Gujarat High Court
Rakhaben Ashwingbhai Vaghela vs State Of Gujarat on 6 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2351/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 2351 of 2025
================================================================
RAKHABEN ASHWINGBHAI VAGHELA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MAKBUL I MANSURI(2694) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 06/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH
ROY)
1. This appeal came up before us today for admission. Aggrieved by
the judgment dated 24.06.2025 passed in Sessions Case No.72 of 2016 on
the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, whereby the
second respondent, who is the sole accused in the said case was acquitted
of the charges punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 506(2) of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, the present appeal is preferred by the victim.
2. We have heard learned advocate Mr.Raiyan Mansuri for learned
advocate Mr.Makbul I. Mansuri for the appellant and learned APP
Ms.Krina Calla for the respondent no.1-State.
3. As per the prosecution version, the appellant, who is the
prosecutrix is a married woman aged about 26 years and she got a
husband and children and the accused is also a married person. It is stated
that on the date of offence when the prosecutrix was alone in her house
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2351/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
and in the absence of her husband that the accused entered her house and
beat her and dragged her into the room and thereafter, had forcible sexual
intercourse on her and committed the offence of rape on the prosecutrix.
On the report lodged by the prosecutrix, crime was registered for the
aforesaid offences against the accused, it was investigated and charge-
sheet was filed. After trial, eventually, the accused was acquitted of all
the said charges by the trial court after considering the evidence on record
and on appreciation of the said evidence.
4. The Coordinate Bench of this Court earlier called for the R&P. The
R&P is received from the trial court. We have carefully perused the entire
record and proceedings and the evidence on record and particularly the
evidence of the prosecutrix. We have also perused the judgment of the
trial court. As can be seen from the judgment of the trial court, the trial
court recorded a finding of acquittal in favour of the accused on the
ground that the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence on
record established that there was an affair between the prosecutrix and the
accused and they have been indulging in consensual sexual intercourse
and there was no offence of rape committed by the accused on the
prosecutrix.
5. We have considered the evidence on record and reappraised the
same. Upon considering the said evidence on record, we are also of the
considered view that both the accused and the prosecutrix, who are
married people got an extramarital relationship between them and they
had an illegal affair with each other and they have been indulging in
consensual sexual intercourse with each other. The evidence of the
prosecutrix examined as PW-1 also shows that both of them also had
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2351/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
earlier visited a hotel. According to her evidence, there are also
photographs of both the accused and the prosecutrix together, which
shows the close intimacy between both of them. Although it is stated by
her that the said photographs are taken by force by the accused, the said
contention of the prosecutrix is not trustworthy and believable. Even the
trial court did not believe the said version. It is not possible to take
intimate photographs of both the accused and the prosecutrix together by
force. Therefore, we are in complete agreement with the finding of the
trial court that the said photographs are not taken by force. Further, the
record reveals that when the husband of the prosecutrix was absent in the
house that the accused and the prosecutrix indulged in sexual intercourse
and at that time, the husband suddenly came at the house and their affair
came to be known to him at that time. Thereafter, the FIR came to be
lodged. Therefore, all these facts and circumstances of the case and the
evidence on record clearly leads to an irresistible conclusion that both the
accused and the prosecutrix had an illegal affair and extramarital
relationship with each other and if at all there is any sexual intercourse
between them, it was only a consensual sexual intercourse and not a
forcible sexual intercourse. So, the facts of the case does not constitute
any offence of rape.
6. Even as can be seen from the medical evidence on record, the
doctor opined that he could not give any opinion as to whether there was
any sexual intercourse on the alleged date of the offence or not. So, even
as per the medical evidence, there are no sings of rape on the prosecutrix.
Therefore, considering all these facts and circumstances and the evidence
on record, the trial court arrived at a right conclusion and recorded a
finding of acquittal in favour of the accused. The prosecution has
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2351/2025 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable
doubt that an offence of rape was committed by the accused on the
prosecutrix.
7. So, the impugned judgment of the trial court is perfectly
sustainable under law and it warrants no interference in this appeal. We
absolutely do not find any valid legal ground much less any ground to
admit the appeal for hearing. So, when the findings of the trial court are
based on proper appreciation of evidence on record and when the findings
and appreciation of evidence are not perverse, the appeal does not deserve
any consideration. It is well settled law that in an appeal against the
acquittal, the accused is entitled to double presumption of innocence on
account of findings recorded by the trial court in his favour based on the
evidence on record. Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the
case, the appeal is liable to be summarily rejected under Section 425(1) of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
8. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed summarily at the admission
stage.
Sd/-
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
Sd/-
(D. M. VYAS, J)
ABHISHEK/3
