{"id":226731,"date":"2008-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008"},"modified":"2017-12-02T16:40:19","modified_gmt":"2017-12-02T11:10:19","slug":"ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/79\/1996\t 22\/ 22\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 79 of 1996\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \n\n\n \n\n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA\tsd\/-  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\tsd\/- \n \n=========================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nRATILAL\nMAGABHAI VASAVA - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nTHE\nSTATE OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nUS BRAHMBHATT, ADVOCATE APPOINTED BY LEGAL AID COMMITTEE  for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR MUKESH PATEL, APP, for Opponent(s) :\n1, \n=========================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 15\/07\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nCAV\nJUDGMENT \n<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED)<\/p>\n
The
\n\tpresent Appellant ?  original accused in Sessions Case No. 250 of
\n\t1994 was charged and tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
\n\tVadodara, for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 and
\n\t341 of Indian Penal Code (for short ?SIPC??).\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tfacts of the prosecution case is that the complainant Maniben, wife
\n\tof Budhabhai Bhailal Vasava was staying at her paternal house at
\n\tvillage Mata Bhagod, Taluka Savli. She was married with Budhabhai
\n\tBhailalbhai, resident of Satnagar village, Taluka Savli, but, due to
\n\tfamily dispute her husband went away to Madras and since last 12
\n\tmonths from the date of incident, she was staying with her parents.
\n\tDuring the married life with her husband one son named Ravji, aged
\n\tabout 7 years and daughter Kamla @ Parul, aged about 4 years were
\n\tborn. It is the case of the prosecution that on 20.6.1994 paternal
\n\tuncle of the complainant was expired and for his funeral ceremony
\n\tthe complainant went to village Shikar Bhagol with her relatives and
\n\tat that time her daughter Parul was also with her. When the
\n\tcomplainant was busy in the said ceremony the prosecutrix was
\n\toutside the house and at about 4.00 pm she came back and was crying.
\n\tOn being asked the minor girl narrated about the incident. Her
\n\tclothes were also stained with blood. The prosecutrix explained to
\n\ther mother ?  complainant that when she was playing near the house
\n\tat that time she was tempted by the present appellant ?  accused.
\n\tShe was taken out by him at the field (place of incident) and
\n\tcommitted the rape on her and then ran away. She also found some
\n\tinjuries on the cheeks.  On inquiry the complainant found that the
\n\tappellant ?  accused Ratilal Vasava has committed the rape on her
\n\tminor daughter. Thereafter the complainant, with other persons and
\n\tthe accused, went to the police and filed complaint against the
\n\tpresent appellant ?  accused at Savli Police Station. The Police
\n\thas registered the offence punishable under Sections 376, 323 and
\n\t341 of IPC. After registering the complaint the Panchnama was drawn.
\n\tThe prosecutrix and the appellant were sent for medical examination.
\n\tThe statement of witnesses were also recorded and thereafter on
\n\tcompletion of investigation, the Police filed charge-sheet against
\n\tthe present appellant ?  accused.\n<\/p>\n
When
\n\tthe offence of rape was registered against the present  appellant ?
\n\taccused, at that time, the accused with an intention to commit
\n\tsuicide, has jumped into the well but he survived and the police has
\n\talso registered the case against him for the offence under Section
\n\t309 I.P.C. and the chargesheet was also filed. However, in the said
\n\tcase he was acquitted.\n<\/p>\n
After
\n\tfiling of the charge-sheet, in the present case, as the offence
\n\tunder Section 376 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of
\n\tSessions, the learned JMFC, Savli,  committed the said case to the
\n\tCourt of Sessions, Vadodara.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tappellant ?  accused was not in a position to engage an Advocate to
\n\tdefend his case and hence, he was provided an Advocate by the Legal
\n\tAid Committee to defend his case. Thereafter the charge (Ex.1) was
\n\tframed against the present ?  appellant accused.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\torder to bring home the charge levelled against the accused, the
\n\tprsecution has examined in all 10 witnesses and relied upon their
\n\toral testimonies. They are as under  :\n<\/p>\n
P.W. 1 –\tMadhuben Lallubhai, Ex.5;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.2  –\tPanch Witness Dixitkumar Pravinchandra, Ex.6<\/p>\n
P.W.3  –\tPanch Witness Kamlesh Jivanbhai Patel, Ex. 8<\/p>\n
P.W.4  –\tComplainant Maniben Punjabhai at Ex.11;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.5  –\tWitness Manjulaben Naginbhai Vasava at Exh.14;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.6  –\tPSO Chhaganbhai Shankerbhai of Savli Police
\nStation,Ex.15;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.7  –\tDr. Rajesh N. Desai, Ex.18;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.8  –\tDr. Upen M. Mehta at Exh.20;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.9  –\tRamjibhai Garbabhai Parmar, PSI ?  IO, Ex.24;\n<\/p>\n
P.W.10-\tJivansinh Bhikhusinh Solanki, PSI at Ex.29<\/p>\n
To prove the culpability of the accused, the prosecution
\nhas also produced and relied upon the following documentary evidence.
\nThey are as under ;\n<\/p>\n
Panchnama
\n\tof scene of offence, Exh. 7;\n<\/p>\n
Panchnama
\n\tof clothes of victim, Ex.9;\n<\/p>\n
complaint
\n\tat Exh.12;\n<\/p>\n
Xerox
\n\tcopy of Death Certificate of Kamlaben Ex.13;\n<\/p>\n
Copy
\n\tof Police station diary at Exh.16;\n<\/p>\n
Yadi
\n\tto Medical officer, Ex.21;\n<\/p>\n
case
\n\tpapers, including medical certificates of the prosecutrix and the
\n\tpresent appellant ?  accused at Ex.22;\n<\/p>\n
Forwarding
\n\tletter regarding receipt of Muddamal and the FSL Report at Exh.27 &
\n\t28;\n<\/p>\n
Yadi
\n\tto Medical Officer at Exh.30;\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter,
\n\tafter examining the witnesses the statement of accused under Section
\n\t313 Cr. P.C. was record in which the appellant ?  accused has
\n\treplied all the questions in the negative, like ?SI do not know??
\n\tor ?Sit is a false contention??.\n<\/p>\n
After
\n\tconsidering the oral as well as documentary evidence the learned
\n\tAdditional Sessions Judge vide impugned Judgment dated 21.12.1995 in
\n\tSessions Case No.257 of 1994 held the accused guilty to the offences
\n\tcharged against him. The accused was convicted and sentenced to
\n\tsuffer rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.4000\/- I\/d to
\n\tunder-go further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the
\n\toffence punishable under Section 376 I.P. Code, and was further
\n\tconvicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six
\n\tmonths with fine of Rs.500\/- I\/d to under go further imprisonment
\n\tfor one month for the offence punishable under section 323 I.P. Code
\n\tand was also convicted and sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for
\n\tsix months with fine of Rs.500\/- I\/d to under-go further rigorous
\n\timprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section
\n\t341 I.P. Code. The said sentence were ordered to run concurrently.
\n\tThe fine, if paid, was ordered to be paid to the prosecutrix on she
\n\tattaining the majority and till then the said amount was directed to
\n\tbe invested in a Nationalized Bank.\n<\/p>\n
Being
\n\taggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and order
\n\tof conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Judge,  the
\n\tpresent appellant ?  original accused has filed this Appeal,
\n\tthrough Jail.\n<\/p>\n
Heard
\n\tlearned Advocate Mr. U.S. Brahmbhatt for the appellant and Mr.
\n\tMukesh Patel, learned APP for the respondent ?  State.\n<\/p>\n
Learned
\n\tAdvocate Mr. Brahmbhatt has contended that the prosecution has not
\n\tproduced any sufficient evidence to prove its case and only relied
\n\tupon the oral evidence of the complainant and other relatives. It is
\n\talso contended that there is no direct evidence to connect the
\n\taccused with the guilt. The prosecution has also failed to establish
\n\tthe age of the prosecutrix and there is not a single iota of
\n\tevidence to show that the prosecutrix baby was tempted by the
\n\tpresent appellant ?  accused and she was taken by him at the field.
\n\tThere is also no direct evidence to show that the accused has
\n\tcommitted any sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. Mr.
\n\tBrahmbhatt has further contended that the trial Court has not
\n\tapplied its mind and without considering the facts and circumstances
\n\tof the case, convicted and awarded sentenced to the present
\n\tappellant ?  accused, which is erroneous and against the provisions
\n\tof law. Mr. Brahmbhatt has also read the deposition of the witnesses
\n\tas well as the documentary evidence and contended that on account of
\n\tsome doubt, no person can be booked in such a serious offence. He
\n\thas also contended that due to false involvement of the accused in
\n\tthe offence he has tried to commit suicide for which an offence was
\n\tregistered and the accused was tried, but,  he was acquitted. He has
\n\talso prayed that sentence of imprisonment of life is also very harsh
\n\tand, according to him, if the appellant – accused is held guilty the
\n\tpunishment awarded to him is required to be reduced.\n<\/p>\n
On
\n\tbehalf of the State Mr. Mukesh Patel, learned APP has submitted that
\n\tthere is voluminous reliable, trustworthy and clinching evidence on
\n\trecord which unequivocally and unerringly proves that the appellant
\n\t?  accused had committed a rape on the minor prosecutrix. He
\n\tfurther contended that from the evidence of the complainant and
\n\tother witnesses as well as from the documentary evidence, the
\n\tprosecution has proved that the appellant ?  accused has committed
\n\trape on a minor girl, aged about 4 years and the mother of the
\n\tprosecutrix has boldly filed complaint against the accused without
\n\tany fear. He has also contended that no mother would dare to file
\n\tfalse complaint for such a serious offence of rape involving her own
\n\tdaughter and that for a minor girl. He has also contended that from
\n\tthe documentary and medical evidence, produced before the trial
\n\tCourt, the age of the prosecutrix is also established. The medical
\n\tCertificate shows that the hymen of the prosecutrix was ruptured and
\n\tthe injuries were also found on the private part as well as on the
\n\tcheeks of the prosecutrix. The medical certificate in respect of the
\n\tvictim shows that there was profuse bleeding from the vagina of the
\n\tprosecutrix. He has also contended that appellant ?  accused was
\n\talso sent for medical examination and from the medical examination,
\n\tit was also found that the appellant ?  accused was also having
\n\tinjury on the private part. He has also contended that after
\n\tcommitting such a serious offence the appellant ?  accused has
\n\ttried to commit suicide and due to that he has sustained fracture.
\n\tHe has contended that the conduct of the present appellant ?
\n\taccused is also required to be considered and further contended that
\n\tin light of the ratio pronounced in land mark Judgment of the
\n\tHon’ble Apex Court as well as the Judgments of this Court, the
\n\tprosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt and
\n\tprayed that the Judgment and order passed by the trial Court is
\n\trequired to be confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tHon’ble Apex Court in a number of decisions held that ?SIt is not
\n\tthe duty of the appellate Court when it agrees with the view of
\n\tTrial Court on the evidence either to restate the effect of the
\n\tevidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the Trial Court.??
\n\tThe said law is laid down by the Hon’ble Court in the case of (1)
\n\tGIRIJANANDINI DEVI & ORS. V\/s. BIJENDRA NARAIN CHOUDHARY,
\n\treported in AIR 1967 SC 1124, and (2) in the case of STATE
\n\tOF KARNATAKA v\/s. HEMAREDDY & ANR., reported in AIR 1981
\n\tSC 1417. Yet, in the interest of justice and to observe said
\n\tcause of Appeal in a legal way, we have discussed the evidence as
\n\twell as the reasons assigned by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
Complainant
\n\tManiben Punjabhai, PW 4, Exh.11 narrated in her oral evidence that
\n\tthe date of birth and name of prosecutrix was entered into Birth
\n\tRegister, Ex.13, and according to the same the date of birth of the
\n\tprosectrix was 15.2.1990 and as per date of birth of the
\n\tprosecutrix, on the date of incident, she was 4 years old. The trial
\n\tCourt has explained the age of the prosecutrix with sound and proper
\n\treason and considered in a legal and proper manner. Therefore, the
\n\tquestion of the age of the prosecutrix cannot be debatable at this
\n\tjuncture. The complainant in her deposition stated that she saw her
\n\tdaughter ?  prosecutrix in a bleeding condition. The complainant
\n\thas asked the prosecutrix as to what happened, the prosecutrix has
\n\texplained before her that the said act was done by the present
\n\tappellant ?  complainant. The said version of the complainant was
\n\talso supported by PW 1 ?  Madhuben Lallubhai, Ex.5. So, compared to
\n\tthe oral evidence of PW 1 and the complainant PW 4, the same was
\n\tfully corroborated the version of FIR (complaint Ex.12).\n<\/p>\n
Panch
\n\twitness Dixitkumar Pravinchandra, PW 2, Ex.6, was a Panch of scene
\n\tof occurrence, has deposed in his examination that they have found
\n\tfoot marks of adult person as well as child. The said fact is also
\n\tcorroborated by the panchnama of scene of offence Ex.7. The
\n\tcomplainant, P.W.1 Madhuben and the Panch witness P.W.2 were fully
\n\tcross examined by the defence lawyer before the trial Court. From
\n\tthe evidence of these witnesses it appears that the present
\n\tappellant ?  accused could not get out from the alleged illegal act
\n\tof the accused and the accused has failed to establish his
\n\tinnocence. P.W.3 ?  Panch Kamlesh Jivanbhai Patel was also examined
\n\tat Ex.8 in whose presence the Investigating Agency has seized the
\n\tclothes of the prosecutrix and the appellant ?  accused after
\n\tdrawing the Panchnama Ex.9 and the clothes were sent to Forensic
\n\tScience Laboratory for examination and Report. The said witness has
\n\talso supported the version of the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tprosecution has examined Dr. Rajesh N. Desai, PW 7, Exh.18, who has
\n\texamined the prosecutrix. He has explained the injuries on the
\n\tprosecutrix. He has deposed that hymen was ruptured in a 2nd
\n\tdegree position of 2 cm deep  and on both the cheeks of the
\n\tprosecutrix brushes marks were found and there was bleeding from the
\n\tprivate part of the prosecutrix. The case history was also noted by
\n\tthis witness (Medical Officer) from the complainant Maniben. The
\n\tMedical Officer has deposed that hymen was ruptured and stitches
\n\twere taken. The prosecutrix was made unconscious after giving
\n\tanesthesia. As an medical expert he has clarified that presence of
\n\tsemen may not be available when there is continuous  bleeding from
\n\tthe private part of the body. As per his opinion the age of the
\n\tprosecutrix was about 4 to 5 years. Dr. Upen N. Mehta, Medical
\n\tOfficer, PW 8, was also examined at Exh.20. He is a Gynecologist. He
\n\thas examined prosecutrix Parul as well as the appellant ?  accused.
\n\tHe has also deposed that abrasions on both the cheeks of the
\n\tprosecutrix were found. Hymen was ruptured and bleeding was
\n\tcontinued. He has also examined the appellant ?  accused. The
\n\taccused sustained fracture injury on left hand. The appellant ?
\n\taccused was also having abrasion on the private part of his body. He
\n\thas taken a sample of blood, semen and pubic hair of the accused and
\n\tsent for examination. In cross examination this witness has fairly
\n\tadmitted that he has a definite opinion that rape was committed on
\n\tthe prosecutrix. He has also issued Medical Certificate to that
\n\teffect.\n<\/p>\n
P.W.\n<\/p>\n
\t5 Manjulaben Naginbhai Vasava, Ex.14, has fully supported the
\n\tversion of complainant as well as the version of PW 1 Madhuben
\n\tLallubhai. She deposed that there was profuse bleeding from the
\n\tvagina of the prosecutrix and the clothes of Parul ?  prosecutrix
\n\twere stained with blood. On being asked she said that she was taken
\n\tby the accused to the field. The blood stains were there on  private
\n\tpart. She, along with the complainant and P.W. 1 Madhuben went to
\n\tthe field where the appellant ?  accused was sleeping. Thereafter
\n\tthe accused was taken away by them to the Police Station. While
\n\ttaking him to police station the accused jumped into the well, which
\n\tshows the guilty mind of the appellant ?  accused. The said conduct
\n\tof the accused is required to be considered.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tHon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.N.Venkatesh & ANR v\/s.
\n\tSTATE OF KARNATAKA, reported in 2005 (3) CRIME 231 (SC)
\n\thas held that by virtue of Section 8 of Evidence Act, the conduct of
\n\tthe accused person is relevant. The Hon’ble Apex Court has held that
\n\t?Sby virtue of Section 8 of the Evidence Act, the conduct of the
\n\taccused person is relevant, if such conduct influences or is
\n\tinfluenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact.?? The evidence of
\n\tcircumstances simplicitor that the present accused pointed out
\n\tbefore all witnesses as well as at the time of filing of FIR before
\n\tPolice is that while taking him to police station,he jumped into the
\n\twell to avoid legal action and due that fear he jumped into the
\n\twell. The said conduct of the accused is relevant in eye of law in
\n\tthe context of Section 8 of Evidence Act.\n<\/p>\n
P.W.\n<\/p>\n
\t9 ?  Ramjibhai Garbabhai Parmar, Investigating Officer, Ex.24, has
\n\tcarried out the investigation in a proper and legal manner. We have
\n\tscrutinized the entire evidence, oral as well as documentary. From
\n\tthe deposition of this witness, the defence ?  present appellant
\n\thas failed to establish that there was any negligence on the part of
\n\tInvestigating Officer in carrying out the investigation. In our
\n\topinion, the Investigating Officer has carried out the investigation
\n\tin a fair and legal manner.\n<\/p>\n
This
\n\tis a complaint of rape on a 4 year old female baby child.  In our
\n\torthodox society unless complaint is genuine no parents would dare
\n\tto lodge false complaint of rape involving his\/her own daughter in
\n\tsuch a heinous incident, knowing fully well that the same would
\n\tdamage the honour of the family in the society.\n<\/p>\n
This
\n\tCourt has considered the submissions advanced by the learned
\n\tAdvocates appearing for the parties and perused the impugned
\n\tJudgment and order. This Court has undertaken a complete and
\n\tcomprehensive appreciation of all vital features of the case and the
\n\tentire evidence on record which is read and re-read by the learned
\n\tadvocates for the parties with reference to broad and reasonable
\n\tprobabilities of the case. In light of caution sounded by the
\n\tSupreme Court while dealing with criminal appeals, this Court has
\n\texamined the entire evidence on record for itself independently of
\n\tthe trial Court and considered the arguments advanced on behalf of
\n\tthe accused and infirmities pressed, scrupulously with a view to
\n\tfind out as to whether the trial Court has rightly recorded the
\n\torder of conviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n
As
\n\tobserved and discussed at length, in our opinion, in light of the
\n\tdocumentary evidence i.e. Medical Certificate Exh. 12, it is
\n\testablished by the prosecution that injuries on a private part of
\n\tthe body of the prosecutrix as well as on the present appellant ?
\n\taccused has proved that the present appellant ?  accused has
\n\tcommitted a rape on the prosecutrix. There is no reason for the
\n\tcomplainant to falsely involve  the appellant ?  accused. The
\n\tappellant ?  accused could have explained during recording of his
\n\tfurther statement u\/s. 313 Cr.P.C. the injuries received by him on
\n\this private part of the body, but, he has not explained anything.
\n\tFrom the oral as well as documentary evidence adduced by the
\n\tprosecution, in our opinion, the learned trial Judge has rightly
\n\tconvicted and sentenced the appellant ?  accused. Therefore, the
\n\tconviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court against the
\n\tappellant ?  accused does not call for any interference of this
\n\tCourt in exercise of appellate powers.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tlearned Advocate, appearing for the appellant ?  accused, has
\n\tlastly prayed that if this Court is of the opinion that the trial
\n\tCourt has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused then the
\n\tleniency may be shown and prayed to reduce the quantum of sentence.
\n\tWe have gone through the Judgment and order of the trial Court. We
\n\thave also perused the record. In our opinion, the accused has
\n\tcommitted a rape on a female child hardly of the age of 4 years. No
\n\tleniency should be shown towards an offender like the present
\n\taccused who has committed a rape on a girl ?  a baby child who is
\n\thardly 4 years old.\n<\/p>\n
We
\n\tfind ourselves in complete agreement with the said finding, ultimate
\n\tconclusion and resultant order of conviction passed by the trial
\n\tCourt and we are of the view that no other conclusion except the one
\n\treached by the trial Court is possible in the instant case as the
\n\tevidence on record stands. Therefore, there is no valid reason or
\n\tjustifiable ground to interfere with the impugned Judgment and order
\n\tof conviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n
For
\n\tthe forgoing reasons the Appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. The
\n\tJudgment and Order of conviction and sentence dated 21.12.1995
\n\trecorded by the trial Court against the appellant ?  accused in
\n\tSessions Case No.257 of 1994 is hereby confirmed and maintained.
\n\tMuddamal be disposed of in terms of directions contained in the
\n\timpugned Judgment and order passed by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
This
\n\tAppeal is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/-\n<\/p>\n
(A.M.KAPADIA,J.)<\/p>\n
sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
(Z.K.\n<\/p>\n
SAIYED,  J.)<\/p>\n
sas<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/79\/1996 22\/ 22 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 79 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA sd\/- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED sd\/- ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-226731","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRatilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-02T11:10:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-02T11:10:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":3302,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\",\"name\":\"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-02T11:10:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-02T11:10:19+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-02T11:10:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008"},"wordCount":3302,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008","name":"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-02T11:10:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratilal-vs-heard-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ratilal vs Heard on 15 July, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226731","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=226731"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226731\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226731"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226731"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226731"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}