Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Chandraprakash Bhagvatiprasad on 24 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 916 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
===============================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
===============================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
CHANDRAPRAKASH BHAGVATIPRASAD
===============================================================
Appearance:
MS CM SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
===============================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 24/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant - State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the judgment and the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court') in Sessions Case No. 14 of 2008 dated 16.03.2012, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent - accused from the offences Page 1 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC'). The respondent is hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' as he stood in the rank and file in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
2.1. On 01.11,2007 before 14:30hours, the accused abducted the minor daughter of the complainant and enticed her on the phone to get married and abducted her from the custody of the complainant, who was her father and took her to village Pindrai, Taluka Dhimarkheda, District Katani, State of Madhya Pradesh, in the Jabalpur bus and kept the victim illegally at his place till 24.11.2007. The complainant filed the complaint before the Gandhigram Police Station under sections 363 and 366 of the IPC, which came to be registered at Gandhigram Police Station I-.C.R.No. 415 of 2007.
2.2. After registration of the FIR, the investigation was carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer and after having Page 2 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined sufficient material against the accused, the chargesheet came to be filed before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions therefore, after completion of process under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the Sessions Court and the same was registered as Sessions Case No. 14 of 2008.
2.3. The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code. A charge was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.6 and the statement of the accused was recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record. The prosecution has examined 6 witnesses and has produced 11 documentary evidence in support of the case.
2.4 After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned APP at Exh.55, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code were recorded. After hearing the arguments of the Page 3 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined learned APP and learned advocate for the accused and after perusing the documents on record, the learned Trial Court, by the impugned judgment and order, has acquitted the accused for the offence.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of natural justice. The learned Trial Court has erred in evaluating the evidence on record of the case and without appreciating the evidence in its real perspective. That there are directed and indirect evidence connecting the respondents with crime produced in this Court, in spite of the fact, the learned Trial Court, without appreciating oral as well as documentary evidence on record of the case, straight way arrived at conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The learned Trial Court has erred in not considering the evidence of the complainant and other witnesses which was fully supported Page 4 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined the case of the prosecution. The learned Trial Court has passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is without giving any cogent and convincing reasons, illegal, invalid and improper, and therefore, the same requires to be quashed and set aside.
4. Heard learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the appellant - State. Though served, the respondent no. 1 has not appear either in person or has not engaged a lawyer. Perused the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and have re-appreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the appellant - State has taken this Court through the entire evidence produced by the prosecution and has vehemently argued that the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence properly and the prosecution has produced cogent evidence to prove the case and has successfully proved the case against the accused but the learned Trial Court has not considered the same and has acquitted the accused. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Judge is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of justice. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Page 5 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined Judge is based on inferences, not warranted by facts of the case and also on presumptions, not permitted by law. Learned APP has urged this Court to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and to find the accused guilty for the said offence and impose maximum sentence on the accused.
6. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the Apex Court in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu Vs. State of M.P. (2006) 10 SCC 313 :
AIR 2006 SC 831, this Court stated; "While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power exercised while hearing appeals against conviction. In both types of appeals, the power exists to review the entire evidence. However, one significant difference is that an order of acquittal will not be interfered with, by an appellate court, where the judgment of the trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the trial court merely because a different view is possible. The appellate court will also bear in mind that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and the accused is entitled to get the benefit of any doubt. Further if it decides to interfere, it should assign reasons for differing with the decision of the trial court". (emphasis supplied) ........ From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge;] Page 6 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined (1) An appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of ac- quittal is founded;
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law; (3) Various expressions, such as, 'substantial and compelling reasons', 'good and sufficient grounds', 'very strong cir-
cumstances', 'distorted conclusions', 'glaring mistakes', etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an ap- pellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phrase- ologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language' to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate Court to in- terfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the Court to review the evidence and to come to its own con- clusion.
(4) An appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence avail- able to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquit- tal, the presumption of his innocence is further rein- forced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court. (5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.
7. It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after appreciation of the evidence produced before the learned Trial Court, it appears that there are some manifest illegality or Page 7 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined perversity which could not have been possibly arrived at by the Court. It is also a settled principle that there is no embargo on the Appellate Court to review the evidence but, generally the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with as the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by the order of acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case of the prosecution i.e.
(i) guilt of the accused and (ii) his innocence, the view, which is in favour of the accused, should be adopted, and if the trial Court has taken the view in favour of the accused, the Appellate Court should not disturb the findings of the acquittal. The Appellate Court can interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal only when there are compelling and substantial reasons and the order is clearly unreasonable and where the Appellate Court comes to conclusion that based on the evidence, the conviction is a must.
8. PW-1 Bhimabhai Vibhabhai at Exh.25 and the witness is the complainant, who has stated that on 01.11.2007, he was at his shop in the afternoon and he went home and found that his minor Page 8 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined daughter aged 16 years and 10 months was not present. His other children were present and on inquiring from them, he was told that she had gone for tuitions. That on the next day, he informed the police and inquired at the house of Gangdasbhai and Gangdasbhai told him on the mobile that Deepakbhai had called from Madhya Pradesh and the phones were made to Shersinh, who was working as a security person at 'Dhanraj Complex'. On inquiry, he was told that Chandraprakash was asking him as to whether the photographs of him and the victim had come in the newspapers. The complaint was filed on 16.11.2007 against the accused, which is produced at Exh.26. In the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that he does not know with whom his daughter had eloped and he did not have any conversation with Deepakbhai about the person with whom his daughter had eloped. He came to know from Shersinh, the security person that his daughter had gone with the accused and the birth of his daughter was registered at Rajkot Municipal Corporation. That when his daughter had returned, he was handed over her custody and she was married in their community.
Page 9 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined 8.1. The victim i.e. the minor daughter of the complainant, has been examined as PW-3 at Exh.35 and she has stated that she knew the accused and was talking to him and he had taken her to some place, but she does not know the name of the place. That she returned to Rajkot and informed the police. During the cross- examination, the victim has admitted that she is at her father's place since she returned to Rajkot and while she was at the accused place at his home town, she used to talk to her parents on the mobile phone and they were aware that she was at Madhya Pradesh. That after the incident, she is married in her community and has one daughter.
8.2. PW-2 Rakeshbhai Maganbhai Khunt examined at Exh.27 is the panch witness of the arrest panchnama produced at Exh.28, but the witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile. 8.3. PW-4 Dr. Hansaben Laljibhai Kachhadiya examined at Exh.37 is the Medical Officer, who has conducted the medical examination of the victim and the witness has stated that on 25.11.2007, the victim was brought to her for medical examination Page 10 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined at about 3.30pm and in the history, the victim had stated that she was in love with the accused for the past 3½ months and of her own free will, she had gone to Jabalpur with the accused on 01.11.2007 and stayed with him. On 19.11.2007, of her own free will, she had got married in the Court at Katani District, and thereafter, on 20.11.2007, with her consent, she had physical relations with the accused. The witness has narrated in detail that she had examined the victim and has produced the medical certificate of the victim at Exh.39. During the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that no Ossification Test was done and there were no marks of injury on the private parts of the victim. The witness has stated that in the police yadi, there was no mention about any age-related test to be conducted and the victim was physically fully developed.
8.4. PW5 Gangdasbhai Popatbhai Jograna examined at Exh.41 has stated that the complainant, Bhimbbhai Vibhabhai Jograna had told him on the phone that his daughter has gone away and they looked for the daughter and he is known to the accused. The complainant had told him that his daughter had gone Page 11 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined towards Madhya Pradesh and they had informed the Gandhigram Police Station later on. In the cross examination, the witness has stated that the victim had gone off from her home and as she was not found, the complaint had been filed.
8.5. PW-6 Mithabhai Kalidas Parmar examined at Exh.43 is the Investigating Officer, who has narrated in detail the procedure undertaken by him during investigation. In the cross-examination, the witness has stated that the victim had filed an affidavit at the time of her marriage at Katani District in Madhya Pradesh and had shown her age to be 19 years, but he had not recorded the statement of the advocate or the notary, before whom, the affidavit was sworn. That no Ossification Test was done and he did not recover the birth certificate of the victim, but has produced the School Leaving Certificate of the victim at Exh.45.
9. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, there is no evidence regarding the age of the victim on record and the evidence that has emerged is that when the complainant came to know from Shersinh, who was working as a security person at 'Dhanraj Complex' that his daughter and the Page 12 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined accused had gone towards Madhya Pradesh, but the said Shersinh has not been examined before the learned Trial Court. In the evidence, particularly in the history given before the Medical Officer, it has come on record that the victim had gone willingly with the accused and even in her statement before the investigating officer, she has stated that she was in love with the accused and had gone with him of her own free will. The affidavit of marriage, which was sworn by the victim at the time of her marriage with the accused at Katni District, has not come on record, but in the evidence of the Investigating Officer, it has come on record that at that time, she had stated her age to be 19 years. In the entire evidence, there is no iota of evidence that the accused had, in any way, enticed the victim or had taken her to Madhya Pradesh and the learned Trial Court has discussed all the evidence in detail.
10. In view of the above, the learned trial Court has appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective and there does not appear to be any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The learned Trial Court has Page 13 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/916/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined appreciated all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the accused of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned trial Court and this Court is in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order and the present appeal is devoid of merits and resultantly, the same is dismissed.
11. The judgment and the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 14 of 2008 dated 16.03.2012 is hereby confirmed.
12. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI.....
Page 14 of 14 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 01:08:00 IST 2025