Page 1

1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2323  OF 2014

BHAVANBHAI BHAYABHAI PANELLA                         …APPELLANT

VERSUS

THE STATE OF GUJARAT       …RESPONDENT O R D E R

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 25th March, 2011 passed  

by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.1298 of 2005.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19th September, 2004 at 1330 hrs., the appellant  

took the prosecutorix aged eleven years near Khojawadi plot in village Jasvantgadh, Taluka and  

District Amreli and committed rape.  He also threatened the prosecutorix that he would kill her if  

she would disclose the facts to anyone.  However, she informed her mother about the occurrence  

who in turn informed her husband on his return to the house in the night.  In the next morning,   

the prosecutorix was taken to the Government Hospital by her parents and First Information  

Report was lodged in the Police Station by the mother of the victim.  Investigating Officer  

conducted  the  investigation  and  filed  charge  sheet  against  the  appellant.   At  the  trial,  the  

prosecution examined the prosecutorix,  her mother,  the medical officer and the investigating  

officer and on the basis of the evidence led, the trial Court held the case of the prosecution  

proved.  Accordingly, the trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 376 (2)(f) IPC and  

sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to  

undergo RI for three months.  The trial Court also awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- (one  

Lakh) to the victim under Section 357(3).  It was directed that on failure of the accused to pay

Page 2

2

compensation, his property will be liable to be sold for recovery of the amount. The conviction  

and sentence have been affirmed by the High Court.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Learned  counsel for the appellant points out that the prosecutorix in cross-examination  

stated that the matter had been compromised and that her mother PW-2 also stated at one stage  

in her statement that an unidentified person had harassed her.  These aspects have been duly  

considered by the courts  below and it  has been held that  from the totality  of evidence,  the  

offence  stood  proved.   We  find  adequate  evidence  on  record  to  justify  conviction  of  the  

appellant.  Thus, conviction of the appellant is upheld.

5. The  only  question  which  survives  for  consideration  is  the  sentence   

to  be  awarded.   We  have  been  informed  that  the  appellant  has  been  in  custody   

for  about  ten  years.   Our  attention  has  been  drawn  to  the  custody  certificate   

dated 27th July, 2012 according to which the appellant had completed sentence of seven years,  

five months and ten days.  Thereafter, a period of two and a half years has gone by.  Thus, the   

appellant has already undergone the sentence of about ten years.

6. Having regard to the totality of circumstances, we are of the view that ends of justice will  

be met if the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to RI for ten years.  However, sentence  

of  fine and compensation as  also default  sentence and direction for recovery of  the amount  

payable as compensation are maintained.  Ordered accordingly.

7. The appeal is disposed of.  

……………………………………………J.       (T.S. THAKUR)

……………………………………………J.                      (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)

NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 4, 2015