RAMESHBHAI @ BHOLABHAI BHIKHABHAI PHOOLMALI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2016-5-146
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on May 04,2016

Rameshbhai @ Bholabhai Bhikhabhai Phoolmali Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgement and order of conviction dated 30.06.2011 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 22 of 2010, whereby the appellant - accused has been convicted of the charges leveled against him u/s 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 3(1)(11), 3(2) (5) of The Atrocities Act. 1.1 The appellant - accused is ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default rigorous imprisonment for one month for offence u/s 363 of Indian Penal Code; rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default rigorous imprisonment for two months for offence u/s 366 of Indian Penal Code; rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default rigorous imprisonment for one year. All the sentences to run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution story as unfolded during the course of trial reveals that on the day of incident the accused had taken the prosecutrix was seen bleeding on her private parts and on inquiry she informed the complainant that the accused had raped her. The complainant was informed by the prosecutrix that the accused took her to a secluded place behind the school in the neighbourhood and raped her without her consent and immediately fled away from the place. A complaint was therefore registered by the complainant 2.1 Thereafter on the strength of the FIR, the offence was registered against the present appellant. Investigation was carried out and chargesheet was submitted against the appellant. Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the same was committed to the Sessions Court. 2.2 The trial was initiated against the appellant and during the course of trial the prosecution examined the following witnesses as oral evidences: JUDGEMENT_146_LAWS(GJH)5_2016.htm
(3.) Mr. Madansingh Barod, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has fairly conceded on the part of conviction of the appellant. He has however concentrated on the sentence awarded to the appellant. Mr. Barod has submitted that the sentence awarded by the court below is on the higher side and the same may be reduced. He has submitted that this court may take a sympathetic view of the matter and reduced the sentence considering the age and financial as well as social status of the appellant.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.