned trial Judge', for short) on dated 9. 1. 2004 in Sessions Case No. 110 of 2001. By virtue of the impugned judgment and order, the learned trial Judge convicted the appellant accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 506 (2) of the Indian Penal Code ('ipc', for short) and awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for 90 days for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year and rigorous imprisonment for 2 years for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 (2) of the IPC respectively. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It was further directed that out of the amount of fine, Rs. 5000/- to be paid to victim Shardaben by way of compensation.

(2.) THE prosecution case in nutshell is as under:-On dated 2. 10. 1999, at about 10 a. m. , the accused committed sexual intercourse with minor Shardaben, the daughter of Lalubhai Maganbhai, aged about 17 years, against her will in the field of witness Chandubhai Somabhai situated in the outskirts of village Chandranagar, Tal. Goghamba, Dist. Panchmahal. That the accused caused hurt to victim Shardaben by inflicting kick and fist blows and she was also threatened that if she would disclose the incident of rape to anybody else, she would be killed. At the first instance, on dated 3. 10. 1999, victim Shardaben reported the incident to the police, wherein it was stated that at the time of the incident, the accused had caused simple hurt to her by inflicting fist and kick blows. In that report dated 3. 10. 1999, she had not said that she was raped by the accused and that accused had threatened her to be killed. Thereafter, on 5. 10. 1999, she lodged her FIR before the police, narrating the incident of rape as well as the incident pertaining to causing simple hurt to her by the accused and administering threats to her by the accused. The FIR was registered by the police in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 506 (2) of the IPC and police started the investigation. During the course of the investigation, statements of material witnesses were recorded, clothes of the victim and of the accused were seized by drawing necessary panchnamas, medical examination of the victim and of the accused was performed. After completing the police investigation, chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of learned JMFC, Devgadh-Baria. As the offences punishable under Section 376 was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Panchmahal at Godhra.

(3.) THE learned trial Judge framed the charge against the accused at Exh. 3, to which the accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereupon, the prosecution adduced its oral and documentary evidence. After the completion of the evidence, the learned Judge recorded further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in his further statement, the accused denied generally all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution and stated that he was intentionally falsely implicated in this case. After appreciating the evidence on record and after considering the arguments advanced on behalf of both the sides, the learned trial Judge delivered the impugned judgment and order recording the conviction of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 506 (2) of the IPC and awarded the sentence as hereinabove referred.