Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25.02.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No.46 of 2001. The respondent-accused, Jesangji Arjanji Thakor, was acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 376, 366, 363, 443 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution case was that on 14.02.1999 at about 6:00 p.m., the prosecutrix went outside the village to answer nature's call, where the accused forcefully approached her, threatened her, kidnapped her, and took her away for sexual intercourse without her consent. It was further alleged that the accused threatened to kill her and kept her in illegal confinement for approximately three months, repeatedly committing rape. On 15.02.1999, the father of the prosecutrix lodged a complaint at Dabhoda Police Station. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. Charges were framed at Exhibit-3, and the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 6 witnesses and produced documentary evidence including panchnamas, medical certificates, and FSL reports. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution evidence insufficient. The State appealed. The High Court heard the appeal and examined the evidence. The court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony was inconsistent and contradictory, and there was no corroboration from medical evidence or FSL report. The FIR was lodged after a delay of one day without satisfactory explanation. The medical evidence did not support the allegation of rape as no injuries were found. The FSL report also did not connect the accused. The court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and the appeal was dismissed, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of Interference - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal can interfere only if the findings of the trial court are perverse or unreasonable. The presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened by acquittal. (Paras 4-5) B) Criminal Law - Rape - Corroboration of Prosecutrix Testimony - The testimony of the prosecutrix must be reliable and trustworthy. In the present case, the prosecutrix's evidence was inconsistent and contradictory, and there was no corroboration from medical evidence or FSL report. (Paras 6-8) C) Criminal Law - Delay in FIR - Effect on Prosecution Case - The FIR was lodged after a delay of one day without satisfactory explanation. The delay creates doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case. (Para 7) D) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Absence of Injuries - The medical evidence did not support the allegation of rape as no injuries were found on the prosecutrix or the accused. The FSL report also did not connect the accused with the offence. (Para 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court was perverse and liable to be set aside in appeal under Section 378 CrPC.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 25.02.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No.46 of 2001 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
- presumption of innocence
- corroboration of prosecutrix testimony
- delay in FIR
- medical evidence
- FSL report
