XYZ (VICTIM/ORIGIONAL COMPLAINANT) vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 2160 of 2026
With
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2345 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
XYZ (VICTIM/ORIGIONAL COMPLAINANT)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NIMIT Y SHUKLA(8338) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS VRUNDA SHAH, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 04/11/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)
1. Both the Appeals are filed by the complainant victim under Section
413 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding
section 372 of Cr.P.C.) against the judgment and order of acquittal.
2. Since the facts of the case and issue involved in both the appeals
are identical and arise out of the same judgment, the appeals are taken up
together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
3. Being dissatisfied by the judgment and order passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, City Court, Ahmedabad passed in Sessions
Page 1 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
Case Nos.33 & 32 of 2024, dated 20.04.2026, acquitting the respondents
accused from the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(N), 354(D),
506(1), and 114 of the IPC, the original complainant – victim has
preferred instant appeals.
4. This Court has heard Mr.Nimit Y. Shukla, learned advocate
appearing for and on behalf of the appellant – victim and Ms.Vrunda
Shah, learned APP for the State.
5. Brief facts giving rise to file the present Appeal are as follows:
The appellant – victim aged about 35 years old, having two kids
living with her husband at Ahmedabad, came into contact via facebook
with the accused Parth Panchal and maintained relationship with him
approximately three years prior to the complaint dated 07.05.2022. In
other words, in 2019, after conversation with the accused, she took to the
Sai Guesthouse, Ahmedabad where the accused engaged in sexual
intercourse against her will and took photograph of her. Subsequently, the
accused threatened to make these photographs viral, she was forced to
maintain sexual intercourse at the Sai Guesthouse as well as Midway
Hotel at Gandhinagar. It is further alleged that after the said incident, the
matter was not end but accused harassed her and roaming near the house
of the victim. So far as accused no.2 Kishan Chauhan is concerned, it is
alleged that he came to know about the nude photographs of the victim
and on that basis, he was demanding sexual favour from the victim.
In the aforesaid context, the victim had informed her husband and
accordingly, on 07.05.2022, an FIR came to be filed by her before Vadaj
Police Station, inter alia, alleging that she was blackmailed by accused
Parth Panchal and forced to maintain relationship.
Page 2 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
The offence for the rape criminal intimidation was registered with
Vadaj Police Station, against two accused persons. After
completion of the investigation, the first chargesheet dated
08.07.2022 was filed against the accused no.2 Kishan Chauhan and
thereafter, chargesheet came to be filed against the principal
accused.
6. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge to which the accused
pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
7. In order to prove the charge, the prosecution has examined 13
witnesses and relied upon 22 documentary evidence. During the trial, the
accused has produced and proved the documentary evidence (Exhs.42 to
46).
8. On conclusion of oral evidence, the Trial Court recorded further
statements of the accused as provided under Section 313 of the Code,
wherein, they claimed their innocence and stated that they have been
falsely implicated in the offence.
9. The learned Sessions Judge, after appreciating and examining the
oral as well as documentary evidence, acquitted the accused herein for the
offences with which they were charged, on the ground that, the victim
was consenting party and relationship was consensual in nature. So far as
accused no.2 Kishan Chauhan is concerned, the Trial Court acquitted him
mainly on the ground that day before the lodging of the FIR, a quarrel
took place between the accused and husband of the victim on the issue of
parking of the car, and therefore, the charge for demanding sexual favour
against him is not proved and established.
Page 3 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
10. Mr.Nimit Shukla, learned advocate appearing for the appellant –
victim, assailing the judgment and order of acquittal, has submitted that;
(i) that the findings of acquittal are contrary to law and evidence on
record and the findings recorded are palpably erroneous and based on the
irrelevant material;
(ii) that the Trial Court failed to appreciate that ordinarily, the evidence
of victim should not be suspected and should be believed, more so, as her
statement has to be evaluated at par with that of injured witness and if the
evidence is reliable, it is the accused to substantiate the allegation of rape
under the guise of marriage is not proved and believable;
(iii) that the Trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that the victim
having two kids and considering the photographs of her allegedly kept by
the accused, she was compelled to file an FIR after delay of three years
and the reason for delay is self-explanatory and, on that ground, the entire
prosecution case cannot be discarded. It required to be appreciated that
the victim being married woman having two kids was under social
pressure and fear of ruining marital life and children’s futures and
therefore, the delay in lodging the FIR cannot be a fatal to the case of the
prosecution.
(iv) that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 has
been corroborated to the evidence of the victim as well as the evidence of
the husband and there is no reason to falsely implicate the accused in a
serious charge of rape.
(v) that the findings of the Trial Court about the relationship are
Page 4 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
contrary to the evidence on record as the consent of the victim obtained
under duress, threat or at the cost of her reputation. The evidence of the
victim clearly demonstrates that she surrendered to the accused only
because of repeated threats to viral her photos which clearly proves that
there was no consent.
(vi) that the Trial Court should not have considered the earlier case
proceedings because at the relevant time, the parties have arrived at
amicable settlement and subsequently, the present proceedings came to be
filed. Thus, the earlier proceedings wherein no investigation was
proceeded and it could not have been taken as evidence to evaluate and/or
analyses the truthfulness of the victim’s evidence.
(vii) that the Trial Court was wrong in holding that no photos and/or
videos found from the accused’s mobile and thereby, this crediting the
claim of threat, etc. The Trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that after
the offence, no accused would keep the incriminating evidence with him
and therefore, in absence of such material does not automatically impact
on the credibility of the evidence of the victim.
(viii) that the acquittal of the accused no.2 based on the surmises and
conjectures.
11. In such circumstances, as referred above, it has been submitted
that while acquitting the respondent accused, the trial Court has discarded
and ignored the truthful, reliable and acceptable evidence and as such, no
cogent reasons being assigned while discarding such evidence. Therefore,
it is submitted that the victim’s evidence is credible and trustworthy and
the same can be acted upon to convict the accused herein. Thus, it is
Page 5 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
prayed that it is a fit case to admit the appeal.
12. On the other hand, learned APP Ms.Vrunda Shah, has fairly stated
that the State has not filed acquittal appeal.
13. In the present case the issue falls for our consideration as to
whether the trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused?
14. We have carefully examined the oral as well as documentary evidence
and perused the findings of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court.
15. Before proceeding to address the rival submissions, we would like
to place on record the scope of interference in an appeal against the
acquittal and when the same is justified. In exceptional cases, where there
are compelling circumstances and the judgment under appeal is found to
be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the judgment of
acquittal. The Appellate Court should bear in mind the presence of
innocence of the accused and further that, the trial Court’s acquittal
bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference in a routine
manner, where the other view of possible should be avoided, unless there
are reasons for interference.
16. In the facts of the present case, the entire prosecution case rests on
the testimony of the victim PW:1. It is settled position of law that the sole
testimony of the victim, if found reliable and trustworthy, requires no
corroboration and may be sufficient to invite conviction of the accused.
17. In Rai Sandeep Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2012 (8) SCC 21) , the
Supreme Court on the facts found totally conflicting version of the
victim, from what was stated in the complaint and what was deposed
Page 6 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
before the Court, resulting in material inconsistency. Reversing the
conviction and holding that, the prosecutrix cannot be held to be a
‘sterling witness’, the Court opined as under:
“22. In our considered opinion, the ‘sterling witness’ should be of
a very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore,
be unassailable. The Court considering the version of such
witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value
without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the
status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be
relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a
witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency
of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely,
at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and
ultimately before the Court. It should be natural and consistent
with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should
not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The
witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-
examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be
and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to
the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as, the
sequence of it. Such a version should have co-relation with each
and everyone of other supporting material such as the recoveries
made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the
scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version
should consistently match with the version of every other
witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test
applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should
not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the
Page 7 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the
version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all
other similar such tests to be applied, it can be held that such a
witness can be called as a ‘sterling witness’ whose version can be
accepted by the Court without any corroboration and based on
which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the version
of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should
remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral,
documentary and material objects should match the said version
in material particulars in order to enable the Court trying the
offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other supporting
materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged.”
18. In Krishna Kumar Malik Vs State of Haryana , (2011 (7) SCC
130) , the Supreme Court in the matter related to sexual offence held that,
the conviction cannot be sustained if the prosecutrix’s testimony found
unreliable and insufficient due to identified flows and lacuna. It was held
thus:
“31. No doubt, it is true that to hold an accused guilty for
commission of an offence of rape, the solitary evidence of the
prosecutrix is sufficient provided the same inspires confidence
and appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and should
be of sterling quality. But, in the case in hand, the evidence of the
prosecutrix, showing several lacunae, which have already been
projected hereinabove, would go to show that her evidence does
not fall in that category and cannot be relied upon to hold the
appellant guilty of the said offences.
32. Indeed, there are several significant variations in material
facts in her Section 164 statement. Section 161 statement ( CrPC ),
Page 8 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
FIR and deposition in court. Thus, it was necessary to get her
evidence corroborated independently, which they could have
done either by examination of Ritu, her sister or Bimla Devi, who
were present in the house at the time of her alleged abduction.
The record shows that Bimla Devi though cited as a witness was
not examined and later given up by the public prosecutor on the
ground that she has been won over by the appellant.”
19. In the case on hand, the victim PW:1, when offence arose, she was
aged about 35 years old and being a married woman, having two children
living with her. She has stated on oath that she came into contact with the
accused on social media facebook and gradually, came closure to the
accused and in the year 2019, the accused took her photographs and then,
taken her to City Hotel where under the threat to viral her photographs,
the accused engaged her with physical sexual intercourse and then
repeatedly for a twice she was called upon at the hotels. She has also
deposed against the accused no.2 that she was blackmailed by him and
demanded sexual favour. The evidence of hotelier PW:8 shows that on
19.02.2019, the victim and the accused no.1 stayed at Hotel Sai for about
two hours. In the cross examination, victim has admitted that in April-
2022, she made a complaint against the accused with the Adalaj Police Station
inter alia alleging act of blackmailing and sexual intercourse and in the said
proceedings, her statement dated 24.04.2022 came to be recorded wherein she
had admitted that she fell into love with the accused, as a result, the
photographs were captured by the accused. The victim has further admitted
that after the thorough investigation of the mobile of the accused, she did not
find any photos and/or videos of her. She has further admitted that now there is
no grudge or any enmity with him and he is not harassing her and therefore, in
order to save her marriage life, she does not want to proceed with the
Page 9 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
complaint.
On further scrutiny of evidence of the victim, it appears that during
the time of her relationship, she did not have raised any complaint against
the accused nor informed her husband. It is relevant to note that the
accused herein has relied upon the transcript of call details produced at
Exh.44 which shows that out of love and affection towards the accused,
she accompanied him at the hotels for two to three times and as such,
nothing comes on record to show that after the incident of hotels, she was
harassed continuously for about three years with an object to compel her
for sexual intercourse. The incident of sexual abuse occurred in the year
2019 was reported before Vadaj Police in the year 2022 (07.05.2022).
Before the FIR, the victim had approached the Vadaj Police Station in the
month April-2022 and submitted a complaint of rape and harassment
against the accused. In the said proceedings, her statement was recorded
on 26.04.2022 at Exh.43. In the statement, she has clearly disclosed that
the accused was not having any photograph and/or videos of her and as
such, she has no any grudge against him. Thus, after the settlement with
the accused, what would be the reason or ground to initiate the present
proceedings for which no any satisfactory explanation comes forward.
Thus, after 2019, when there was no threat to the victim about making
viral of her photographs by the accused and the relations between them
clearly established a consensual in nature, the evidence of the victim on
the same ground alleging that her consent was taken on the threat of
making viral her photographs cannot be believed and accepted and
therefore, in our opinion, the evidence of the victim, does not fall under
the category of wholly reliable and cannot be said to be a “sterling
Page 10 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
witness”. Thus, the evidence of the victim on the aspect of allegation of
blackmailing and sexual abuse does not inspire confidence and cannot be
acted upon as trustworthy, reliable and worthy of credence to convict the
accused for the charge of rape and criminal intimidation. We may
profitably refer the observations of the Supreme Court in Prasant Vs.
State of NCT of Delhi, 2025 (5) SCC 764, wherein it was observed that
mere a break of relationship between consenting couple cannot result in
the initiation of criminal proceedings when the said relationship does not
fructify into a marriage. In another judgment, the Supreme Court
(Samadhan Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC Online 2528 ,
observed that the offence of rape being the gravest kind, must be invoked
only in cases where there exists genuine sexual violence, coercion, or
absence or pre-consent. To convert every soured relationship into an
offence of rape not only trivializes the seriousness of the offence, but also
inflicts upon the accused indelible stigma and grave injustice. The misuse
of criminal justice machinery in this regard is a matter of profound
concern for the judiciary already facing heavy load and calls for
condemnation.
20. So far as accused no.2 is concerned, in our opinion, the husband of
the victim had a fight with him on the issue of parking before day one of
registration of the FIR and considering the non-availability of
incriminating material, like photographs, etc., the theory projected by the
victim about asking sexual favour by the accused cannot be accepted.
21. In the result, we do not find any perversity in the impugned
judgment and in absence of substantial and compelling reason, no ground
exists to interfere with the findings of acquittal recorded by the Trial
Page 11 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026
R/CR.A/2160/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/11/2026
(GJHC240622452026)
Court and therefore, the Trial Court was justified in acquitting the
accused.
22. With the observations as aforesaid, both the appeals, at the admission
stage, are dismissed .
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
Rakesh
Page 12 of 12
Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 05 03:04:27 IST 2026