SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Guj) 135

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.J. DESAI, A.S. SUPEHIA, JJ.
State of Gujarat - Appellant
Versus
Raju @ Rajeshbhai Ishwarbhai Vaghri - Respondent
R/Criminal Confirmation Case No. 3 of 2020
Decided On : 23-03-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. Krina Calla, A.P.P.
For the Respondent: HCLS Committee, Mr. Nirad D. Buch.

Point of Law: though the appellant is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, since there was no requisite intent as would bring the case under any of the first three clauses of Section 300 IPC, the offence in the present case does not deserve death penalty

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 376A, 376(2) (f), 300 , 377, 363, 364, 397 and 201 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - sections 4 and 6 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 366 and 368 - Murder and rape of minor girl - Sexual assault on a child - Sold the gold and silver ornaments - Appeal against conviction - Prosecution in nutshell is complainant namely, mother of victim, who is examined had lodged complaint at Khambat Rural Police Station inter alia stating morning her daughter was kidnapped by unknown person - Charges framed at accused had committed rape and sodomy murdered four year old daughter of complainant - It was also established he had also sold the gold and silver ornaments, worn by victim –

Finding of the Court:

Looking to age of victim and the sexual assault by the accused, it can be fairly presumed that he must have known consequences of sexual assault on a child of four years old - Evidence recommends instant act - Accused comes within aforesaid parameters observations made by Apex Court conviction which is recorded with the aid of clause “fourthly” of section 300 of IPC, would rarely attract the death sentence - Wake of the given facts narrate the manner in which murder and rape of minor girl - medical evidence, it can be securely acknowledged victim has succumbed to injuries caused on account of the accused superimposing himself on the victim while doing act of rape and sodomy - Victim coupled with the cause of death and in light of the parameters suggested in clause ‘fourthly’ of section 300 of the IPC –

Result: Ordered Accordingly

JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. Vide judgement and order dated 29.09.2020 passed by Special Judge POCSO and Additional Sessions Judge, Anand in Special (POCSO) Case No.20 of 2017, accused – Raju @ Rajeshbhai Ishwarbhai Vaghri, has been convicted for the offences punishable under sections 302, 376A, 377, 363, 364, 397 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “the IPC”) and under sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short “the POCSO”). He has been sentenced for death and fine for the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC, sentenced for life imprisonment and fine for the offence punishable under section 376A of the IPC, sentenced for 10 years imprisonment and fine for the offence punishable under section 377 of the IPC, sentenced for 05 years imprisonment and fine for the offence punishable under section 363 of the IPC, sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under section 364 of the IPC, sentenced for 07 years imprisonment for the offence punishable under section 397 of the IPC and sentenced for 05 years imprisonment for the offence punishable under section 201 of the IPC. Accordingly, the judgement and order convicting and sentencing the accused has been referred to this Court by Special Judge (POCSO) & Additional Sessions Judge, Anand by a communication dated 26.10.2020 for confirmation of death sentence under section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The opponent – accused has not preferred any appeal against his conviction and sentence. However, the provisions of section 368 of the Cr.P.C. empower the High Court to confirm the sentence, or pass any other sentences warranted by law.

By the order dated 25.01.2021 this Court had appointed learned advocate Mr. Nirad D. Buch to represent the respondent – convict.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that the complainant namely, Sarojben Dineshbhai Chhotabhai Talpada, the mother of the victim, who is examined as PW-2 had lodged the complaint on 15.02.2017 (Exh.24) at Khambat Rural Police Station inter alia stating that at around 9 O'clock in the morning of 14.02.2017 at Village Finav, Valmik Vas, Taluka Tarapur, Dist. Anand her daughter was kidnapped by unknown person. As per the charges framed at Exh.6, the accused had committed rape and sodomy and thereafter, murdered the four year old daughter of the complainant. It was also established that he had also sold the gold and silver ornaments, worn by the victim.

3. The investigation was initially undertaken by Police Sub-Inspector, V.B. Chaudhry for the offence under section 363 of the IPC but subsequently since the offence was found to be serious in nature that of murder and rape, the same was handed over to the In-charge Circle Police Inspector, Priteshkumar Jayantibhai Patel (PW-24). The accused was arrested on 15.02.2017 at 04:30 p.m., which can be ascertained from the panchnama at Exh.33.

4. An F.I.R. was registered as C.R.No.I-5 of 2017 at Khambhat (Rural) Police Station, Anand for the aforenoted offences. The charges were framed at Exh.6 and it was registered as Special POCSO Case No.20 of 2017 on 13.04.2017 before the Sessions Court, Anand. The prosecution has examined 24 witnesses and also adduced documentary evidence in order to bring home the charges against the accused. After hearing the parties on the point of quantum of sentence, the Sessions Court has found the accused guilty under various offences and awarded the capital punishment directing the accused – Raju @ Rajeshbhai Ishwarbhai Vaghri to be hanged till death, subject to confirmation of the High Court of Gujarat. As noted hereinabove, the accused has not preferred any appeal against his conviction.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Krina Calla, while referring to the various depositions of the witnesses as well as the medical ev

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top