Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Naginbhai Mathurbhai Tadvi vs State Of ... on 8 August, 2017

Author: Abhilasha Kumari

Bench: Abhilasha Kumari, A.J. Shastri

                  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  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