Gujarat High Court
Rabari Vishnubhai Karshanbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 4 September, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1007/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1007 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
RABARI VISHNUBHAI KARSHANBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SONAL D VYAS(999) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN KUMAR RAVAL APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 04/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Learned advocate Ms. Sonal D.Vyas for the appellant submitted that the appeal has been filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), to challenge the judgment of conviction dated 31.01.2008 under Section 363 of I.P.C., which was passed against only one accused out of nine, who Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Sep 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 09 01:05:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1007/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined all faced the trial under Sections 363, 366 and 365 read with Section 114 of I.P.C. 1.1 The sentence against the present appellant
- Rabari Vishnubhai Karshanbhai was of three years simple imprisonment and Rs.1500/- fine and in default of payment of fine to suffer further three months simple imprisonment.
2. Learned advocate Ms. Vyas submitted that the learned Judge while passing the order itself has noted that the accused had married the victim and out of the wedlock, they are having a child. Ms. Vyas submitted that it was not a case of rape and all the family members were acquitted. Further stated that the age of the victim girl could not be proved at the time of offence, alleged to be on 02.08.2006 and the judgment of the learned Judge was on 31.01.2008, and prior to that the accused and the victim girl had performed the marriage on 27.01.2007, and at present they are Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Sep 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 09 01:05:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1007/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined having two children aged about 18 years and 10 years.
2.1 Advocate Ms. Vyas has referred to the affidavit of wife of the appellant, who was noted to be victim at the relevant time. Ms. Vyas submitted that the age of the victim at that time could not be proved, however, it was urged that at the time of the incident, the victim was aged about 18 years.
3. Learned APP Mr. Rohan Kumar Raval submitted that though the victim has filed affidavit, but the offence is not compoundable and therefore, submitted that the affidavit should not be considered for acquittal of the accused.
4. Learned Judge has convicted the present appellant under Section 363 of I.P.C. finding that there was kidnapping of the victim girl. However, the conviction did not follow for Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Sep 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 09 01:05:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1007/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined Section 365 I.P.C. of any wrongful confinement. The observation of the learned Judge noted the date of birth and considered the victim girl below 18 years. However, the fact, as could be noted that the victim on her own volition had joined the company of the accused, as noted in the case of S. Varadrajan Vs. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942, wherein it is observed that, where the facts indicate that a girl left her father's protection, knowing and having capacity to know the full import of what she was doing and voluntarily joined the accused, the offence of kidnapping cannot be said to have been made out.
5. The facts of the case suggest that other eight accused were acquitted and the victim girl on her own volition had joined the company of the accused. The affidavit of the victim girl, which is supported by copy of Aadhar Card, who is now aged about 36 years, notes that they had legally married on 27.01.2007, and out of the matrimonial Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Sep 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 09 01:05:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1007/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined relation are having two children.
6. In view of the proposition of law, as laid down in the case of S. Varadrajan (supra), the present appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.01.2008 is set aside. The accused is acquitted. Bail bond stands discharged. Record and Proceedings be sent back to the concerned Court forthwith.
(GITA GOPI,J) Pankaj/23 Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Sep 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 09 01:05:30 IST 2025