Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/9872/2009 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 9872 of 2009
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1516 of 2009
=========================================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
Versus
BHAGABHAI
DEVABHAI BHIDARVALA (MARVADI) - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for
Applicant(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date
: 15/03/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
The
present application for leave to prefer appeal is directed against
the judgement and order dated 14.5.2009 passed by the learned
Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.91 of 2006, whereby the accused
has been acquitted for the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376
of IPC.
We
have considered the judgement and the reasons recorded therein by
the learned Sessions Judge. We have considered the records and
proceedings of the trial Court. We have also heard the learned APP
for the State.
It
appears to us that when the victim reported before the Police, it
has been stated that there was love affair with the accused and when
it was reported to her parents, they had beaten her and thereafter,
she had run away with the accused. She also stated that from Gujarat
they had gone to Andhra Pradesh and the accused had kept her at one
hut, where she was doing the work of watering, cleaning vessels,
etc. Even about physical relationship, she stated before the Police
that it was volition on her part to have the physical relationship
with the accused. The aforesaid statement made before the Police
has been contradicted in the cross-examination by the victim, but
has been proved in the deposition of the Investigating Officer.
Under
these circumstances, the victim had number of opportunity to resist
or to run away, if she was really kidnapped or kept in custody.
There is no sufficient evidence for compulsion to have physical
relationship and on the contrary the aforesaid contradiction, which
is proved, would show that the physical relationship was voluntary.
There is no evidence in the medical history or any injury on the
body of the victim.
Even
on the aspect of age of the victim, it has not been sufficiently
proved inasmuch as after the incident and when she came back within
three months, the parents arranged marriage with other person and,
therefore, the learned Sessions Judge has found that she must be
adult.
Under
these circumstances, if the learned Sessions Judge has found that
the prosecution has not been able to prove beyond reasonable doubt,
the same cannot be said to be erroneous.
In
view of the aforesaid, leave does not deserve to be granted. Hence,
not granted. The application is disposed of accordingly.
(Jayant Patel, J.)
15.3.2010 (Rajesh
H. Shukla, J.)
vinod
Top