Bombay High Court
Sachin Mahesh Mahato vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 11 August, 2025
Author: Amit Borkar
Bench: Amit Borkar
2025:BHC-AS:34429
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
VRJ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.2165 OF 2025
Sachin Mahesh Mahato ... Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents
VAIBHAV
RAMESH
JADHAV
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV RAMESH
JADHAV Mr. Akshay Kajaria with Devang V. Thakkar for the
Date: 2025.08.11
18:49:20 +0530
applicant.
Ms. Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, APP for the State-
respondent No.1.
Ms. Priyanka B. Chavan for respondent No.2
(Appointed as Legal Aid Counsel).
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED : AUGUST 11, 2025
P.C.:
1. The present application is filed by the applicant under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, seeking
his release on regular bail in connection with Crime No. 221 of
2023 registered with Badlapur (East) Police Station. The offences
alleged are under Sections 363, 376(2), 376(j)(l), 376(3),
376(DA), 342, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
and Sections 4(2), 5(k), 5(g) and 6 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO Act” for short). These
are serious charges involving allegations of kidnapping and
aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor girl.
1
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
2. As per the First Information Report (FIR), the complainant
has stated that on 12th August 2023 at about 9:30 p.m., the victim
child, aged below eighteen years, went missing while playing in
the open ground outside her house. CCTV footage from a nearby
location allegedly showed her riding pillion on a scooter with an
unknown person. The FIR was initially registered under Section
363 IPC for kidnapping. Later, during the investigation, the victim
gave a statement stating that she had left home after being scolded
by her grandmother. She was first intercepted by one Ravi from
her society, but she refused to return home. Thereafter, one person
named Sachin allegedly offered to drop her home but instead took
her to a shed and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her.
The victim stated that in the morning Sachin called someone
named Ajit, who came to the spot and removed both of them from
the shed. Thereafter, she was dropped near Khadani, where she
was found by her parents and society members and taken to the
police station.
3. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the
applicant was arrested on 13th August 2023 and that there are
major inconsistencies in the victim’s version. It is pointed out that
the victim’s first statement, recorded on 13th August 2023, only
referred to Sachin as the person who committed the sexual act and
to Ajit as the person who removed them from the shed, without
naming the present applicant in that capacity. However, in her in-
camera statement recorded after more than a month, on 14th
September 2023, she gave a changed version, stating that two
scooters came, the accused threatened her, took her to the shed,
2
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
and thereafter all three accused, including the present applicant,
had sexual intercourse with her.
4. The learned counsel submitted that the victim has lodged
another FIR on 30th October 2023 for similar offences, which casts
doubt on the credibility of her statements. He further pointed out
that the mobile phone panchnama was conducted after an
unexplained delay of 11 days, that the clothes of the victim did not
have semen or blood stains, and that the medical examination
revealed no external or internal injuries on her body or genitals. It
is also submitted that the CCTV footage shows the victim
accompanying the applicant and others without resistance,
suggesting her voluntary presence. He further submitted that two
co-accused have already been granted bail and, applying the
principle of parity, the applicant is also entitled to the same relief.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP, supported by the
appointed advocate for the victim, opposed the application. They
pointed to the CCTV panchnama which allegedly shows the
applicant with the co-accused entering and leaving the shed with
the victim. It is submitted that the mobile phone seized from the
applicant contains photographs of him with the victim taken on
12th and 13th August 2023. The medico-legal examination of the
victim has recorded findings consistent with sexual assault. The
victim, in her first statement recorded soon after the incident, has
named the applicant as one of the persons who committed the
offence of penetrative sexual assault. It is further pointed out that
the victim is a person with intellectual disability and behavioural
problems, as certified by the treating doctor, which makes her
3
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
vulnerable. An independent eyewitness has identified the applicant
as being present with the victim at the scene. The call detail
records (CDR) of the applicant place him in the location of the
shed on the relevant night. Another witness saw the applicant with
the victim in the shed at around 11:30 p.m. on 12th August 2023.
In view of the nature of the offence, the gravity of the allegations,
and the corroborative material available, they prayed that the bail
application be rejected.
6. I have considered the rival submissions, perused the case
papers, and examined the nature of allegations and the evidence
collected so far. The victim in the present case is admittedly a
minor and has also been certified by a medical professional to be a
person with intellectual disability and behavioural problems. This
makes her a vulnerable witness, and the law recognises that such
victims require special protection. The offences alleged are of a
grave nature, attracting stringent punishment under both the IPC
and the POCSO Act.
7. While the learned advocate for the applicant has pointed out
certain inconsistencies in the victim’s statements, it is well-settled
that at the stage of considering bail, the Court is not expected to
conduct a meticulous examination of contradictions or minor
variations, unless they completely demolish the prosecution case.
The variations pointed out here relate to the sequence of events
and the number of persons involved, but the core allegation of
sexual assault remains consistent.
8. The prosecution case does not rest merely on the bare
4
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
statement of the victim but is supported by several independent
and corroborative pieces of evidence.
9. First, the CCTV panchnama clearly records the presence of
the applicant along with the victim, both entering and later leaving
the shed where the incident is alleged to have taken place. Such
electronic evidence, collected through a proper panchnama, is
considered reliable at the stage of bail, as it directly links the
accused to the location of occurrence during the relevant time
frame.
10. Second, the photographs of the applicant and the victim,
taken on the dates of the alleged incident, have been recovered
from the applicant’s own mobile phone. This recovery is
significant, as it indicates that the applicant was in close contact
with the victim during the critical period and was in a position to
capture such images. These photographs, coupled with the CCTV
footage, create a chain of circumstances placing the applicant in
the company of the victim.
11. Third, there is the evidence of an independent eyewitness,
who has identified the applicant with the victim at the relevant
place and time. Independent witness testimony, particularly when
the witness is not related to the victim, carries considerable weight
in supporting the prosecution version at the bail stage.
12. Fourth, the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the applicant’s
mobile phone show his location in the vicinity of the shed at the
material time. CDR evidence, when consistent with other
materials, further corroborates the presence of the accused at the
5
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
scene and strengthens the prosecution’s case.
13. Lastly, the medical examination report of the victim contains
findings consistent with sexual assault. While the defence has
argued about the absence of visible injuries or semen stains, it is
settled law that the absence of such evidence is not fatal at this
stage. Courts have recognised that sexual assault can occur
without leaving physical injuries, especially in cases involving
minors or persons with intellectual disabilities.
14. Taken together, these materials form a prima facie chain of
evidence linking the applicant to the alleged offence. At the stage
of bail, the Court is not required to conduct a detailed trial-like
evaluation but only to assess whether there exists sufficient
material connecting the accused with the crime. Here, the
cumulative effect of the CCTV footage, photographs, eyewitness
identification, CDR location data, and medical findings provides
strong prima facie support to the prosecution’s case, making it
unsafe to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage.
15. The argument that the victim accompanied the accused
persons willingly cannot, at this stage, weaken the prosecution
case, as the law under the POCSO Act treats any such consent by a
child as legally irrelevant. Similarly, the absence of injuries or
semen stains is not, by itself, conclusive to discard the allegation of
penetrative sexual assault, as it is now judicially recognised that
such assault can take place without leaving physical injuries.
16. The principle of parity also does not assist the applicant in
the present case. The specific role attributed to the applicant in the
6
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::
83-ba2165-2025-f.doc
victim’s in-camera statement and the presence of corroborative
material against him distinguish his case from that of the co-
accused who have been granted bail. Parity applies only when the
role and circumstances are substantially identical, which is not so
here.
17. Considering the gravity of the offence, the vulnerability of
the victim, the nature of supporting evidence, and the possibility of
the applicant influencing witnesses if released, I am of the view
that no case is made out for grant of bail at this stage.
18. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected.
19. The bail application is disposed of.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
7
::: Uploaded on – 11/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 11/08/2025 21:36:32 :::