IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, including establishing the victim's age and non-consent; failure to do so justifies acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT)

1. The present Acquittal Appeal has been filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 20.12.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court-1), Ahmedabad City (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court”) in Session Case No.01 of 2002. The State is in appeal before us. By way of the impugned judgment and order, the accused has been acquitted of all the charges levelled against him under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The short facts of the prosecution case read as under:-

2.1 The prosecution alleges that on 31.12.2000/2001 at around 2:15, the accused lured and kidnapped the minor victim creating an impression to marry and had taken her away to Kasandra Village at place of one Manubhai and raped her, resulting into an offence punishable under Section 363, 366 and 376 of the IPC.

2.2 Thereafter, the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged on 02.01.2001 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 of 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2.3 The Investigating Officer recorded witness statements, prepared panchnamas including panchnama of scene of offence, panchnama of clothes, scene of offence, etc. Upon completion of the investigation and upon committal of the case to the Trial Court, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, has found so many contradictions in the version of witnesses, who have been examined by the prosecution and the story enumerated by complainant as well as other supporting witnesses, are not found trust worthy. Thus, considering the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court, has acquitted all the accused from all the charges.

3. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Utkarsh Sharma at length, who has taken us through various oral evidence as well as documentary evidence, which are on record. We have independently examined and appreciated evidence of witnesses.

4. Learned Trial Judge, framed charges vide Exh. 2 against the Respondent - Accused for the aforesaid offences. The Respondent - Accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. He was tried for the said offences and in order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined 10 prosecution witnesses and also produced 9 documentary evidence, which are as under:-

Documentary Evidences

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Utkarsh Sharma would submit that the findings of acquittal are contrary t