[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Tukaram Bhanudas Shinde vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 December, 2025
1 21APPLN2217.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
21 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2216 OF 2024
IN APEALST/6131/2024
Tukaram Bhanudas Shinde
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
...
Mr. Apparao Prakash Yenegure - Advocate for Applicant
Mr. B. A. Shinde - APP for State
Mr. Nasimoddin R. Shaikh - Advocate (appointed through Legal Aid) for
Respondent No. 2
...
CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATED : 15TH DECEMBER, 2025
PER COURT : -
1. This is an Application for suspension of substantive
sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the learned Special Judge,
Beed, by the Judgment and Order dated 28.08.2019 in Spl. (POCSO)
Case No. 40/2016, convicting and sentencing the Applicant/Appellant as
under:-
"ORDER
1. The accused Tukaram Bhanudas Shinde, R/o. Hattikhana, near
Krushna Mandir, Beed, Tq. Dist. Beed, is hereby convicted for the
offence punishable under Sections 376 (2)(i) of Indian Penal Code
and Section 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 vide section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
2. Theaccused Tukaram Bhanudas Shinde, R/o. Hattikhana, near
Krushna Mandir, Beed, Tq. Dist. Beed, is convicted for the offence
punishable under section 376(2)(i) of Indian Penal Code vide
section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and pay fine
of Rs. 2,000/ ( Rs. Two Thousand only). In default, he shall
undergo rigorous imprisonment for one (1) month.
3. The accused Tukaram Bhanudas Shinde, R/o. Hattikhana, near
2 21APPLN2217.2024.odt
Krushna Mandir, Beed, Tq. Dist. Beed, is convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 6 of The Protection of Children From
Sexual Offences Act,2012, vide section 235 (2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for ten (10) years and pay fine of Rs.2,000/ ( Rs.
Two Thousand only). In default, he shall undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one (1) month.
4. The period of inquiry, investigation and trial undergone by the
accused Tukaram Bhanudas Shinde, R/o. Hattikhana, near
Krushna Mandir, Beed, Tq. Dist. Beed, since 12/10/2016 till today
be set off vide Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
5. The substantive sentence of the accused shall run concurrently
vide section 31 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
6. Muddemal property bearing GMP No.75/2017, Article A and B,
being worthless be destroyed after appeal period is over.
7. A copy of the Judgment be given to the accused in gratis and
forwarded to District Magistrate, Beed vide Section 353(4) and
365 of the Code of Criminal Procedure respectively.
8. The accused is appraised of provision of appeal.
Dictated and pronounced in the open Court."
2. The Prosecution case in brief, as seen from the impugned
Judgment and Order, is reproduced as follows: -
"3. On 11/10/2016, mother of the victim lodged complaint that, she
and her husband are residing as tenants at Hattikhana alongwith
her children. The accused and his wife are residing opposite to the
house of victim. At around 7.00 P.M, the victim aged about 4 years
went to play outside. After 10 minutes she returned crying and
her underpants were pulled down. On enquiry she pointed finger
towards accused and stated "Mama ne hath dala". The family
members of victim enquired accused to which he said nothing
happened. The mother of victim took her inside the house and
checked her. She found cut injury on the vagina of the victim. The
accused had ran away so the parents of victim took her to police
station. The complaint was registered vide Crime No. 286/2016 of
Beed City Police Station."
3. The sentence awarded to the Applicant is of ten (10) years
3 21APPLN2217.2024.odt
of imprisonment. The Applicant is behind the bars since 12.10.16 [total
nine (9) years and two (2) months] i.e. ten (10) months short of
completing his substantive sentence. The Appeal is admitted today itself
after condoning the delay. The Applicant was 80 years of age at the time
of offence and is 88 years of age as on date. On the ground of long
incarceration, the Application deserves to be allowed. Hence, I proceed
to pass the following order:
ORDER
[i] The Application is allowed.
[ii] The sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the learned
Special Judge, Beed, by the Judgment and Order dated
28.08.2019 in Spl. (POCSO) Case No. 40/2016, is hereby
suspended till the final decision of the Appeal.
[iii] The Applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal
bond of Rs.15,000/- [Rupees Fifteen Thousand], with one
or two sureties in the like amount.
[iv] Bail before the Trial Court.
[v] The fees of the learned Advocate Mr. Nasimoddin R. Shaikh
appointed to represent Respondent No. 2, is quantified at
Rs. 10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand], which shall be paid
by the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee,
Aurangabad Bench.
[vi] The Application stands disposed off.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE]
JUDGE
SG Punde
Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/12/2025 19:52:20
