IMPORTANT POINT
The appellate court must respect the trial court's acquittal unless there is a clear error, reaffirming the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

1. Present Appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C." for short) is filed by the appellant-State of Gujarat against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 27.12.2004 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Gandhinagar (hereinafter be referred to as "trial Court") in Sessions Case No.71 of 2004, whereby the trial Court has acquitted the respondents herein - original accused persons from the charges levelled against them under Sections 366, 368, 493, 498, 384 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short).

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant had married with one Bhikhiben Shankarbhai Chaudhari before 20 years and by the said wedlock Bhikhiben delivered two children namely Nilam and Jemini.

2.1 It is further case of the prosecution that the brother of the complainant namely Babubhai was residing in Bombay with his family. Babubhai had married with sister of the Bhikhiben. Since there was a dispute between Babubhai and his wife, the Babubhai had given divorce and because of that dispute, the brother of Bhikhiben i.e. respondent No.1 came to the house of the complainant along with other persons named in the FIR and had discussed about the divorce of his brother and the sister of the respondent No.1 and it was objected by the family members, therefore, respondent No.1 had administered threats to get divorce and thereafter, on the day of incident i.e. 4.5.2003, the complainant went to Mehsana and while returning from Mehsana at night hours, he inquired to his children about the whereabouts of Bhikhiben-the mother of the children and in turn, the children have informed present respondent No.1 along with respondent No.4- Chaudhari Vinubhai Ramsangbhai along with other came to his house in Jeep Car and they had taken away the wife of the complainant i.e. Bhikhiben along with them and also conveyed the message that they will send her back on next day.

2.2 At that time, the wife of the complainant also carried two briefcases containing cloths and golden ornaments. Thereafter, the complainant has made inquiry at village Pamor where the in-laws of the complainant were residing. However, upon inquiry he got information that his wife was not there at village Pamor and then again he has telephoned on second day but the whereabouts of his wife was not found. It is further case of the prosecution that the complainant has also made inquiry with his relative but his wife Bhikhiben was not traced out and thereafter, on 10.5.2003 the complainant came to know that his brother’s wife has been sold at village Dagavadiya and therefore, he is apprehending that his wife was also harassed by the respondent with a view to get her married with other person and in absence of the complainant, with an intention of marriage of wife of the complainant at other place, the wife of the complainant namely Bhikhiben was kidnapped or wrongly confined by the accused persons.

2.3 It is further case of the complainant that the informant went to the concerned police station but they have refused to record the FIR therefore, the complainant constrained to file private complaint before the concerned Judicial Magistrate, Mansa. The learned Magistrate initiated an inquiry under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C., and investigation was commenced for the offence of abduction and other allegations made in the said complaint.

2.4 The Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of witnesses and drawn necessary panchnama and on found sufficient evidence against the respondent accused, an offence was registered and the chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mansa.

2.5 The chargesheet was filed for the alleged offence and as the offence is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, therefore after completing the formalities and procedure under Section 209 of Cr.P.C., the case was committed in the court of sessions and the same was registered as Session Case