The prosecution’s failure to establish its case against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt charged under Sections 376,201 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code- Appeal dismissed Gujarat high court

TITLE: Minaben D/O Chauhan v State of Gujarat

Decided On-: 12/07/2023

2253 of 2022

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. Umesh Trivedi and M.K Thakker

INTRODUCTION- In accordance with Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the first informant-victim appealed the judgment and order of acquittal.


The respondent is accused of breaking into the appellant’s home on February 23, 2020, around 2:00 p.m., and committing an act of rape over her while brandishing a knife, threatening to kill the appellant’s parents in the process. As the respondent-accused was her third-generation cousin, she was terrified by the accused’s behaviour at knifepoint and lacked the courage to file the FIR right away. As a result, it took 6-7 days to be filed. According to the FIR filed, an investigation was conducted, and after sufficient evidence was gathered during the course of the investigation, the police authorities filed the charge-sheet, which ultimately led to the registration of a SessionsCase against the Respondent.



The prosecution used approximately 22 of the case’s records, including the testimony of nearly 12 witnesses, including the first informant and victim, to prove its case against the defendant.

knowledgeable advocate We have carefully read the Record and Proceedings and have heard from Mr. Kishore Prajapati for the appellant, learned attorney Ms. Shivangi M. Rana for the respondent-accused, as well as learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the State. The State has decided not to contest the learned Judge’s order of acquittal, according to Ms. CM Shah, a learned APP.

It is evident that the accused of the crime is none other than a close third-generation cousin, and that there is a dispute regarding property between the two families, after listening to the learned advocates for the various parties and taking the evidence presented to the court into consideration while reading the Record and Proceedings of the case. Therefore, before accepting or rejecting the evidence presented to the court, careful consideration of the evidence is necessary.

There is once more a significant discrepancy between the victim’s history as provided to the doctor and the deposition provided to the court.

Although the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the “Code” was produced and proved by the victim herself, who had signed it and verified her signature, it is useless unless the events described in the statement were not deposed to before the Court and it did not support the deposition.

However, in the cross-examination, it is revealed that there has been a dispute between two families for years, and despite efforts by village residents, their relations have not improved. This raises questions about the crime and the way it was committed, which were both claimed by the witnesses.

 Appeal Dismissed

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by-  Steffi Desousa


Click here to view judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *