4 Whether This Case Involves A … vs State Of … on 8 August, 2017

R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1444 of 2012

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed YES
to see the judgment ?

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? YES

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of NO
the judgment ?

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of NO
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?

NAGINBHAI MATHURBHAI TADVI….Appellant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT….Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)

Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE, ADVOCATE for the Appellant
MR MANRAJ A BAROT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant
MR JK SHAH, APP for the Respondent

CORAM: HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI

Date : 08/08/2017

ORAL JUDGMENT

Page 1 of 40

HC-NIC Page 1 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI)

1. The present Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) 

read   with   Section   386   of   the   Code   of   Criminal 

Procedure,1973 (the Cr.P.C.) is directed against the 

judgment   and   order   passed   by   the   learned   10th 

Additional District Judge, Vadodara, in Sessions Case 

No.155   of   2010,   whereby   the   appellant   –   accused   is 

convicted and order of sentence is passed against him.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.6.2010 

at about 21.00 hours at village Zaverpura, there was a 

rain and storm and on account of which the electricity 

was disrupted. It is further case of the prosecution 

that   on   account   of   that   situation,   the   roof   of   the 

house   was   blown   off.   It   is   further   asserted   in   the 

complaint   that   the   husband   of   the   complainant,   who 

came along with appellant ­ accused  from labour work, 

the appellant took the disadvantage of the situation. 

The   husband   of   the   complainant   happens   to   be   the 

father   of   the   prosecutrix   was  repairing   the   roof   of 

the house, whereas the complainant was preparing the 

meal   in   the   house.   At   that   point   of   time,   the 

prosecutrix, aged about 6 years, was sleeping on the 

Page 2 of 40

HC-NIC Page 2 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

cot   in   ‘Adari’  of  the   house.  The   complainant,   after 

preparing   the   meal   at   around   9.00   O’clock   in   the 

night,   came   to   wake   up   the   prosecutrix,   who   was 

sleeping found that she was in bleeding condition and 

having seen this situation, she immediately called the 

husband to come down. At that point of time, when both 

complainant   and   her   husband,   ignited   the   lamp   and 

mobile battery, woke up the prosecutrix, whose clothes 

found   with   bloodstains   and   the   complainant,   after 

physically   verifying   the   prosecutrix,   asked   the 

prosecutrix as to what had happened. At that point of 

time,   the   prosecutrix   conveyed   that   Nagindada   had 

come,   who   gagged     her   mouth   and   after   removing   her 

clothes,   had   done   the   act   which   resulted   into 

bleeding.   On   knowing   this   fact,   immediately   the 

complainant   and   her   husband   called   the   uncle   ­ 

Pravinbhai Shankarbhai Tadvi, who, along with aunt – 

Samkaben   and   their   son   –   Gopal   along   with   other 

persons, came to the house and were conveyed about the 

incident which took place with her daughter, who was 

raped by the present appellant ­ accused. Since there 

was   a  storm  and   continuous  rain   and  the   electricity 

was disrupted on that night, a complaint could not be 

Page 3 of 40

HC-NIC Page 3 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

lodged. However, the village people also came to know 

about   this   incident.   It   is   further   asserted   in   the 

complaint that since the appellant – accused was going 

for   labour   work   along   with   the   husband   of   the 

complainant, he was frequently coming to the house and 

the prosecutrix was also knowing him. On that day at 

about   6.00   O’clock,   the   appellant     ­   accused   along 

with the husband of the complainant, after the labour 

work,   came   to   the   house   and   it   was   conveyed   by   the 

appellant  ­ accused that as soon as the rain and the 

storm stop, he would go to his house. Resultantly, the 

husband engaged  himself in arrangement of roof of the 

house, whereas the complainant went to cook the meal 

and   taking   disadvantage   of   this   situation,   it   is 

asserted   in   the   complaint,   that   the   appellant   – 

accused committed the rape and ran away and for that 

purpose,   a   complaint   came   to   be   filed   before   the 

Bodeli Police Station which came to be registered as 

I­C.R.No.27 of 2010 on 19.6.2010, which then came to 

be investigated by the Investigating Officer.   

2.1 Mr.Ashokbhai   Valabhai   Katkad,   an   Investigating 

Officer,   Bodeli   Police   Station,   upon   receipt   of   the 

Page 4 of 40

HC-NIC Page 4 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

complaint,   has   investigated   the   complaint   by   taking 

necessary steps in that regard and upon completion of 

investigation, a charge­sheet came to be filed against 

the   appellant   –   accused   for   the   offence   punishable 

under  Sections  376   of   the   Indian  Penal  Code,  before 

the   learned   Chief   Magistrate,   Sankheda   which   was 

registered as Criminal Case No.3070 of 2010. 

2.3 Since   the   offence   was   triable   by   the   Court   of 

Sessions, the learned Magistrate in exercise of power 

under   Section   209   of   the   Cr.P.C.,   was   pleased   to 

commit the case to the Court of Sessions, which was 

then registered as Sessions Case No.155 of 2010. 

2.4 Upon   the   case   being   committed,   the   learned   10th 

Additional   District   Judge   framed   the   charge   on 

25.10.2010 against the appellant – accused vide Exh.6, 

wherein   the  appellant   –   accused     pleaded  not   guilty 

and therefore, the prosecution has examined as many as 

19   witnesses   and   also   produced   the   documentary 

evidence, 19 in numbers, to see that the case can be 

proved beyond reasonable doubt.  

Page 5 of 40

HC-NIC Page 5 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

2.5 After   leading   the   evidence,   the   prosecution 

tendered   a   closure   pursis   and   thereafter,   the 

statement     of   the   appellant   –   accused   was   recorded 

under   Section   313   of   the   Cr.P.C.,   wherein   the 

appellant had reiterated that he is an innocent person 

and   has   wrongly   been   implicated   and   claimed   to   be 

tried. However, he has chosen not examine any witness 

nor   any   elaborate   explanation   on   any   incriminating 

issue   is   given.   After   the   said   process   being 

undertaken,   the   case   was   put   up   for   further 

adjudication, wherein after examining the oral as well 

as   documentary   evidence   and   after   considering   the 

defence   of   the  appellant   –   accused,   the   Trial   Court 

was   pleased   to   pass   the   judgment   and   order   dated 

31.3.2012,   whereby   the   appellant   –   accused   is   held 

responsible for having committed an offence of Section 

376   of   IPC   and   thereby,   by   holding   the   appellant   – 

guilty   of   Section   376(2)(f),   in   particular,   of   the 

Indian Penal Code, sentenced him to undergo the life 

imprisonment   with  a   fine   of   Rs.1000/­   and  upon   non­

payment   of   fine,   a   15   days’   simple   imprisonment   is 

ordered by this judgment and order. 

Page 6 of 40

HC-NIC Page 6 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

2.6 Considering   the   evidence   on   record   and   upon 

examination   of     the   documentary   evidence,   the   Trial 

Court has specifically found that the case is made out 

against   the   appellant   –   accused   beyond   reasonable 

doubt  and   for   coming  to  this   conclusion,   a  specific 

version   of   the   prosecutrix   as   well   as   the   medical 

evidence   appeared   to   have   been   examined   and   relied 

upon. The Trial Court has also considered the aspect 

of presence of the accused at the relevant point of 

time   at   the   house   of   the   complainant.   In   addition 

thereto,  the   Trial   Court   has   found   and  analyzed  the 

testimony of the FSL Officer and also that of doctor’s 

version, who had medically examined the prosecutrix. 

On the basis of evaluation by the Trial Court, it was 

found that there appears to be consistency in ocular 

evidence as well as the medical evidence and thereby, 

after considering every material on record, an order 

of sentence came to be passed on 31.3.2012. 

2.7 It   is   against   this   judgment   and   order   that   the 

appellant – accused has brought the present Criminal 

Appeal   before   this   Court   which   was   admitted   by   this 

Court   on   12.2.2013   and   has   now   come   up   for   final 

Page 7 of 40

HC-NIC Page 7 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

disposal before us. 

3. Mr.Manraj   A.   Barot,   learned   advocate   for   the 

appellant – accused, has submitted that all the panch 

witnesses, who have been examined by the prosecution, 

are the related witnesses and known to the father of 

the prosecutrix and even the accused and, therefore, 

it is not safe to rely upon the testimonies of such 

interested   witnesses,   to   convict   the   appellant   – 

accused.   Mr.Barot   has   also   contended   that   every 

interested   witness   has   categorically   deposed   on   the 

basis of information passed on by the parents of the 

prosecutrix   and   there   is   no   evidence   of   any 

independent   witness   and,   therefore,   on   the   basis   of 

such evidence, it cannot be said that the prosecution 

has established the case beyond reasonable doubt. It 

has also been contended by Mr.Barot that the panchnama 

which has been drawn is also not in consonance with 

the statutory provisions contained under Sections 25 

and 27 of the Evidence Act. Even the recovery which 

has been made from the place of the accused is belated 

recovery and there appears to be contradiction amongst 

the   panch   witnesses   on   such   recovery   issue.   Learned 

Page 8 of 40

HC-NIC Page 8 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

advocate   has   further   contended   that   timing     of 

recovery   is   also   deferring   from   version   to   version 

and, therefore, the testimony of panch witness is not 

of any credence. Learned advocate has also contended 

that it is highly improbable to believe the case of 

the prosecution, since as per the testimony of mother 

of   the   victim,   in   the   house   there   were   other   three 

daughters   and   one  son   already  present   and  the   elder 

girl child named Nirma, aged 9 years, was also very 

much   present   in   the   house   and,   therefore,   the 

narration of the complaint itself is not believable. 

Learned   advocate   has   submitted   that   it   is   also   not 

believable that the victim, aged about 6 years, would 

sleep outside portion of the house i.e. Atari in such 

an   atmosphere   where   not   only   there   was   a   rain,   but 

also a storm was prevailing and, therefore, the case 

is   highly   improbable.   In   addition   to   that,   learned 

advocate   for   the   appellant   has   contended   that   had 

there   been   such   an   inhumane   act   committed,   then   a 

girl,   aged   about   6  years,   would   scream,   shout   and 

would not sleep after the act and the mother of the 

victim has categorically stated that at the time when 

she saw the victim, was sleeping and, therefore, this 

Page 9 of 40

HC-NIC Page 9 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

entire   version   is   not   believable   as   per   the   say   of 

learned advocate for the appellant – accused. It has 

also been contended that other witnesses have deposed 

before the Trial Court on the basis of the information 

passed   on   by   the   parents   of   the   prosecutrix   and, 

therefore,   their   evidence   partakes   the   character   of 

hearsay evidence which is not safe to be relied upon. 

As   per   the   say   of   the   learned   advocate   for   the 

appellant   –   accused,   there   appears   to   be   a   serious 

doubt about the involvement of accused in commission 

of   crime   of   such   a   serious   crime   and   also   there 

appears to be a gross delay in lodging the complaint 

as   well   and,   therefore,   when   such   weak   piece   of 

evidence is reflecting on record, it is not safe to 

convict the appellant – accused by holding him guilty 

and that error which has been committed by the Trial 

Court requires to be corrected. It is also pointed out 

READ  Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga vs Rameshwari Rameshchandra Daga on 13 December, 2004

by Mr.Barot that the blood group of the appellant – 

accused as well as that of the prosecutrix is the same 

and from the medical evidence and Serological Report, 

it is not coming out beyond reasonable doubt that it 

is the blood group of the accused which has been found 

on the clothes and “Pati” of the cot and, therefore, 

Page 10 of 40

HC-NIC Page 10 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

in such a conflicting view which is emerging from the 

ocular, medical as well as the FSL analysis, it cannot 

be said that the prosecution has established the case 

beyond   reasonable   doubt   and   by   pointing   out   this, 

learned   advocate   has   prayed   this   Court   that   the 

findings which have been arrived at by the Trial Court 

are not in consonance with the material on record and, 

therefore, in the absence of any cogent evidence about 

specific   involvement   of   the   present   accused,   the 

benefit   of   doubt   must   be   given   to   the   appellant   – 

accused and consequently, requested the Court to grant 

the relief and allow the appeal filed by the appellant 

–   accused.   No   other   submissions   are   made   by   the 

learned advocate for the appellant. 

4. Opposing the stand taken by Mr.Manraj A. Barot, 

learned   advocate   for   the   appellant   ­   accused, 

Mr.J.K.Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for 

the respondent – State, has vehemently contended that 

this is a fit case in which appropriate punishment is 

awarded   as   the   appellant     ­   accused   has   committed 

inhuman and heinous crime and made victim a child aged 

about   6   years   of   the   complainant   and,   therefore, 

Page 11 of 40

HC-NIC Page 11 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

since   the   evidence   on   record   is   sufficiently 

establishing the guilt of the appellant – accused, the 

appeal deserves to be dismissed. To substantiate his 

contention,   learned   APP   has   contended   that   from   the 

ocular evidence, if one would peruse the testimony of 

the   prosecutrix,   she   has   all   throughout   remained 

consistent   and   unshaken   evidence   of   her   is   clearly 

suggesting that the guilt of the appellant – accused 

is   established   beyond   reasonable   doubt.   Mr.Shah   has 

pointed   out   that   the   genesis   of   the   case   has   been 

established by the prosecution and the main substratum 

of the complaint has remained consistent if one would 

peruse not only the testimony of the prosecutrix, but 

the testimonies of the father as well as the mother – 

Jyotsnaben (complainant). Therefore, in the absence of 

any deviation of any manner, such consistent version 

cannot   be   ignored   and   that   has   rightly   been 

appreciated   by   the   Trial   Court.   Learned   APP   has 

further   pointed   out   and   contended   that   the   medical 

evidence is in consonance with the ocular evidence on 

record   and   in   addition   thereto,   Mr.Shah   has 

specifically pointed out the testimony of Dr.Hemant, 

who not only issued the Certificate, but has examined 

Page 12 of 40

HC-NIC Page 12 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

the   prosecutrix   in   first   point   of   time  on  19.6.2010 

itself and there appears to be a clear opinion about 

the rape with the prosecutrix which is substantiated 

by the evidence on record. The history which has been 

given   by   the   prosecutrix   before   the   examination   is 

sufficient   enough   to   establish   the   guilt   of   the 

accused   and,   therefore,   when   there   appears   to   be   a 

categorical   medical   opinion,   there   appears   to   be   no 

doubt of any nature about the case of prosecution. In 

addition   thereto,   learned   APP   has   pointed   out   that 

there is no previous animosity or enmity even alleged 

by either side and, therefore, the wrong involvement 

is   out   of   question   by   the   complainant   side.   On   the 

contrary,   the   husband   of   the   complainant   and   the 

appellant   –   accused   were   both   working   together   and 

evidence   is   emerging   that   on   account   of   such 

relations,   the   appellant   –   accused   was   frequently 

visiting the house and known to the family members as 

well, including the prosecutrix and, therefore, when 

such   relation   of   trust   is   completely   misused  by  the 

appellant   –   accused,   no   leniency   should   be   shown   to 

the   appellant   –   accused,   as   the  appellant   –   accused 

has taken the disadvantage of the situation of storm, 

Page 13 of 40

HC-NIC Page 13 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

rainy   atmosphere   and   disruption   of   electricity   and, 

therefore,   when   such   conduct   is   reflecting   from   the 

evidence on record and the guilt of the appellant – 

accused   is   established   beyond   reasonable   doubt,   the 

judgment and order assailed in the appeal may not be 

interfered with.  

4.1 Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP has also contended that 

the Serological Report is also clearly suggesting the 

fact of commission of crime. The officer of the FSL, 

who has examined and analyzed the place offence, has 

also   opined   against   the   appellant.   In   addition 

thereto, in Column No.8 of Serological Report at Page 

No.187   of   paper­book   compilation,   on   Pati   (Mark­B), 

the sperm is clearly that of the appellant – accused 

is found and this clearly connecting the appellant in 

commission   of   crime   and,   therefore,   when   such 

overwhelming   material   is   evident   on   record,   there 

cannot   be   any   doubt   about   non­involvement   of   the 

appellant   –   accused   in   commission   of   crime.   In 

addition   thereto,   learned   APP   has   pointed   out   that 

there   appears   to   be   no   explanation   of   any 

incriminating   circumstances   which   are   put   to   the 

Page 14 of 40

HC-NIC Page 14 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

accused   and  except   bare  denial,   there   is   nothing   on 

record   to   suggest  that   any  defence   is   put­forth.   On 

the contrary, overall evidence is examined in detail 

and   when   the   prosecution   has   established   the   case 

beyond reasonable doubt, the Trial Court has committed 

no  error  in  passing   the  judgment  and   order   impugned 

and hence, the appeal filed by the appellant deserves 

to be dismissed. 

5. On the basis of such submissions, since the Court 

is called upon to examine the validity of the impugned 

judgment   and   order   and   since   this   being   an   appeal 

against an order of conviction, we deem it proper to 

apply   our   independent   analysis   before   coming   to   the 

conclusion   of   any   nature   and,   therefore,   in   such 

situation,   we   hereunder   examine   and   analyze   the 

evidence  on  record   which   is   pressed  into   service   by 

the prosecution. 

6. First   of   all,   a   specific   charge   which   has   been 

framed at Exh.6 on 25.10.2010, in which the appellant 

–   accused   was   put   up   for   trial   is   an   offence 

punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. 

Page 15 of 40

HC-NIC Page 15 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

Now to prove this specific charge of Section 376 of 

the IPC, the prosecution has examined as many as 19 

witnesses. The first examination which is undertaken 

by   the   prosecution   is   in   the   form   of   PW­1   – 

Jayantibhai   Bhikhabhai   Tadvi,   who   was   examined   at 

Exh.12. This witness has deposed before the Court that 

in  his   presence,   the  police   collected   the  “Pati”   of 

cot   and   the   sand   from   the   house   of   Vinodbhai,   who 

happened to be the husband of the complainant and this 

panch witness has put his signature upon preparation 

of the said Panchnama at Exh.13. He along with another 

PW­2 – Maheshbhai Bhagabhai Tadvi, who was examined at 

Exh.17,   also   remained   present   ans   signed   the   said 

Panchnama as well as the chit about recovery of blood­

stained sand and “Pati” of cot. This witness, who has 

consistently supported the case   of the prosecution, 

has specifically identified by the appellant – accused 

in the Court. A bare perusal of the cross­examination 

of this witness has reflected that it is not correct 

that prepared Panchnama was got signed by the police 

and, therefore, this witness has supported the case of 

the prosecution. 

Page 16 of 40

HC-NIC Page 16 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

6.1 The   Panchnama   which   has   been   prepared   is 

exhibited   at   Exh.13,   reflecting   not   only   that   there 

were   blood­stains   found   on   the   place   of   occurrence, 

but also the blood­stains reflected on the "Pati" of 

the   cot   as   also   on   the   floor   of   the   house   in   the 

"Adari" portion where the cot was lying on which the 

prosecutrix was sleeping. While drawing the Panchnama, 

the Officer of the FSL was also called from Vadodara, 

who,   upon   examination   of   the   scene   of   offence, 

collected the controlled sand, the blood­stained sand 

and "Pati"  and after packing, the same was sent for 

further analysis. This Panchnama has been drawn on the 

very   next   day   i.e.   on   19.6.2010   at   17.45   hours, 

whereas   the   offence   took   place   at   21.00   hours   n 

18.6.2010. Therefore, the Panchnama was drawn without 

any much delay. 

7. The prosecution has thereafter examined   PW­2 - 

Maheshbhai Bhagabhai Tadvi, at Exh.17. This witness is 

also panch witness of Panchnama of scene of offence. 

In addition to the Panchnama of scene of offence, said 

witness is also the panch witness to the recovery of 

the   blood­stained   clothes   of   the   prosecutrix.   This 

Page 17 of 40

HC-NIC Page 17 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

witness has reiterated even in cross­examination that 

he   had   put   the   signature   and   also   denied   that   the 

Panchnama was not a prepared Panchnama and, therefore, 

he   has   supported   the   stand   of   the   prosecution.   The 

Panchnama at Exh.18 reveals that same is supported by 

this   aforesaid  PW­2   which   was  drawn  on  19.6.2010   at 

10.30 hours. 

8. One another witness has been pressed into service 

by   the   prosecution   is   PW­3   -   Bhikhabhai   Kanjibhai 

Tadvi, who was examined at Exh.20, in which also said 

witness has supported the case of the prosecution and 

this   witness   has   not   been   declared     hostile   and, 

therefore,   so   far   as   Panchnamas   are   concerned,   the 

same   have   been   established   and   supported   by   the 

testimonies   of   the   panch   witnesses.           The   record 

reveals   that   prosecution   has   examined   yet   another 

witness   ­   PW­4   -   Pravinbhai   Ganpatbhai   Tadvi,   at 

Exh.21. Said witness is the panch witness of panchnama 

of recovery of clothes, worn by appellant - accused - 

Naginbhai.   This   witness   in   cross­examination   has 

deposed that police has written the said Panchnama on 

which he signed which is at Exh.22. This Panchnama of 

Page 18 of 40

HC-NIC Page 18 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

recovery   of   clothes   is   at   Page­81,   in   which   it   is 

reflecting that it is the appellant - accused who on 

his   own   drew   the   squad   and   led   the   Investigating 

Officer along with the Panchas to show the clothes in 

the form of Pant, Shirt and undergarment worn by him 

at  the   time  of  commission   of   crime.  Incidentally,   a 

fact   is   also   emerging   from   this   Panchnama   which   is 

also   established   that   on   the   fateful   day   i.e.   on 

18.6.2010,   the   appellant   -   accused   went   with   the 

father of the prosecutrix at his house since there was 

a rain and storm. The description of the clothes worn 

by him is detailed out in the said Panchnama. But this 

Panchnama since well supported by panch witnesses who 

have   not   turned   hostile,   it   appears   that   same   is 

establishing   the   fact   mentioned   therein   during   the 

course of trial. Now to support this, the prosecution 

has   examined   PW­5   -   Pratapbhai   Dhanabhai   Tadvi,   at 

Exh.24,   who  has   not   only   identified  the   appellant   - 

accused, but has also fortified the fact that he put 

his   signature   on   the   Panchnama.   Of   course,   he   has 

conveyed   in   the   cross­examination   that   in   his 

presence,   no   muddamal   was   recovered   nor   a   Panchnama 

was drawn. However, nothing turns on it as it appears. 

Page 19 of 40

HC-NIC Page 19 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

9. In furtherance of endeavor to establish the case 

against the appellant - accused, the prosecution has 

examined   PW­6   ­     Madhavbhai   Maganbhai   Patel,   at 

Exh.25. This witness is a panch witness of Panchnama 

of physical condition of the accused. Said Panchnama 

at Exh.26 which is reflecting on Page­89 of the paper­

book compilation where nothing incriminating was found 

since   said   Panchnama   ­   as   it   appears   -   drawn   on 

2.7.2010 i.e. much after the day of the incident. 

10. The   prosecution   in   order   to   establish   the   case 

has also examined PW­7 - Vinodbhai Vitthalbhai Patel, 

at Exh.29. This witness happens to be the father of 

the   prosecutrix.   In   the   chief­examination,   this 

witness   has   categorically   sated   that   since   on 

18.6.2010 there was a storm and rain, the appellant - 

accused and he came back to his house at about 6.00 

O'clock after their labour work was over and since on 

account   of   storm   and   rain,   roof   of   the   house   got 

damaged   and   blown   off,   he   went   to   repair   the   roof, 

while his wife i.e. the  complainant was preparing the 

meal   in   the   kitchen.   He   further   asserted   in   the 

Page 20 of 40

HC-NIC Page 20 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

deposition   that   the   prosecutrix   was   sleeping   on   the 

cot in "Adari" portion of the house and when the wife 

of this witness had gone to wake up the prosecutrix, 

at   that   point   of   time   she   found   that   she   was   in 

bleeding condition; her clothes were reflecting blood 

stains   and   the   blood   was   oozing   out   continuously. 

Immediately   on   seeing   this,   the   wife   called   this 

witness   and   when   daughter   was   asked   as   to   what 

happened,   it   was   specifically   conveyed   by   the 

prosecutrix that Nagindada i.e. present appellant had 

gagged     her   mouth   and   also   removed   her   clothes   and 

done the act. On realizing this situation, immediately 

this witness had called PW­4 - Pravinbhai Ganpatbhai 

Tadvi   (uncle),   who,   along   with   Samkaben   (aunt)   and 

their son - Gopal came there and were appraised with 

this   fact.   It   is   further   reflecting   from   the 

deposition   of   this   witness   that   since   there   was 

continuous rain, storm and disruption of electricity, 

they did not go to lodge the complaint and thereafter, 

immediately  on  the   next  day   i.e.  on  19.6.2010,   they 

lodged   the   complaint   at   Bodeli   Police   Station   by 

narrating   the   say   which   has   been   conveyed   by   the 

prosecutrix. This witness has specifically identified 

Page 21 of 40

HC-NIC Page 21 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

the appellant - accused. In the cross­examination of 

this   witness,   it   is   revealing  that   this   appellant   - 

accused came to the house at around 6.00 O'clock along 

with him after the labour work. At that point of time, 

there was no electricity in the house on account of 

storm and rain and also no visibility prevailing. This 

witness   has   reiterated   that   the   prosecutrix   has 

specifically   narrated   and   conveyed   as   to   what   had 

happened.   Further   cross­examination   is   reflecting 

about the topography of house, in which it has been 

asserted by this witness that if anything happens in 

"Adari", normally no voice will reach to a place where 

this witness was arranging the roof of the house. This 

witness   has  further   conveyed   that   it   is   not   correct 

that   the   appellant   -   accused   has   not   done   such 

gruesome act with his daughter and is wrongly roping 

the   appellant   -   accused   on   account   of   any   personal 

grudge. In fact, the entire deposition is reflecting 

that   there   is   no   previous   animosity   between   the 

appellant   -   accused   and   the   present   witness.   It   is 

also reflecting that the appellant - accused was known 

to the family and was used to go together for labour 

work. 

Page 22 of 40

HC-NIC Page 22 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

11. The   prosecution   has   further   examined   PW­8   - 

Pravinbhai Shankarbhai Tadvi, at Exh.30. This witness 

happens to be the uncle of father of the prosecutrix. 

But since this witness was posted above facts narrated 

by the parents of the prosecutrix, he can be said to a 

hearsay   witness.   But   nonetheless   this   witness   has 

supported the case of the prosecution and reiterated 

that   immediate   phone   call   came   informing   about   the 

incident in question and he rushed to the spot with 

his family members. This witness is also knowing the 

appellant - accused, who is residing in Navingiri. 

12. The   prosecution   has   also   examined   PW­9   - 

Alkeshkumar   Kantilal   Desai,   at   Exh.31.   This   witness 

has deposed that on 2.7.2010 i.e. nearly after 14 days 

of   the   incident   in   question,   the   police   called   him 

saying   that   they   had   arrested   one   accused,   who   has 

committed the offence under Section 376 of the IPC and 

by   drawing   the   arrest   Panchnama   at   Exh.26,   his 

signature was obtained. This witness has categorically 

stated   that   Vinodbhai   and   Jyotsnaben   had   narrated 

about   the   incident   in   question   and   also   reiterated 

that in his presence, the Panchnama was drawn by the 

Page 23 of 40

HC-NIC Page 23 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

police at Exh.26.

13.   The   prosecution   has   examined   next   one   of   the 

most important witness of the present case, who is PW­

10   -   Jyotsnaben   Vinodbhai   Tadvi,   at   Exh.32.   This 

witness is the complainant in this case. The analysis 

of the evidence of this witness is reflecting that on 

the day when the offence took place, she was preparing 

meal in the house, where as the husband Vinodbhai was 

arranging the roof. She has categorically stated that 

the   prosecutrix   was   sleeping   on   the   cot   in   "Adari" 

portion of the house and when she went to wake up her 

for the purpose of taking meal, she found prosecutrix 

in a bleeding condition and bloodstains were found on 

the clothes worn by the prosecutrix. Upon seeing this, 

she   immediately   shouted  for   the   husband   to   come  and 

when both asked the prosecutrix, the prosecutrix had 

categorically   stated   that   it   is   the   Nagindado   i.e. 

appellant - accused, who gagged   her mouth and after 

removing the clothes, did the act and on account of 

which the bleeding started. She has stated that after 

committing that act, he ran away. She has stated that 

immediately   thereafter   both   herself   and   her   husband 

called the uncle Pravinbhai and his family members and 

Page 24 of 40

HC-NIC Page 24 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

since there was a rainy season and storm, they had not 

filed the complaint as electricity was also disrupted 

and subsequently, this fact was brought to the notice 

of  the   police   authority  and   lodged   the  complaint   at 

Bodeli Police Station. This witness has categorically 

identified   the   clothes   which   were   worn   by   the 

prosecutrix on the day of the incident and has also 

identified the accused - Nagin. In cross­examination, 

by   maintaining   her   version,   she   has   completely 

supported   the   case   of   the   prosecution.   On   the 

contrary, from her cross­examination, it is revealing 

that the presence of the appellant - accused lastly at 

the house on that day when the occurrence took place 

is   established   and,   therefore,   this   witness   has 

materially deposed in favour of the prosecution.  

14. The next document is the complaint which has been 

filed on 19.6.2010, in which also the narration is in 

consonance with the testimony of witness which she has 

deposed before the Court. 

15. The prosecution has made an attempt to establish 

the   case   by   taking   assistance   from   another   PW­11   - 

Mangiben Pravinbhai Tadvi, who was examined at Exh.35. 

Page 25 of 40

HC-NIC Page 25 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

This witness happens to be the neighbour, who had also 

identified the appellant - accused. It was fortified 

in her deposition that on the day of incident, when 

she went upon knowing the fact of incident there was 

darkness and electricity was disrupted throughout the 

whole   night.   She   has   admitted   that   when   the   police 

came, she gave her statement. She has also stated that 

whatever written by her is on the basis of information 

passed on to her by the complainant - Jyotsnaben. 

16.  The next witness examined by the prosecution is 

PW­12 - Gopalbhai Naranbhai Tadvi, examined at Exh.38. 

This   witness   appears   to   be   the   relative   of   the 

complainant   and   cousin   of   the   husband   of   the 

complainant. He went along with his father Pravinbhai 

and mother on passing of immediate information on the 

phone of Bipinbhai, one of the neighbourers. In cross­

examination, he has admitted that he is not having the 

phone,   but   in   Faliya,   the   phone   call   came   at   the 

residence   of   Bipinbhai   Chandubhai,   who,   in   turn, 

informed him. Resultantly, he and his parents went to 

the house of the complainant. 

17. Yet another witness pressed into service by the 

Page 26 of 40

HC-NIC Page 26 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

prosecution for proving the case is PW­ 13 - Shaniben 

Vitthalbhai   Tadvi,   who   was   examined   at   Exh.40.   This 

witness,  who   happens  to  be  the   mother­in­law  of  the 

complainant,   has   stated   that   the   complainant   - 

Jyotsnaben informed her about the occurrence with the 

prosecutrix.   She   has   conveyed   in   cross­examination 

that she had no personal knowledge about it, but the 

information about the incident was reported to her by 

the   daughter­in­law,   namely,   the   complainant   - 

Jyotsnaben. Nothing much turns on this, but the next 

witness   who   is   the   main   witness   examined   by   the 

prosecution is PW­14, who has deposed at Exh.41 and is 

the prosecutrix. 

18.  The deposition of this witness was taken in the 

month   of   February,2012.   At   that   time   she   was   aged 

about   8   years.   Though   she   is   a   child   witness   but 

before taking the deposition, few questions which were 

relevant to ascertain whether she is in a position to 

depose had been asked and thereafter, the deposition 

started.   There   was   a   specific   question   posed   before 

her in the Court that what had happened in the year 

2010   and   at   that   time,   she   has   categorically   and 

empathetically   stated   that   when   she   was   sleeping   on 

Page 27 of 40

HC-NIC Page 27 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

the   cot   in   the   house,   the   appellant   -   accused   - 

Nagindada had come and gagged   her mouth and did the 

act.   She   has   categorically   identified   the   accused   - 

Nagindada,   who  was   standing   in   the   Court.  In  cross­

examination also, she has remained unperturbed and has 

categorically   reiterated   what   has   been   done   by   the 

appellant - accused with her. She has identified this 

accused not only in the Court, but has re­collected at 

the   time   when   occurrence   took   place   and,   therefore, 

this witness has unshakenly reiterated the act which 

has   been   done   with   her   by   the   appellant   -   accused. 

Thus,   this   witness   has   remained   consistent   from   the 

day of incident till the deposition being taken in the 

Court. 

19. The   record   of   the   case   indicates   that   the 

prosecution has further examined PW­15 ­ Mr.Ashokkumar 

Popatlal Jani, at Exh.43. This witness, who happened 

to be an FSL Officer, was called to analyze the scene 

of   offence   scientifically.   This   witness   has 

specifically   verified   the   spot   of   offence   and   has 

found that the cot which was lying in 'Adari' portion 

of  the   house   was   admeasuring   65'x36'   rolled   over   by 

cotton 'Pati', on which there were blood marks found. 

Page 28 of 40

HC-NIC Page 28 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

This   witness   had   also   found   the   bloodstains   on 

flooring as well as on cot and the Chemical Test had 

been   undertaken   (Benzadine   Test),   wherein   positive 

result   was   found.   The   controlled   sand   was   also 

collected   and   after   properly   sealing   the   same,   was 

handed over to the police authority for the purpose of 

analysis. In cross­examination, it has been stated by 

him that Benzadine Test would not identify the blood 

group   of   a   person   and   therefore,   it   appears   that 

further analysis was undertaken. The initial report of 

FSL   officer   is   at   Page­123   of   the   paper­book 

compilation. But since this has been fortified by the 

testimony of this witness, we found no deviation. 

20.    The prosecution has further examined   PW­16 - 

Dr.Maitri   Chetanbhai   Shah   (Gynecologist),   at   Exh.46. 

This witness had on 20.6.2010 physically examined the 

prosecutrix,   who   was  brought   by   the  mother   i.e.  the 

complainant.   In   the   history   which   had   been   given   at 

the   initial   stage   while   she   was   brought   to   the 

hospital  also,  there  was   a  reference   with  regard   to 

specific name of the appellant - accused. This Medical 

Officer also found that there are no abrasion marks. 

Page 29 of 40

HC-NIC Page 29 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

However, there was a specific first degree perennial 

tear   was   present   and   since   there   was   no   active 

bleeding, the patient was discharged from the hospital 

on 26.6.2010. In cross­examination, this witness has 

stated   that  since  the   victim   -   prosecutrix   was  aged 

about 5 years, she had not put any further questions 

and   therefore,   the   history   was   recorded   after 

ascertaining   from   the   mother.   But   the   substance   of 

this   examination   is   that   there   was   a   first   degree 

perennial   tear.   The   report   related   to   the   physical 

condition   is   also   appended   to   the   compilation   after 

Page­127 onwards. 

21.      The prosecution has also taken assistance to 

prove   the   case   by   examining   PW­17   -   Dr.Rameshbhai 

Khemabhai Parmar, at Exh.48. This witness was serving 

as Medical Officer in S.R.Group­14, Kevadiya, District 

-  Narmada.  This   witness   has   stated  before   the   Court 

that the appellant - accused was brought by the police 

with Yadi and for the purpose of physical examination 

of   this   accused,   he   was   brought   before   him   on 

3.7.2010,   namely,   after   almost   a   period   of   16   days 

from the incident in question. The testimony of this 

Page 30 of 40

HC-NIC Page 30 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

witness   is   revealing  that   the  appellant   -   accused  - 

Naginbhai had stated before him that though he had not 

committed   an   act   with   the   prosecutrix,   still   the 

relatives   of   the   prosecutrix   had   beaten   up   and   was 

brought   before   the   police   station.   The   physical 

examination   is   not   revealing   any   marks   of   injuries, 

but   was   found   by   this   Medical   Officer   that   he   was 

capable   of   having   sex.   The   cross­examination   has 

indicated that there were no injuries on the body of 

the accused. However, the Medical Officer has opined 

that   if   a   rape   is   committed   by   the   accused   on   five 

years' girl, then on private part the injuries may or 

may   not   be   there.   Nothing   much   turns   out   from   the 

deposition of this witness. 

22. Further,   the   testimony   of   PW­18   -   Dr.Hemant 

Dahyabhai   Patel,   who  was   examined   at   Exh.53   and  who 

was   the   Medical   Officer,   is   also  significant  to  the 

background   of   this   case.   This   witness   has   in   his 

deposition   has   categorically   stated   that   prosecutrix 

was brought for physical check up by the grandmother 

and the mother i.e. complainant of the prosecutrix and 

before checking, consent letter was obtained by him. 

Page 31 of 40

HC-NIC Page 31 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

This witness had examined the prosecutrix immediately 

on the next day of occurrence i.e. on 19.6.2010 and 

the   history   had   also   been   recorded.   Upon   physical 

examination, this witness had specifically found the 

cut   mark   in   the   lower   portion   of   the   Labia   Minora 

admeasuring   around   4   x   0.5   x   0.5   cm.   Proceeding 

towards  anal portion of the prosecutrix. The general 

condition   was   found   to   be   normal   by   this   Medical 

Officer.   However,   it   has   been   categorically   stated 

that there was a swelling and pain in lower part of 

the stomach and there were no other external marks of 

injuries.   However,   when   the   private   part   of   the 

prosecutrix  was   checked  up,   there   was   a  swelling   as 

well   as   pain   and   therefore,   a   specific   opinion   was 

given by this Medical Officer, who, first in point of 

time, examined the prosecutrix, that there appears to 

be a rape on the prosecutrix. This important witness 

has,   in   cross­examination,   further   reiterated   that 

history   about   rape   being   committed   on   the   girl   was 

recorded. He has denied that recording of the history 

at   Exh.56   is   not   written   down   at   the   instance   of 

grandmother or the Yadi. But overall analysis of this 

evidence is reflecting that on the private part of the 

Page 32 of 40

HC-NIC Page 32 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

prosecutrix, there was a swelling as well as cut mark 

as found upon physical examination.  

23. To prove the case, another P.W.No.19 - Ashokbhai 

Valabhai Katkad, examined at Exh.56, has been pressed 

into service by the prosecution, who happens to be the 

Investigating   Officer.   This   police   witness   who   is 

serving   as   A.S.I.   at   Bodeli   Police   Station   at   that 

time a complainant Jyotsnaben, wife of Vinodbhai Tadvi 

came   to   lodge   the   complaint   and   as   per   her   say, 

whatever   conveyed   is   written   down   in   the   complaint. 

During the course of investigation, this witness has 

examined   and   recorded   the   statements   of   several 

witnesses and also undertaken the process of drawing 

panchnamas of the scene of offence, has also arrested 

on 2.7.2010 as found material against the appellant. 

The physical condition   has also been ascertained by 

examining him and all the muddamal articles which were 

recovered were sent by him to F.S.L. Office, Vadodara. 

This witness having found enough material against the 

appellant­ accused had submitted       the charge­sheet 

before   the   Court   concerned  and   also     identified  the 

accused.   In   cross­examination,   he   has   stated   that 

Page 33 of 40

HC-NIC Page 33 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

Serological   analysis   of   the   sperm   which   has   been 

collected, the result is undecided. However, in cross­

examination,   he   has   stated   that   blood   group   'O'   is 

same of both the appellant - accused as well as the 

prosecutrix. It appears further that there appears to 

be no other oral testimony except last this witness, 

who has examined PW­19.

24.   Further,   from   the   analysis   of   documentary 

evidence,   few   instances   are   very   relevant   and, 

therefore, same are considered by us while analyzing 

the evidence. The Ravangi Nondh indicates that several 

samples have been collected and sent for analysis. On 

Page­185 of the paper­book compilation, the result of 

such analysis is indicating that in Column No.1, Item 

No.2,   Mark­B   is   found   to   be   with   sperm   mixed   with 

blood.   Even   in   Item   No.5   in   Column   No.2   of   this 

result,   human   blood   has   been   found   and   same   is   the 

case with Item No.8 in Column No.3 where human sperm 

has been found. Even in Item No.13 in Column No.6, the 

sperm   has   been   found   and   the   same   is   the   case   with 

Item No.16 of Column No.7. The further analysis in the 

form of Serological Report at Page­187 of the paper­

Page 34 of 40

HC-NIC Page 34 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

book compilation has categorically reflected that in 

Item No.8, 'Pati" Mark­B, the sperm has been found of 

"O" blood group which is undisputedly belonging to the 

appellant   -   accused   and,   therefore,   when   such 

incriminating   circumstances   have   been   found,   so 

succinctly on record, it prima facie conclude that the 

case is made out against the appellant - accused.

25.  On further examining the material, we found that 

in further statement recorded under Section 313 of the 

Cr.P.C. on all these incriminating circumstances which 

were   reflecting   on   record,   there   appears   to   be   no 

cogent   explanation   of   whatsoever   nature.   On   the 

contrary,   on   one   hand,   there   is   no   explanation   in 

entire 313 statement of the appellant - accused and on 

the other hand, when the appellant - accused was heard 

on the issue of sentence, he categorically stated that 

he is having no parents; his wife has left him 8 years 

back and there is no child and further categorically 

stated that for committing such act, he has repented 

and and requested to give pardon. Now this version is 

reflecting on Page­235 of the paper­book compilation 

which   indicates   that   when   the   incriminating 

Page 35 of 40

HC-NIC Page 35 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

circumstances   connecting   the   appellant­   accused   have 

been   put   to   him,   no   explanation   is   offered.   On   the 

contrary, it reflects the repentance and admission of 

the appellant - accused and therefore, we, with this 

background   of   fact,   even   from   documentary   material 

also   found   that   the   case   is   made   out   by   the 

prosecution   which   is   connecting   the   appellant   - 

accused   with   crime   beyond   reasonable   doubt   and, 

therefore, there appears to be no serious infirmity in 

the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court. 

26. Further,   our   independent   overall   analysis   is 

indicating that the prosecutrix in the present case is 

minor,   aged   about   6   years   and   the   appellant   was   a 

person of trust in the house, as it is emerging from 

the   record   that   on   account   of   his   going   for   labour 

work   with   the   father  of  the   prosecutrix,   was  having 

frequent  visit  of  the   house,   all  the   family   members 

were   knowing   the   appellant   -   accused   including   the 

prosecutrix. 

27. We   also   found   from   the   record   that   a   specific 

attribution   against   the   appellant   has   remained 

Page 36 of 40

HC-NIC Page 36 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

consistent   right   from   the   day   of   narration   by   the 

prosecutrix till the deposition which has taken place 

in   the   Court.   Consistently   and   unshakenly   the 

prosecutrix   has   pointed   out   everywhere   against   the 

appellant   -   accused  for   committing  rape   on   her.   Not 

only even the history before the doctor has remained 

the   same,   but   the   medical   examination   of   the 

prosecutrix   is   fortifying   the   version   of   the 

prosecutrix,   as   injuries   have  been   found   by   PW­18   - 

Dr.Hemant   Dahyabhai   Patel.   Therefore,   overall 

testimony   of   the   prosecutrix,   the   deposition   of   the 

complainant   about   the   narration   of   the   incident,   is 

well   supported   by   the   medical   evidence   and   the 

prosecutrix   even   in   cross­examination   has   not 

shattered   nor   shaken   and,   therefore,   since   that 

consistent version being corroborated by the medical 

evidence,   more   particularly   identification   has   also 

been made by the prosecutrix, there appears to be no 

reasonable doubt which would permit us to dislodge the 

finding arrived at by the Trial Court. 

28. Perusal of the entire record and our independent 

analysis   has   further   revealed   that   there   is   a 

Page 37 of 40

HC-NIC Page 37 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

consistency in the medical evidence as well as ocular 

evidence   and   the   last   seen   together   of   appellant   - 

accused   at   the   house   of   the   prosecutrix   is   also 

clearly emerging. On the contrary, the situation was 

such   where   there   was   no   electricity,   the   rain   and 

storm  was   in   process  and   the   evidence   is   indicating 

that the appellant - accused has taken disadvantage of 

the situation and committed the crime. 

29. It   is   further   revealing   clearly   that   the 

Serological Report is also categorically pointing out 

the   finger   of   misdeed   committed   by   the   appellant   - 

accused   and   there   is   no   explanation   of   any   nature 

cogent enough of incriminating circumstances which are 

reflecting   on   the   record   and   therefore,   we   see   no 

reason   to   disbelieve  the   case  of  the   prosecution   in 

any manner. Apart from the fact that in 313 statement, 

the defence has not put­forth any explanation, but at 

the   same   time,   no   defence   witness   has   also   been 

examined.   On   the   contrary,   when   the   hearing   was 

afforded to the appellant - accused on the issue of 

sentence, he appeared to have admitted the crime and 

sought pardon and, therefore, when consistent version 

Page 38 of 40

HC-NIC Page 38 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

has come out clearly of the  prosecutrix coupled with 

well supported medical evidence and FSL analysis, we 

see   no   reason   to   disbelieve   the   testimony   of   the 

prosecutrix and the complainant as well. 

30. In   addition   to   this,   we   have   also   found   that 

there   is   no   evidence   of   any   nature   which   would 

indicate   even   remotely   that   on   account   of   some 

animosity, a chance of false implication is there. On 

the   contrary,   the   relations   were   very   much   cordial. 

The   father   of   the     prosecutrix   and   the   appellant   - 

accused   were   going   together   for   labour   work   and   on 

account   of   that,   there   was   a   frequent   visit   at   the 

house of appellant - accused and practically, all the 

family   members   were   knowing   the   appellant   -   accused 

and, therefore, element of trust was prevailing in the 

house   of   the   complainant   for   appellant   ­   accusedand 

that being misused, we found that sentence which has 

been   awarded   and   the   order   of   conviction   which   has 

been   passed   for   offence   punishable   under   Section 

376(2)(f)   of   the   Indian  Penal  Code   is   justified  and 

sentence has been appropriately awarded and this being 

the position, we are in complete agreement    with the 

Page 39 of 40

HC-NIC Page 39 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017
R/CR.A/1444/2012 JUDGMENT

judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed 

by   the   learned   10th  Additional   District   Judge, 

Vadodara.

31. In   view   of   the   above,   the   present   appeal   being 

meritless is dismissed hereby. The judgment and order, 

dated 31.3.2012, passed by the learned 10th Additional 

District   Judge,   Vadodara   in   Sessions   Case   No.155   of 

2010,   consequently   is   hereby   confirmed.   Record   and 

Proceedings be sent back to the trial Court concerned, 

forthwith.

(SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.)

(A.J. SHASTRI, J.)
vipul

Page 40 of 40

HC-NIC Page 40 of 40 Created On Wed Aug 09 02:42:54 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *