CR.A/108319/1994 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1083 of 1994 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= RAVIYA BAGHAR VASAVA - Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : NOTICE SERVED for Appellant(s) : 1,MRS TANVEER M SHAIKH for Appellant(s) : 1, MR MA PATEL, APP for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA Date : 16/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE) CR.A/108319/1994 2/3 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the appellant to challenge judgment and order dated 13/9/1994 convicting the appellant for offence punishable under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC] and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.200/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Surat in Sessions Case No. 131/1993. 2. The appellant was represented by Ld. Advocate Mrs. Tanveer M Shaikh [as she then was]. However, on her joining judicial services, a notice was served on the appellant on 10/8/2001 to which the appellant has not responded. 3. We notice that the appellant served the full sentence and was released on 2/1/1999 from the prison as per jail report submitted to us by the Ld. APP, after being granted remission of 4 years, 1 month and 1 day by the State. 4. Having examined record and proceedings and having examined the evidence, we find that there is satisfactory evidence to connect the appellant with the crime of rape. There is evidence to show the appellant escaping from the place where the offence was committed by him. The medical evidence also supports the prosecution case. It is an unfortunate case where the prosecutrix was a young minor girl aged about 6 years. Having examined the evidence thoroughly and having seen the judgment of the trial Court, we are of the considered view that the conviction was rightly recorded. The trial Court has appreciated the CR.A/108319/1994 3/3 JUDGMENT evidence in its proper perspective and has recorded the conviction. We do not find any merits in the appeal against conviction. It must, therefore, fail. Appeal stands dismissed. ( A. L. DAVE, J.) ( J .C. UPADHYAYA, J. ) *Pansala.