AKBAR HAJIBHAI MIYANA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17. 9. 1999 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Morbi in Sessions Case No. 27/98 for offences punishable under sections 363, 366, 376 and 506 (2) of Indian Penal Code and at the end of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and 2 years respectively and fine of Rs. 20,000/-, in default he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for offences punishable under sections 363 and 366 of IPC. So far as offence under section 376 and 506 (2) of IPC is concerned, the appellant was acquitted of the offences. The State of Gujarat has also preferred criminal appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 1147 of 1999 challenging the acquittal of the appellant-accused.

(2.) THE facts of the case of the prosecution in brief are as under: the complainant-Devaben and her family including the victim was residing near Ramdev Salt Works, Morbi. It is the case of the prosecution that on 18. 12. 1997 at about 7. 30 p. m. when the victim has gone to answer nature's call, four persons came there and took her away in an autorickshaw and was locked in one room and the present appellant-accused committed rape on her on number of times. It is also alleged that under threat she was kept with the accused for seven days and during this period she was repeatedly raped by him. A complaint was lodged by mother of the victim-Devaben with Morbi City police station. Thereafter investigation was started and the accused was arrested. Upon arrest and at the end of investigation, charge sheet was submitted in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class. As the offence was sessions triable case, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the court of Sessions at Morbi under section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge framed charge against the accused at Exh. 1. The charge was read over and explained to the accused. The accused denied all the charges and pleaded to be tried. Hence, the prosecution was asked to prove the guilt against the accused.

(3.) TO proved the guilt against the accused, the prosecution examined the complainant, victim, Doctor etc. , and relied upon several documentary evidences like the complaint, medical certificate in respect of the victim as well as the accused issued by the Medical Officer, School Leaving Certificate and other documents regarding age of the victim and FSL report.