Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/8729/2009 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 8729 of 2009
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1350 of 2009
=========================================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
Versus
SATYAPRAKASH
@ MUNNO RAMDEV ARORA - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for
Applicant(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 01/04/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
The
present application for leave to prefer appeal is directed against
the judgement and order dated 24.4.2009 passed by the learned
Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.176/2008, whereby the accused has
been acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 363,
366A, 342, 372, 373, 368, 376, and 34 of IPC read with Section 3, 4,
5, 6, 7 and 9 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
We
have considered the judgement and the reasons recorded by the
learned Sessions Judge. We have considered the record and
proceedings. We have also heard the learned APP for the State.
It
appears that there are certain basic infirmities in the case of
prosecution inasmuch as the majority of investigation and
charge-sheet has been by the Officer in the rank of Police
Sub-Inspector and not P.I., even if it is considered that the
officer of the rank of P.I. is authorized to conduct such
investigation under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
Further in the deposition of I.O., no such authorization is
referred, nor is there any basis stated for such purpose. So far as
the other offences under I.P.C. are concerned, there were different
birth dates mentioned in the School Leaving Certificate as well as
the Certificate under Birth and Death Registration Act. The
identity of the accused was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and
serious doubt was created. There is no identification parade held.
It may also be noted that there is no mark of assault on the body of
the victim, so as to constitute the offence of compulsory physical
relationship under Section 376 of IPC.
Under
these circumstances, if the learned Sessions Judge has found that
the prosecution has not been able to prove the case beyond
reasonable doubt,
the same cannot be said as erroneous.
In
view of the above, the leave does not deserve to be granted,
therefore, not granted. The application is disposed of accordingly.
(Jayant
Patel, J.)
1.4.2010 (Z.
K. Saiyed, J.)
vinod
Top