Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Samsher Abubkkar Khalifa on 17 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1551 of 2021
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SAMSHER ABUBKKAR KHALIFA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 17/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH
ROY)
1. Assailing the judgment dated 24/12/2019 of the learned
Principal Sessions Court, Navsari passed in Sessions Case
No.7 of 2016 on the file of the said court whereby respondent
nos.1 and 2 who are accused nos.1 and 2 in the said case
(hereinafter referred to as A-1 and A-2) were acquitted for the
charges levelled against them, the instant appeal has been
preferred by the State.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the prosecution case are as
follows:
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
2.1. The victim woman who is examined as PW-1 (herein
after referred to as 'PW-1') is a married woman aged about 31
years. She got a son aged about 11 years. She got
acquaintance with accused no.1 in the process of performing
some rituals. It is stated that on 27/06/2015, A-1 has taken
PW-1 to Anukul Hotel, Bilimora and has booked a room and
after taking her into the room that he has mixed some tablets
which are sedative in nature in the water in a glass and made
her to drink the said water. After PW-1 has consumed the
said water, she lost her consciousness. It is stated that
thereafter he has sexual intercourse with her while she was in
unconscious state of mind and thereby committed rape on her
without her consent.
2.2. After PW-1 regained her consciousness, she went back
to her house and thereafter she lodged a report with the
police after two months from the date of offence i.e. on
19/08/2015 stating that the accused has committed rape on
her by administering sedative drugs to her. It is also stated
that the accused also recorded the incident in his mobile video
and threatened PW-1 to pay money to him and tried to extort
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
money from her. It is also stated that A-1 has taken the ATM
card of PW-1 and has withdrawn money several times from
her account. A-2 is the wife of A-1 and it is stated that she has
abetted the commission of the said offence by A-1.
3. After registering the crime by the police, PW-1 was
referred for medical examination. PW-11, who is a doctor,
who has examined PW-1 has stated that there was a
consensual sexual relationship on her part.
4. After completion of the investigation, the police has filed
charge-sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.
5. After committal of the case by the committal court to the
court of sessions, the trial court has framed charges for the
offences punishable under Sections 376, 384 and 506(2) of the
Indian Penal Code against both A-1 and A-2. Both the accused
denied commission of any such offences and claimed to be
tried.
6. The trial took place in the trial court and at the
culmination of the trial, after considering the both oral and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
documentary evidence as well as the medical evidence, the
learned Sessions Judge, after appreciating the evidence on
record, found both A-1 and A-2 not guilty for any of the
aforesaid charges levelled again them and thereby acquitted
both the accused for the aforesaid charges.
7. Aggrieved thereby, as noticed supra, the State has
preferred the present appeal against the said judgment of
acquittal.
8. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor
Mr.Bhargav Pandya at length for the State and also perused
the record and proceedings and considered the evidence on
record.
9. The trial court, after considering the evidence on record,
held that PW-1, who is the victim, is a major and she has
voluntarily accompanied A-1 to the hotel and there is no
evidence on record to prove that sedative drugs are
administered to her by A-1 and thereby raped her and held
that she is a consenting party for the sexual intercourse that
took place between both of them and thereby disbelieved the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
case of the prosecution and acquitted the accused. Apart
from the other findings recorded by the trial court, the
accused were acquitted mainly on the aforesaid ground.
10. After considering the evidence on record, we have
absolutely no hesitation to hold that the trial court arrived at a
right conclusion and disbelieved the case of the prosecution
and acquitted the accused on proper appreciation of the
evidence on record.
11. Admittedly, PW-1 is a grownup woman aged about 31
years. She is also a married woman and a mother of 11 years
boy. There was prior acquaintance between both PW-1 and A-
1. The same is borne out by record. In the process of
performing some rituals, they got acquaintance with each
other. The evidence of the Manager of hotel, who is examined
as PW-7, clearly proves and establishes that even on four
occasions prior to date of offence that both PW-1 and A-1
came to the said hotel and booked a room for one whole day
and stayed together in the said room. Even on the date of
offence, admittedly, PW-1 voluntarily accompanied A-1 to the
said hotel and has booked a room and stayed in it. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
evidence of PW-7 also proves that she herself has submitted
her identity proof at the time of booking the hotel and entered
the room along with A-1. The said evidence of PW-7 and the
said circumstances clinchingly proves that there was some
illegal affair between both PW-1 and A-1 and that she has
been voluntarily accompanying him to the hotel frequently
and staying with him in a room for the whole day. The said
evidence also proves that even on the date of offence i.e. on
27/06/2015 that she voluntarily accompanied A-1, submitted
her identity proof and booked a room and stayed with him in
the said room. Although it is stated by her that A-1 has mixed
some sedative tablets in a water and made her to consume the
said water and that thereafter she become unconscious and
that A-1 had forcefully committed sexual intercourse on her,
there is no medical evidence on record, much less, any
acceptable legal evidence on record to prove that A-1 has
administered any sedative drugs to her and thereby made her
unconscious and that thereafter he raped her. It is significant
to note that even she did not state the said fact before PW-11,
who is a doctor, who examined her that a sedative drugs are
administered to her. It is also significant to note that she also
did not state in the FIR in specific terms that any sedative
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
drugs are administered by A-1 in the room of the said hotel.
Therefore, the said story is absolutely false and it has been
invented for the purpose of registering a false case against A-
1. It is also important to note here that when the offence took
place, according to her, on 27/06/2015, she lodged a report
with the police with inordinate delay of almost two months on
19/08/2015. No explanation is offered by her to explain the
said delay. It throws any amount of doubt recording the
falsity of the allegations made against both A-1 and A-2.
12. The evidence of the doctor, who is examined as PW-11,
clearly shows that when PW-1 was examined by her that PW-1
clearly and unequivocally stated before the doctor that she
had earlier sexual relationship with A-1. This evidence is
sufficient to hold that PW-1, who is the victim, had an extra
marital relationship and affair with A-1 and she has been
voluntarily accompanying him to the hotel and staying with
him in a room booked by them by voluntarily submitting her
identity proof in the hotel. These facts and circumstances
emanating from the record amply proves that the allegation of
committing rape by A-1 on PW-1 ins absolutely false. On the
other hand, the said facts and circumstances of the case
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
clinchingly establish that they had an extra marital
relationship and it a clear case of consent and not at all a case
of rape.
13. As regards the allegation that A-1 has recorded in his
mobile video when they were in compromise situation and he
has threatened her with the use of said video clippings and
extracted money from her, there is absolutely no evidence on
record even to establish the said fact. No such mobile
clippings are seized. In fact the Investigating Officer clearly
admitted that no such recording is found in the mobile phone
of A-1. Therefore, this allegation also clearly appears to be
false. The evidence on record and the facts and
circumstances of the case clearly show that PW-1 has lodged a
false report with the police and made many false allegations
against both A-1 and A-2 converting a case of consent into a
case of rape.
14. The learned Sessions Judge, after considering the
evidence on record and on proper appreciation of the same
and also after considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, arrived at a right conclusion and recorded a finding of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1551/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
acquittal against both A-1 and A-2. Upon considering the said
evidence on record and upon re-appraisal of the same and
after considering the facts and circumstances of the case
carefully, we absolutely find no valid legal ground warranting
interference of this Court with the said judgment of acquittal
rendered by the learned Sessions Judge. The findings
recorded by the trial court are based on proper appreciation
of the evidence on record and they are not perverse.
15. Therefore, we see absolutely no valid ground even to
admit this appeal.
16. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed at the admission
stage itself. Record and proceedings be sent back forthwith
to the concerned court.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
(D. M. VYAS, J)
ILA
