The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing that the presumption of innocence remains unless clear evidence of guilt is established, and it should not interfere with the trial court's findings if two reasonable conclusions are possible.

JUDGMENT :

BIREN VAISHNAV, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palanpur, acquitting the respondents in Sessions Case No.62 of 1996 on 13.06.1997. The respondent was accused for the offenses punishable under Sections 376, 342, 323, 427, 201 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Brief case of the prosecution case is as under:

2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that on 02/02/1996 the prosecutrix would take divorce from the respondent accused person, had gone to the house of the respondent accused i.e. her ex-husband for taking her belongings and at that relevant point of time, the accused person had assaulted the prosecutrix, torn her clothes after removing the same and committed the offence of rape on her by saying that though the respondent accused had given divorce to the prosecutrix, however, still there are husband and wife. After committing the offence of rape, the clothes of the prosecutrix were burnt by the respondent accused person and the prosecutrix was kept in room by locking the room and she was threatened that if she conveys this to anybody, she'll have to face dire consequences. It is the say of the prosecutrix that on 04/02/1996, she somehow got free from the said room and thereafter she had filed the complaint and accordingly the same was registered as FIR. And thereby, the respondent accused committed alleged offence.

2.2 Details of investigation are that in pursuance of the above allegation of the first informant, First Information Report was lodged with the Palanpur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 342, 323, 427, 201 & 506 (2) of Indian Penal Code, 1860, vide I-CR No. 0 of 1996. Investigating Agency during the course of investigation recorded statements of the witnesses, drawn various panchnamas, the prosecutrix was taken for medical examination for the purpose of proving of the offence. After having found sufficient material against the Respondents - Accused, charge sheet came to be filed in the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tharad. It is to be noted that initially the complaint was filed at patentable station 0" Number and thereafter the same was sent for competent jurisdiction and politician i.e. Tharad police station for the purpose of investigation. As the said Court, lacks jurisdiction to try the offence as alleged offences being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, it committed the case to the Sessions Court, Palanpur, as provided under Section 209 of the Code, which was numbered as Sessions Case No.62 of 1996.

2.3 Details of Trial Proceedings suggests that upon committal of the case to the Hon'ble Sessions Court, Palanpur, the Ld. Sessions Judge, framed charges vide Exh.3 against the Respondents Accused for the aforesaid offences. The Respondents - Accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. They were tried for the said offences and in order to bring home charge, the prosecution has examined 14 prosecution witnesses and also produced various documentary evidence before the Ld. Trial Court. The details of the evidence led by the prosecution are reproduced in the tabular form hereunder:

Oral Evidence