Gujarat HC Upholds Acquittal Of Woman Accused Of Locking Door To Aid Alleged Rape, Finding No Evidence Of Abetment

The State appealed under Section 378 CrPC against the Sessions Court’s acquittal of the accused of offences under Sections 376, 348 and 342 read with Section 114 IPC

The prosecution alleged that Gambhirbhai raped the victim and that Saviben facilitated the offence by closing the door from outside

During the appeal, Gambhirbhai died, and the appeal against him abated

The complainant, the victim and other material witnesses did not support the prosecution, and the Sessions Court found the evidence insufficient to connect the accused to the offences

Whether the Sessions Court was justified in acquitting the accused, such that the acquittal should stand in the State’s appeal

Whether the evidence established that Saviben abetted the principal accused in committing the alleged offence

Section 378 CrPC permits an appeal against acquittal.

An appellate court may interfere in exceptional cases where compelling circumstances show that the acquittal is perverse; it must account for the presumption of innocence, which is reinforced by the trial court’s acquittal. Where another view of the evidence is reasonably possible, routine interference should be avoided

The charged offences were under Sections 376, 348 and 342 read with Section 114 IPC

The principal accused’s death limited the appeal to Saviben’s alleged role

The complainant, victim and other material witnesses did not support the prosecution and did not adopt their police statements; the forensic evidence also did not identify Gambhirbhai as the child’s biological father

The Court found no direct or circumstantial evidence that Saviben had abetted the offence

Given the absence of evidence and any perversity or compelling reason to interfere, the acquittal was not disturbed

The appeal was dismissed; the appeal against Gambhirbhai had already abated following his death