IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B. PARDIWALA, A.C. RAO, JJ.
RANJANBEN MAHESHBHAI VASAVA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 934, 1342 of 2018
Decided on : 12-03-2019
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 372 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376 and 506 (1) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 4 and 6 - Criminal case - It is the case of the prosecution that while the victim was playing with her friends, the accused took her to his house and locked the door from inside - Thereafter, the accused removed the clothes of the victim, and he too, took off his clothes - Accused applied some oil on the private part of the victim and, thereafter, raped the victim - Accused is also alleged to have threatened the victim by saying that if she would disclose to anyone, she would be thrown in the river - Held, Supreme Court had an occasion to deal with Section 222 of the Cr.P.C - Court came to the conclusion that when an accused is charged with a major offence and if the ingredients of major offence are not proved, the accused can be convicted for minor offence, if ingredients of minor offence are available - So, if it appears to the Court that Section 376 IPC is not applicable but a lesser offence under 376 read with 511 IPC is made out, the court is not prevented from taking recourse to and punishing the accused for the commission of such lesser offence - Attempt to commit rape is lesser offence than that of rape, and there is no bar of converting the act of the accused from Section 376 to Section 511 - Appeal allowed. (Paras 88, 89)
J. B. PARDIWALA, J.
1. As both the captioned appeals are against the selfsame judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
2. The Criminal Appeal No.1342 of 2018 is at the instance of the State of Gujarat, whereas the Criminal Appeal No.934 of 2018 has been filed by the original complainant (victim's mother) under section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
3. Both the appeals, referred to above, are directed against an order of acquittal dated 3rd May, 2018 passed by the Special & Addl. Sessions Judge, Bharuch in the Special POCSO Case No.45 of 2016. By the impugned judgment passed by the Special & Addl. Sessions Judge, Bharuch, the original accused came to be acquitted of having committed the offences punishable under sections 376 and 506 (1) of the IPC and sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short "POCSO").
4. Case of the prosecution
4.1 The prosecution case, which unfolded during the course of the trial is that on 14th June, 2016, the victim, a six year old girl, after returning home from her school, was playing outside her house along with her friends. The accused is also residing nearby the house of the victim. It is the case of the prosecution that while the victim was playing with her friends, the accused took her to his house and locked the door from inside. Thereafter, the accused removed the clothes of the victim, and he too, took off his clothes. The accused applied some oil on the private part of the victim and, thereafter, raped the victim. The accused is also alleged to have threatened the victim by saying that if she would disclose to anyone, she would be thrown in the river. The victim, thereafter, somehow, managed to escape from the clutches of the accused and straightway went running to her house and disclosed about the incident to her mother, namely, Ranjanben Maheshbhai Vasava. The mother, on learning about the incident from her minor daughter, examined the private part of the victim and noticed that there was swelling and redness. Thereafter, the mother of the victim immediately confronted the accused as regards the incident. The accused denied before the mother of the victim having indulged in any such act as complained by the victim. The father of the victim, on his return to home from his job, went straight in search of the accused. However, the accused was not found. As the victim was unable to pass urine, the parents, along with the victim, went straight to the police station, and at the police station, the mother lodged the first information report for the offences enumerated above.
4.2 On the first information report being lodged by the P.W. 12, i.e, the mother of the victim, the investigation had commenced. The victim was taken to the General Hospital, Bharuch with a police Yadi for the medical examination.
4.3 The medical certificate of the victim issued by the Doctor is at Exh.37. The accused was arrested on the next day, i.e, on 15th June, 2016 and he too was taken to the Civil Hospital, Bharuch with a police Yadi for medical examination. The accused, while narrating the history before the Doctor, stated that on 14th June, 2016, he was playing with the victim in the evening between 3:00 and 4:00 O' clock and, thereafter, he brought the victim at his house and started playing with her after closing the door. The medical certificate of the medical examination of the accused is at Exh.40. The victim, thereafter, was taken to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bharuch for the recording of her statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The victim was put forward before the 5th Addl. JMFC, Bharuch, who, in turn, recorded the statement of the victim under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The Panchnama of the place of occurrence,
Abhayanand Mishra Vs. State of Bihar
Aman Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Haryana
Bharvada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Chandrappa and Other Vs. State of Karnataka
Chimanbhai Ukabhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Dagdu and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Dattu Ramrao Sakhare Vs. State of Maharashtra
Dr. S.P. Kohli, Civil Surgeon, Ferozepur Vs. High Court of Punjab and Haryana thr. Registrar
K. Venkateshwarlu Vs. State of A. P.
Karnel Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Koli Trikam Jivraj and Another Vs. The State of Gujarat
Koppula Venkat Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Madan Gopal Kakkad Vs. Naval Dubey
Madan Lal Vs. State of J. & K.
Mohammad Giasuddin Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Munna Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Narender Kumar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
Pandharinath Vs. State of Maharashtra
Radhakrishna Nagesh Vs. State of A. P.
Rahim Beg & Mahadeo Vs. The State of U. P.
Raja Ram Yadav Vs. State of Bihar
Rakeshkumar alias Babli Vs. State of Haryana
Rameshwar Kalyan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Santa Singh Vs. The State of Punjab
Santosh Kumar Vs. State of M. P.
Sardul Singh Vs. State of Haryana
Satyabhan Kishore & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar
Shaikh Zakir Vs. State of Bihar
Shamnsaheb M. Multtani Vs. State of Karnataka
Shankar Kerba Jadhav and Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ramesh & Anr.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Chanderprakash Kewalchand Jain
State of Maharashtra Vs. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi
State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh
State of U. P. Vs. Ashok Dixit
State of U. P. Vs. Krishna Gopal
State of U. P. Vs. M. K. Anthony
Suryanarayana Vs. State of Karnataka
Tameezuddin alias Tammu Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
Tarjubhai Narsingbhai Rathwa Vs. State of Gujarat
Tarkeshwar Sahu Vs. State of Bihar
Tarlok Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Tarun Bora alias Alok Hazarika Vs. State of Assam
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.