Bombay High Court
Shubham S/O Dashrath Khatri vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pos, Ps … on 30 June, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:6129
1 56.APEAL.683-2024.JUDGMENT.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 683 OF 2024
Shubham S/o Dashrath Khatri,
Age 26 years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Itwar Bazar, Tah. & Dist. Wardha. APPELLANT
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Wardha City, Wardha.
2. X.Y.Z./Victim
(Informant in Crime No. 497/2023
registered with Police Station, Wardha
City on 26.04.2023.) RESPONDENTS
-----------------------------------------------
Mr. R.P. Durge, Advocate h/f Mr. R.R. Vyas, Advocate for the
Appellant.
Mr. Neeraj Jawade, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1/State.
Ms.R.K. Swami, Advocate (Appointed) for the Respondent No.2.
-----------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.
DATED : 30th JUNE, 2025.
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. Heard.
2 56.APEAL.683-2024.JUDGMENT.odt
2. Admit.
3. By preferring this Appeal, the Appellant has
challenged the order passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act),
Wardha in Bail Application No. 554/2023 dated 05.12.2023
rejecting the application of the present Appellant for grant of
bail.
4. The Appellant came to be arrested on 19.09.2023 in
connection with Crime No. 497/2023 registered with Police
Station Wardha City, District Wardha under Sections 363,
376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short)
and under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO” for short) and under
Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Atrocities Act” for
short).
5. The crime is registered on the basis of the report
lodged by the father of the Victim alleging that on 25.04.2023
his daughter got missing, has left the house and not returned
3 56.APEAL.683-2024.JUDGMENT.odt
back. On the basis of the said report initially the crime was
registered under Section 363 of IPC against the unknown
person. During search of the Vitim, the Victim was found and
her statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer. During
her statement, it reveals that it was the present Appellant who
has taken her on his motorcycle and thereafter subjected her for
forceful sexual assault. On the basis of the said statement, the
crime was registered under Sections 376 (2)(n) and 506 of the
IPC and under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. After
registration of the crime, the Appellant approached to the
Special Court for grant of bail, the same was rejected, and
therefore, the present Appeal is filed.
6. Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant, who
submitted that, the evidence of the Victim is already recorded,
the Appellant is the relative of the Victim aged about 26 years,
as far as the allegations are concerned, which are false and
baseless. Considering the fact that now the evidence of the
Victim is already recorded, no purpose will be served by keeping
the Appellant behind bars. He also invited my attention to the
various statements of the witnesses and submitted that it was
4 56.APEAL.683-2024.JUDGMENT.odt
the Victim who has joined the Company of the present
Appellant. Thus, it can be ascertained that it was a love affair
and out of love affair the alleged incident has taken place.
7. Per contra, learned APP for the Respondent
No.1/State and learned Counsel for the Respondent
No.2/Victim strongly opposed the Appeal and submitted that,
during the pendency of the trial the relatives of the present
Appellant pressurized the Victim, threatened her regarding the
same, and therefore, another Crime No. 1930/2024 under
Section 232(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 was registered against one Ritesh
Dashrath Khatri and Reshma Shubham Khatri. Thus, if the
Appellant is released on bail he would tamper with the
prosecution evidence as other witnesses are yet to be examined.
On merits, they have submitted that the allegations levelled by
the Victim are substantiated by the medical evidence and if the
Appellant is released on bail as he is the relative of the Victim,
he may pressurize the other witnesses and for that reason the
Appeal deserves to be dismissed.
8. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the
5 56.APEAL.683-2024.JUDGMENT.odt
entire investigation papers, it reveals that, the Victim is not
having Mother and she is residing alongwith her Father and her
maternal aunt is looking after her. On the day of incident, she
was taken by the present Appellant, who is her relative on the
pretext that her maternal aunt has called her and thereafter
taken her at Village Rajangaon and subjected her for the
forceful sexual assault. This Allegation is substantiated by the
medical evidence. It further reveals from the investigation
papers that, after completion of the investigation and after filing
of the charge-sheet, she was threatened by the relatives of the
present Appellant and regarding the same another crime is
registered. She has informed the said incident to the learned
Trial Court also. Thus, considering the same, the apprehension
of the learned APP and learned Counsel for the Victim has some
substance if the Appellant is released on bail, there is every
likelihood of tampering of the prosecution witnesses. Though
the Victim is examined but other witnesses are yet to be
examined and considering the same the learned Trial Court has
rightly rejected the Application, and therefore, I do not find any
merit in the contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellant.
In view of that, the Appeal deserves to be dismissed.
6 56.APEAL.683-2024.JUDGMENT.odt
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
i. The Appeal is dismissed.
ii. Fees of the learned Appointed Counsel be quantified
as per rules.
9. Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of
accordingly.
( URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.)
S.D.Bhimte
Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 01/07/2025 17:54:00