Gujarat High Court
Manishaben Khushalbhai Rathod vs Parulben Rameshbhai Parmar on 27 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY
SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 1020 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
MANISHABEN KHUSHALBHAI RATHOD
Versus
PARULBEN RAMESHBHAI PARMAR & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIJAY H NANGESH(3981) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR. HARDIK SONI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 27/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. With consent of learned advocates for both the parties, the present application is taken for final hearing.
2. By way of present revision application preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for short) challenges the order dated 6.8.2022 passed by Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur (hereinafter referred to 'the Sessions Court' for short), below Exh-4 in Sessions Case No. 231 of 2021, whereby the learned Sessions Court allowed the application of the respondent and discharged the respondent-accused from the offence punishable under Section 376(1), 406 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present revision application is that the applicant is the original complainant who registered the First Information Report against accused Vijaybhai Rameshbhai Parmar as the main accused. The present respondent Nos. 1 to 4 (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents' for short) are arraigned as accused in the same First Information Report being C.R. No. 11192015210547 of 2021 on 11.8.2021 filed before Changodar Police Station, District: Ahmedabad as abettor to the crime. The main allegations of the offence is against the accused Vijaybhai Rameshbhai Parmar, wherein it is alleged that the said accused had committed the offence punishable under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code. Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined
4. Pursuant to the registration of the First Information Report, charge-sheet came to be filed and subsequent to the filing of the charge-sheet, case came to be committed before the learned Sessions Court being Sessions Case No.231 of 2021. The respondents preferred an application below Exh-4 before the learned Sessions Court for discharge from the charges levelled against them. The application came to be preferred under Section 227 of the Code mainly on the ground that there is no role of the respondent in the offence which can be borne out from charge-sheet. It was further averred by the respondent that the complainant- present applicant had decided to get married with the accused Vijaybhai Rameshbhai Parmar. Thereafter, the alleged offence has been committed which is not at the place of the respondent. There is no role of the respondent in the alleged offence. Therefore, they were liable to be discharged.
5. Pursuant to discharge application under Section 227 of the Code preferred by the respondent below Exh-4, the applicant appeared before the learned Sessions Court and Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined filed objections below Exh-9 primarily contending that there is documentary evidence on record qua the role of respondents and the same needs to be tested before the learned Sessions Court prior to deciding the discharge application. In wake of such submissions, it was prayed to reject the discharge application.
6. The learned Sessions Court, after hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, was pleased to allow the discharge application vide order dated 6.8.2022 and discharged the respondents, mainly on the ground that accused No.1 i.e. Vijaybhai refused to marry with the complainant i.e. the applicant herein and in the interregnum had committed the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. There was no material against the respondent and, therefore, by way of impugned order, the respondents came to be discharged.
7. Being aggrieved by the order dated 6.8.2022, the present revision application is sought.
8. The Court has heard Mr. Vijay Nangesh, learned Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined advocate for the applicant and Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent. Though notice was served, no one appeared for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
9. It is submitted by Mr. Vijay Nangesh, learned advocate for the applicant that the impugned order is passed mainly on the ground that there is no prima-facie case made out against the respondents who happen to be the relatives of the original accused i.e. Vijaybhai. Respondent No.1 is the mother of Vijaybhai, whereas respondent No.2 is brother of the respondent and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are other relatives of Vijaybhai, who is the original accused. It was further submitted by Mr. Nangesh that pursuant to the interim relief granted to the present respondent, the case being Sessions Case No. 231 of 2021 came to be conducted qua Vijaybhai and the same came to be disposed of by way judgment and order dated 15.5.2024, whereby accused No.1 Vijaybhai came to be convicted for the offence under Section 376. However, as far as the role of the present applicant is concerned, Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined the same can be said from the fact that during the love affair, the applicant had constantly met the respondents being relatives of original accused Vijaybhai. It was further contended by Mr. Nangesh, pursuant to the incident of 376 the applicant had tried to commit suicide by taking pills and there was a dying declaration recorded by Executive Magistrate on 11.8. 2022, wherein she has named the respondents. It was further contended that though it may be true that the main case of the Section 376 is against the accused No.1, but the present respondents are abettor and, therefore, they are liable to be punished with the main offence. In the First Information Report, there is a detailed role of each and every respondent and, therefore, the respondents ought not to have been discharged where it is well settled law that if there is only case beyond reasonable doubt then only the accused can be discharged. In the present case, there are documentary and prima-facie evidence against the respondents and, therefore, the impugned order is bad in law. In wake of such submissions, Mr. Nangesh has prayed Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined to consider the case of the applicant and grant the prayers as prayed in the present revision application.
10. Having heard Mr. Nangesh, learned advocate for the applicant as well as material placed on record and on perusal of the First Information Report, it is not in dispute that the only allegations against the present respondents as being abettor to the main accused i.e. Vijaybhai. If the charge-sheet is perused carefully and the statement of present applicants recorded on 11.8.2021 is considered carefully, then it comes on record that pursuant to the relationship of the present applicant and Vijaybhai, it can be seen that certain objections were raised by respondent No.1. Pursuant thereto, the main accused i.e. Vijaybhai had left the house of the respondent and had gone with the applicant at her house. It was at that place the allegation of 376(1) are made against the applicant i.e. Vijaybhai. From the statement of the applicant herself, it can be inferred that there is no role played by the present respondent even as a abettor to the incidents in question. In wake of statement itself as well as material on record, Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1020/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/02/2025 undefined no infirmity can be drawn by the order passed by the learned Sessions Court. That being the case, the present application is devoid of merits and no infirmity can be passed to the order passed by the learned Sessions Court.
Resultantly, the present revision application is dismissed as devoid of merits. Rule is discharged.
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J) SAJ GEORGE Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Wed Mar 12 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 14 23:00:59 IST 2025