STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. CHANDRABHAI R VASAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgement and order dated 05. 11. 1988 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 125 of 1988 whereby the accused has been acquitted of the charges leveled against him under section 366 and 376 of Indian Penal Code. He was however convicted of the offence under section 363 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 300, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: 2. 1 The victim who was the youngest daughter of the complainant had gone for labour work on 05. 04. 1988. She did not return beyond her usual time. The complainant presumed that she might have gone to any relative's house. However when she did not return even till late night the complainant inquired about her but could not find her. Fearing family prestige he did not file any complaint. Thereafter on 16. 04. 1988, one Sanabhai who was working with the victim informed the complainant that he had spotted the victim with the accused and handed them over to the police chowky. The complainant thereafter went to Waghodia police station and lodged his complaint accusing that the respondent no. 1 accused had taken away his daughter. 2. 2 Therefore a complaint with respect to the aforesaid offence was filed against the accused-present respondent no. 1 with Waghodia Police Station. Necessary investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, the respondent was arrested and ultimately, charge-sheet was filed against him. Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the same was committed to the Sessions Court. 2. 3 The trial was initiated against the respondents and during the course of trial the prosecution examined the following witnesses as oral evidences: dr. Uday Ramchandra Purandare Ex. 8 dhulabhai Govindbhai Ex. 10 shanabhai Prabhatbhai Ex. 12 sonaben Dhulabhai Ex. 13 ramanbhai Bhajibhai Ex. 14 dahyabhai Chittabhai Ex. 20 abdul Rahim Ahmed Shaikh Ex. 23 2. 4 The prosecution also exhibited the following documentary evidences: medical certificate of rape Ex. 6 certificate of age Ex. 7 certificate of examination of accused Ex. 8 yadi to Medical Officer Ex. 9 complaint Ex. 11 entry about birth from register Ex. 21 xerox copy of birth register Ex. 22 report from Head Constable Vasad Ex. 15 message from Anand to Waghodia Ex. 24 2. 5 At the end of trial, after recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of Cr. P. C. , and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused of all the charges leveled against him by judgement and order dated 05. 11. 1988. 2. 6 Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgement and order passed by the Sessions Court the appellant State has preferred the present appeal.

(3.) IT was contended by Ms. Shah, learned APP that the judgement and order of the Sessions Court is against the provisions of law; the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against the present respondents. Learned APP has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence. 3. 1 Ms. Shah has submitted that the trial court ought to have seen that the girl is aged about 13 years and that the accused induced the girl and also threatened her on certain occasions. She has submitted that the trial court ought to have given due weight to the evidence of the sole eye-witness and victim and ought not to have acquitted the present accused.