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 12, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat vs Kishorbhai Jayntibhai ... on 19 September, 2016

Author: Anant S.Dave

Bench: Anant S. Dave, B.N. Karia

                 R/CR.A/1315/2012                                                CAV JUDGMENT



                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1315 of 2012
                                                   With
                                    CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 855 of 2012


         FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:



         HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE


         and
         HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

         ==========================================================

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

         2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

         3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
               the judgment ?

         4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of
               law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
               India or any order made thereunder ?

         ==========================================================
                           STATE OF GUJARAT....Appellant(s)
                                      Versus
               KISHORBHAI JAYNTIBHAI TRIVEDI....Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1315 of 2012
         MR. RUTVIJ OZA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
         No. 1
         MR BHAVIN S RAIYANI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
         IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 855 of 2012:
         MR BHAVIN S RAIYANI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
         MR. RUTVIJ OZA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
         Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1


                                                Page 1 of 21

HC-NIC                                        Page 1 of 21     Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016
                R/CR.A/1315/2012                                        CAV JUDGMENT



         ==========================================================
          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
                 and
                 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
                            Date : 19/09/2016
                                  CAV JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA) 1 Criminal Appeal No. 1315 of 2012 is preferred by  the   appellant­State   of   Gujarat   under   Section   377   of  the   Code   of   Criminal   Procedure,   1973,   against   the  judgment  and   order   of   sentence   in   Sessions   Case  No.  202   of   2009   passed   by   the   learned   Sessions   Judge,  Bhavnagar on 20.6.2012 to modify the impugned judgment  and   order   of   sentence,   so   far   as   offence   under  Sections   511   and   354   of   the   Indian   Penal   Code   are  concerned and to enhance the sentence under the above  mentioned sections to its maximum. Whereas, Criminal  Appeal   No.   855  of  2012,  preferred   by   the   appellant­ original   accused   of   Sessions   Case   No.   202   of   2009  under   Section   374(2)   of   the   Code   of   Criminal  Procedure, 1973 is against the judgment and order of  conviction   passed   by   the   learned   Sessions   Judge,  Bhavnagar,   dated   20.6.2012,   whereby   the   appellant­ original   accused   is   held   guilty   for   the   offences  punishable   under   Sections   354   of   the   Indian   Penal  Code,   and   has   been   ordered   to   undergo   rigorous  Page 2 of 21 HC-NIC Page 2 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT imprisonment   for   two   years   with   fine   of   Rs.3,000/­,  and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous  imprisonment   for   one   month   and   for   the   offence  punishable under Section 511 of the IPC, the accused  is ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four  years   with   fine   of   Rs.5,000/­,   and   in   default   of  payment   of   fine,   to   further   undergo   rigorous  imprisonment   for   six   months.   Both   the   sentences   are  ordered to run concurrently. Whereas, for the offences  under Sections 376,377,452, and 506(2) of the IPC, the  respondent­accused has been acquitted.    2 The   case   of   the   prosecution,   in   brief,   reads  thus:

2.1 It   is   the   case   of   the   prosecution   that   the  accused   on   21.7.2009   at   12:30   p.m   had   gone   to   the  house of victim­girl to serve a book. At that time,  witness Nos. 8 and 9 were present at the house. It is  alleged   that   the   accused   caught   hold   of   victim   and  dragged her into a room, removed his own clothes as  well as clothes of the victim and threatened her not  to   shout   or   else,   she   would   be   murdered,   and  thereafter,   had   a   forceful   intercourse   with   her  Page 3 of 21 HC-NIC Page 3 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT against her wish and will. Therefore, the accused was  charged   for   the   offences   punishable   under   Sections  376511452377354 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal  Code.  
3 A complaint in respect of the aforesaid incident  was   lodged   by   the   mother   of   the   victim   before   the  Police Sub Inspector, Jesar Police Station. Necessary  investigation   was   done   and   the   accused   came   to   be  arrested.   At   the   end   of   the   investigation,   charge­ sheet was filed against the accused before the trial  Court.   However,   since   it   was   a   sessions   triable  offence, the case was committed to Sessions Court and  ultimately trial was initiated and charge came to be  framed. The accused pleaded not guilty of the charges  and claimed to be tried.
4 To   prove   the   case   against   the   accused,   the  prosecution  examined  10  oral   as   well   as   produced   16  documentary evidences.
5 Heard Mr. Bhavin S Raiyani, learned advocate for  the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 855/2012 and for  the respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 1315/2012. Mr.  Page 4 of 21 HC-NIC Page 4 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT Rutvij Oza, learned APP for the respondent in Criminal  Appeal   No.   855   of   2012   and   for   the   appellant   in  Criminal Appeal No. 1315 of 2012.
6 It is submitted by Mr. Raiyani, learned advocate  that   the   order   passed   by   the   learned   trial   judge  convicting the appellant under Section 354 and 511 of  the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 202 of 2009  dated 20.6.2012 is illegal, improper and contrary to  the principles of criminal jurisprudence and against  the   principles   of   law,   and   therefore,   liable   to   be  interfered   with   and   deserves   to   be   quashed   and   set  aside.   It   is   further   argued   that   the   learned   trial  judge has convicted the present appellant only on the  basis   of   deposition   of   the   complainant   and   the  relatives of the victim, who are highly interested in  the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the  prosecution   has   miserably   failed   to   prove   the   case  against the present appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 

However,   learned   trial   judge,   without   any   base   or  evidence on record, has convicted the appellant. That,  the   evidence   of   the   victim   girl,   statement   of   the  doctor and panchnamas were not properly appreciated by  Page 5 of 21 HC-NIC Page 5 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT the learned trial judge. That, no material documents  were produced by the prosecution against the appellant  and that there was no concrete evidence for conviction  under Section 354 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code.  That, there was no good relation between the family of  the   complainant   and   the   appellant,   and   therefore,  complaint   was   registered   against   the   present  appellant. That, on the statement of the victim girl  and doctor, this complaint was lodged by the mother.  That, the statement of the victim girl has not been  recorded  before   the   doctor  or  before   the   police.   It  shows that the family of the victim was interested in  falsely implicating the present appellant. That, from  the medical certificate and statement of the doctor it  has come out that no injury was found on the body of  the victim, meaning thereby that false complaint was  lodged   by   the   complainant,   and   therefore,   it   was  requested by the learned advocate for the convict to  quash   and   set   aside   the   judgment   and   order   dated  20.6.2012,   passed   by   the   learned   trial   judge   at  Bhavnagar   in   Sessions   Case   No.   202   of   2009   and   to  acquit the appellant from the charges punishable under  Sections 511 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, as well  Page 6 of 21 HC-NIC Page 6 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT as to dismiss the appeal preferred by the respondent­ State   of   Gujarat   i.e.   Criminal   Appeal   No.   1315   of  2012.   It   is   further   argued   that   the   husband   of   the  complainant has expired and looking to the facts and  circumstances   of   the  case,  the   Hon'ble   Court,   if   it  deems fit, can pass an order to compensate the victim  within the limit of   Rs.1 lakh, as it was a dispute  between two families.

7 On   the   other   side,   Mr.   Rutvij   Oza,   learned  Additional   Pubic   Prosecutor   strongly   opposed   the  submissions made by the learned advocate Mr. Raiyani  and   argued   that   the   sentence   awarded   by   the   learned  trial judge for the offences punishable under Sections  354   and   511   of   the   Indian   Penal   Code   against   the  appellant   itself   is   lenient   and   grossly   inadequate.  Learned APP further submitted that the learned trial  judge   should   have   considered   over   all   facts   and  circumstances, and that the accused has committed an  offence punishable under Sections 354 and 511 of the  Indian   Penal   Code   and   that   the   accused   should   have  been   imposed   adequate   and   sufficient   conviction.  Learned APP further contended that maximum punishment,  Page 7 of 21 HC-NIC Page 7 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT while   convicting   the   accused   under   Section   511   IPC  ought to have been imposed, considering the evidence  produced by prosecution against the accused. That, no  undue   emphasis   ought   to   have   been   given   to   the  contradictions   and/or   omissions   appearing   in   the  evidence   of   the   prosecution   witnesses   by   the   trial  Court. That, prosecution has clearly proved its case  beyond reasonable doubt against the accused by leading  oral as well as medical evidence. However, trial Court  has committed a grave error in law, showing leniency  to the accused in awarding sentence under Section 511  of Indian Penal Code. Hence, it was requested by him  to allow his appeal and thereby enhance the sentence  so far offence under Section 511 of the Indian Penal  Code imposed upon the accused in Sessions Case No. 202  of   2009   dated   20.6.2012   and   dismiss   the   Criminal  Appeal No. 855 of 2012. 

8 Having heard learned advocate for the appellant­ State as well as learned advocate for the respondent  having   bestowed   our   anxious   consideration   to   the  material placed before us, first of all, we would like  to analyze the legal position.

Page 8 of 21 HC-NIC Page 8 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT In case of  Sadhu Saran  Singh v. State of Uttar   Pradesh   &   Ors.,  reported   in  (2016)   4   SCC   357,  the  Apex Court while discussing scope of interference in  appeal against acquittal order, held and observed as  under :­

20.   Generally,   an   appeal   against   acquittal  has   always   been   altogether   on   a   different  pedestal   from   that   of   an   appeal   against  conviction.   In   an   appeal   against   acquittal  where the presumption of innocence in favour  of the accused is reinforced, the appellate  court   would   interfere   with   the   order   of  acquittal   only   when   there   is   perversity   of  fact   and   law.   However,   we   believe   that   the  paramount consideration of the Court is to do  substantial justice and avoid miscarriage of  justice   which   can   arise   by   acquitting   the  accused   who   is   guilty   of   an   offence.   A  miscarriage of justice that may occur by the  acquittal of the guilty is no less than from  the   conviction   of   an   innocent.   This   Court,  while enunciating the principles with regard  to the scope of powers of the appellate court  in an appeal against acquittal in Sambasivan  v. State of Kerala, (1998) 5 SCC 412 has held  :

7. The principles with regard to the   scope of the powers of the appellate   court in an appeal against acquittal,  Page 9 of 21 HC-NIC Page 9 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT are well settled. The powers of the  appellate court in an appeal against  acquittal   are   no   less   than   in   an  appeal against conviction. But where  on   the   basis   of   evidence   on   record  two views are reasonably possible the  appellate court cannot substitute its  view   in   the   place   of   that   of   the   trial   Court.   It   is   only   when   the  approach   of   the   trial   Court   in  acquitting an accused is found to be   clearly   erroneous   in   its  consideration   of   evidence   on   record  and in deducing conclusions therefrom  that   the   appellate   court   can  interfere   with   the   order   of  acquittal. 
9 Having   considered   the   facts   of   the   case,  submissions   made   by   learned   advocate   for   the  respective parties and record of the Court, it appears  that   prosecution   has   proved   its   case   under   Sections  354   and   511   of   the   Indian   Penal   Code   against   the  accused.   As   per   the   findings   passed   by   the   learned  judge,   the   accused   has   attempted   to   commit   rape   on  victim   girl.   As   the   charge  was   framed   under   Section  511   and   354   IPC   and   accepting   the   case   of   the  prosecution that he had made an attempt to commit rape  with the victim girl, he was convicted under both the  provisions   of   the   Indian   Penal   Code.   Now,   let   us  examine the case of prosecution, wherein, the learned  Page 10 of 21 HC-NIC Page 10 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT trial judge has opined that considering the evidence  of the prosecution, it has failed to prove the charges  against the accused/appellant under Section 376377  and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. Now, if we examine  the oral evidence of the prosecution, the complainant  Shantuben   Nanjibhai     (Exh   10)   is   the   mother   of   the  victim, had lodged a complaint. As per her testimony  before the Court, her husband, namely, Nanjibhai was  blind   and   unable   to   hear.   This   incident   was   taken  place   before   two   years   from   the   filing   of   the  complaint.   On   the  day   of   this  incident,   she   herself  and her two daughters had gone to their field whereas,  victim   as   well   as   her   husband   were   staying   at   her  residence.   When   she   returned   back   from  the   field   at  about   7:00   p.m,   she   was   informed   by   victim­her  daughter   that   the   present   accused   came   at   their  residence   at   about   12:30   p.m   and   called   her   out. 

Hence, the doors of the residence were opened by the  victim.   As   the   accused   was   serving   as   a   Post­Man,  therefore, he was used to visit the residence of the  complainant and this time he came to dispatch a book  and   when   he   inquired   the   victim   in   respect   of   her  mother and sister, he came to know that all of them  Page 11 of 21 HC-NIC Page 11 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT had   gone   to   their   field,   therefore,   the   victim   was  caught hold of by the accused and then she was dragged  into   a   room   and   threatened   of   life   if   she   utters  anything. Further, the complainant was informed by her  daughter­the victim, that she was thrown away on the  floor   and   sexual   intercourse   was   committed   by   the  accused. This incidence was informed to Mr. Manubhai  Shamjibhai­cousin of the complainant and to her nephew  and   thereafter   a   complaint   was   lodged   before   Jesar  Police   Station   (Exh.11).   As   per   statement   of   this  witness, the victim was aged 20 years and was mentally  retarded. It appears from her cross­examination that  at the time of incidence, she was not present at her  residence   and   for   whole   day,   she   was   at   her   field.  During this period, victim had not informed anybody of  this incident, except her, when she returned back to  residence   from  her   field   in   the   evening.   The  victim  had not informed her father also, though, he was at  the residence when the incidence had taken place. She  has admitted that her husband was a deaf and was able  to hear only if it was spoken loudly near to his ears  and that her husband was visually impaired and could  see just upto 10 feet distance. The residence of the  Page 12 of 21 HC-NIC Page 12 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT complainant is situated on the main road and number of  neighbours   are   staying   nearby   to   her   residence.   It  also   appears   that  the   victim   girl   was   also   examined  vide   Exh.12   before   the   trial   Court.   As   per   her  statement,   at   the  time   of   incident,  she   herself  and  her father were present at their residence. At about  12:30   p.m,   the   accused   came   at   their   residence   to  deliver   a   book,   and   taking   advantage   of   loneliness,  she was caught hold of by him and was dragged into a  room. Her clothes were removed by the accused as well  as   he   himself   removed   his   clothes,   and   thereafter,  intercourse was made by him. She was also threatened  that if she would inform anybody of the act, then she  would   be   murdered,   and   thereafter,   the   accused   left  from her home. She has further stated that her father  was   blind   and   unable   to   hear.   When   her   mother   came  back   home   from   the   field,   she   informed   her   of   the  incident.   Thereafter,   she   was   taken   to   the   hospital  and examined by the doctor. In the cross examination,  she has admitted that she was aged about 25 years, but  having no knowledge of writing and reading as she was  not   educated.   She   has   further   admitted   that   since  birth her brain has not developed, and therefore, she  Page 13 of 21 HC-NIC Page 13 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT has   no   idea   about   the   things   happening.   She   has  admitted  that   if   anybody   would   tutor   her,  she   would  exactly do the same, as instructed, and that she had  given her testimony as per the instructions issued by  her advocate. The accused was serving as a Postman and  was   in   a   routine   course   visiting   her   residence   to  serve the post. She has also admitted that if a person  would   speak   with   a   loud   voice   nearby   ear   of   her  father, he can hear and that her father was able to  move in the residence. That, nearby to her residence a  number   of   persons   and   relatives   were   staying,   whose  names  and   addresses   were   inquired   by   the   police  and  nothing   more   was   inquired.   That,   she   was   never  inquired   by   the   police   in   respect   of   the   offence.  Further,   she   said   that   the   accused   came   to   her  residence,   he   entered   the   house   and  she   was   dragged  into   a   room   where   her   clothes   were   removed   and  intercourse   was   made   to   her.   All   the   things   were  informed to the police. She also admits that whatever  instructions were given to her by her family members,  accordingly,   she   had   informed   the   police.   In   the  hospital, no history was given to the doctor by her,  but it was given by the relatives. Further, she admits  Page 14 of 21 HC-NIC Page 14 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT that the accused namely, Kishorebhai had not come to  her   residence   nor   had   he   threated   her.   Due   to   the  dispute   between   two   families   this   complaint   was  lodged.   Prosecution   has   examined   doctor   Bharatbhai  Navinchandra Panchal PW­3, (Exh.14). This witness was  serving   as   a   Medical   Officer   at   Sir   T   Hospital   at  Bhavnagar on 27.07.2009. Victim was examined by this  witness at 10:35 a.m, as she was brought for physical  examination   by   Jesar   Police   Station.   The   victim  informed the doctor that she was brought in connection  with   a   crime   of   rape   and   that   she   was   attempted   to  rape by the accused. The mother who was accompanying  the   victim   informed   that   the   victim   was   mentally  retarded and also that she was unable to sit at the  age of one and a half year and unable to speak at the  age   of   five   years.   The   victim   was   in   a   position   to  speak her name and able to identify a wall clock but  she   was   unable   to   identify   the   colour   or   coins   of  different rupees. As per the opinion of this doctor,  the   victim   was   mentally   retarded.   This   doctor   has  issued   a   certificate   produced   vide   Exh.15.   Another  doctor   PW­4   Dr.   Bhanukumar   Shankarlal   Solanki,   was  examined   vide   (Exh.16),   as   he   was   serving   in   the  Page 15 of 21 HC-NIC Page 15 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT health   centre   as   Medical   Officer   at   Jesar.   On  21.7.2009, at about 18:30 p.m, the victim was brought  to   this   witness   for   her   physical   examination  accompanied   by   her   mother   Shantuben   Nanjibhai.  Necessary samples were collected by this witness and  were   handed   over   to   PSI   Jesar   by   issuing   a   Medical  Certificate at Exh.18. This witness has also examined  the   accused  and   issued   a  certificate   Exh.20.  As  per  the   opinion   of   this   doctor,   age   of   the   victim   was  between 17 to 20. Certificate issued by this witness  is  produced  vide    Exh.22.   In   the  cross  examination,  this witness has admitted that no history was given by  victim,   but   it   was   given   by   her   mother.   Victim   was  inquired by this witness, but no reply was given. At  this juncture, if we examine the essential ingredients  for   the   offence   under   Section   354   which   can   be  subscribed as under:

"4 Essentials of offence under Section 354 are:
                     (1)      That   the   assault   must   be   on   a 
                        women,
                     (2)      That   the   accused   must   have   used  
                        criminal force on her, and
                     (3)      That   the   criminal   force   must   have 
                        been   used   on   the   woman   intending 
                        thereby to outrage her modesty.
Act will amount to outraging of modesty if it is  such which  could   be   perceived   as   one   capable of shocking sense of  decency   of   a   woman. Modesty   of   a   woman   is   her   sex,   it   is   a Page 16 of 21 HC-NIC Page 16 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT virtuewhich   attaches   to   a   female   owing   to   her   sex. Modesty  is   quality   of   being   modest   and   in relation to woman, it is  womanly   propriety   of behaviour, scrupulous chastity of thought, speech  and conduct.
5 Scope and object: The   offence   of   outraging the modesty  is   committed   when   a   person assaults or uses criminal force  to   a   woman intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that   he   will   thereby   outrage   her   modesty.   To constitute an offence of indecent assault on  a  woman an intention to outrage her modesty must  be  present."        

10 Panch   witnesses   Hardevsinh   Ravubha   (Exh.26)   and  Mayabhai   Kadubhai   (Exh.28)   are   not   supporting   the  panchnama   (Exh.27)   regarding   panchnama   of   recovering  clothes of the accused and they have turned hostile by  the prosecution. Doctor Mehulbhai Tribhovandas Parmar  (Exh.31) has examined the victim girl on 27.07.2009.  He has opined that there was no external injury found  on the victim as well as hymen of the victim was found  to be intact. He has issued a Medical Certificate in  this regard vide Exh.32.

11 Kiritsinh   Hathubha   Zala,   Investigating   Officer  (Exh.35)   has   recorded   the   complaint   (Exh.11)   of   the  complainant as per her instructions, and thereafter,  started   the   investigation.   This   witness   has   also  recorded   the   statement   of   victim   on   22.07.2009,   in  Page 17 of 21 HC-NIC Page 17 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT which she has not stated that her clothes were removed  or   any   sexual   intercourse   was   made   on   her.   In   the  complaint lodged by the mother of the victim, she has  not stated that any rape was committed by the accused,  but,   it   transpires   from   the   complaint   that   as   the  victim   shouted   the   accused   immediately   left   the  residence of the complainant. Holding the victim girl,  dragging her in a room and putting his hands on her  breast and thereafter removing clothes of the victim,  all   these   things   were   written  by  the   complainant   as  informed   by   her   daughter.   As   per   the   opinion   of  Radiologist (Exh.22) age of the victim girl was found  approximately between 17 to 20 years. Medical evidence  is not supporting the case of the prosecution of the  rape   committed   by   the   accused   with   the   victim   or  whatever   the   statement   given   by   the   victim   in   her  testimony,   nor   it   is   stated   in   the   complaint   at  Exh.11. The hymen of victim was found to be intact as  per the opinion of the Medical Officer, and therefore,  there is no question of implicating the accused in an  offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. The learned  judge has found that there was an attempt to commit  rape   by   the   accused   with   the   victim.   As   regards  Page 18 of 21 HC-NIC Page 18 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT outraging   modesty   of   the   victim   girl   is   concerned,  medical   evidence   does   not   indicate   that   the   accused  has tried to force his penis inside the private part  of   the   girl   or   her   mouth.   This   statement   was   never  disclosed   by   the   complainant   in   her   complaint  (Exh.11), nor it is stated by the victim herself in  her statement before the police, but she has tried to  improve   her   version   before   the   Court   for   the   first  time, and therefore, it cannot be believed or relied  upon.   The   act   of   the   accused   holding   her   hand,  dragging the victim in a room and putting his hands on  her breast would certainly be an offence under Section  354   IPC   that   is   to   say   outraging   the   modesty.   But,  this   offence   committed   by   accused   do   not   amount   to  attempt   to   commit   rape   punishable   under   Section   376  r/w. Section 511 IPC, but it was under section 354.  The learned trial judge has not passed any reasons in  convicting   the   accused   under   Section   511   of   Indian  Penal Code. It is presumed that for reasons unknown,  the   accused   was   unable   to   complete   the   offence   of  committing rape on the victim. Therefore, this Court  is of the view that learned trial judge has rightly  convicted   the   accused   under   Section   354   IPC   as   the  Page 19 of 21 HC-NIC Page 19 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT accused has outraged the modesty of the victim girl.  But,   conviction   under   Section   511   IPC   would   not   be  maintainable in the eyes of law. Therefore, it should  be quashed and set aside. 

12 This Court has considered the submissions made by  the learned advocate Mr. B S Raiyani for the accused  and   that   the   accused   can   give   compensation   to   the  victim,   therefore,   this   Court   would   like   to   partly  allow   the   appeal   preferred   by   the   accused   i.e.  criminal appeal No. 855 of 2012 quashing and setting  aside  the   order   of   conviction  passed   by   the   learned  trial   judge   under   Section   511   IPC,   confirming   the  sentence imposed on him under Section 354 IPC. Under  Section   354   of   IPC,   if   the   offence   is   proved,   the  accused would be liable to be punished for not less  then 2 years, which may extend to 5 years and also be  liable for fine. In the present case, the accused is  punished for rigorous imprisonment for two years and  fine of Rs.3,000/­ only for the said offences. It is  the discretionary power vested with the Court to pass  an order for punishment, therefore, no interference is  required to be made by this Court in the punishment  Page 20 of 21 HC-NIC Page 20 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016 R/CR.A/1315/2012 CAV JUDGMENT granted to the accused. But this Court would like to  compensate the victim girl under Section 357(3) of the  Cr.P.C, who has suffered a loss by reason of the act  for which the accused has been sentenced.  13 For   the   foregoing   reasons,   Criminal   Appeal  preferred by the State of Gujarat i.e. Criminal Appeal  No.   1315   of   2012   consequently   stands   dismissed.  Criminal   Appeal   No.   855   of   2012   preferred   by   the  accused   is   hereby   partly   allowed   by   quashing   and  setting   aside   the   judgment   and   order   of   conviction  under Section 511 of IPC and the accused is directed  to pay an amount of               Rs. 1,00,000/­ (Rs. One  Lakh Only/­) to the victim within 30 days from passing  of   this   order   by   way   of   compensation   under   Section  357(3) of Cr.P.C to the victim girl.  

(ANANT S.DAVE, J.) (B.N. KARIA, J.) Bimal Page 21 of 21 HC-NIC Page 21 of 21 Created On Wed Sep 21 07:07:42 IST 2016