[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Dhammadip @ Vikky Shivram Chahande vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Mouda ... on 19 December, 2025
1 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.990/2025
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.591/2025
Dhammadip @ Vikky Shivram Chahande Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Police
Station Officer, Police Station Mouda, District Nagpur
Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders or directions and
Registrar's orders
Mr. K.Y. Mandpe, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. A.R.Chutke, APP for Respondent
CORAM: NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.
DATED : 19th DECEMBER, 2025
1. The applicant has preferred the present
application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section
389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking
suspension of sentence pending appeal and release on
bail, assailing the judgment and order dated
19.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-3, Nagpur in Sessions Case No. 295 of 2021.
2. The applicant has been convicted and sentenced
as under:
(i) For the offence punishable under Section
376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of
Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment
for six months;
2 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
(ii) For the offence punishable under Section 450 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment
for six months;
(iii) For the offence punishable under Section
354(d) of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment
for three months;
(iv) For the offence punishable under Section 342 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer simple imprisonment
for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month;
(v) For the offence punishable under Section 323 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer simple imprisonment
for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month;
(vi) For the offence punishable under Section 504 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer simple imprisonment
for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month;
and
(vii) For the offence punishable under Section 506 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer simple imprisonment
for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.
3 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that
the applicant was on bail throughout the course of the
trial and has not misused the liberty so granted. It is
contended that the conviction rests primarily on the
sole testimony of the prosecutrix, which, according to
the learned counsel, suffers from material
inconsistencies and variations. It is further submitted
that the testimonies of other prosecution witnesses are
also not free from contradictions and omissions.
Attention is invited to the delay of approximately
seven hours in lodging the First Information Report,
for which no satisfactory explanation has been
brought on record by the prosecution. It is further
submitted that though it is alleged that the applicant
had sexually exploited the prosecutrix about one
month prior to lodging of the report, the said incident
was admittedly not reported earlier. On these
premises, it is argued that the relationship between
the applicant and the prosecutrix was consensual.
Learned counsel further submits that the medical
evidence does not corroborate the prosecution case
and that the Chemical Analyser's report does not form
part of the prosecution evidence. It is, therefore,
urged that the conviction is unsustainable and that the
applicant has an arguable case on merits. Hence,
suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal
is sought.
4. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
vehemently opposed the application and submitted
4 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
that the nature and gravity of the offences are serious.
It is contended that in the event of suspension of
sentence and release of the applicant on bail, the
possibility of misuse of liberty cannot be ruled out.
Learned APP submits that the alleged contradictions
and omissions have been duly considered by the trial
Court and that the prosecution has proved the case
beyond reasonable doubt. It is, therefore, urged that
no case for suspension of sentence is made out.
5. This Court has given anxious consideration to
the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for
the applicant and the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor, and has perused the impugned judgment
and the evidence on record, to the limited extent
permissible at the stage of consideration of an
application for suspension of sentence under Section
430 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
6. It is well settled that while considering an
application for suspension of sentence pending
appeal, the appellate Court is not expected to
undertake a detailed re-appreciation of evidence or
record findings on the merits of the conviction. The
Court is required to examine whether the appeal
raises arguable points, whether the sentence is of such
nature that its execution may be suspended, and
whether the conduct of the applicant warrants the
exercise of discretion in his favour.
5 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
7. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the
applicant was on bail throughout the trial and there is
no material placed on record to indicate that he has
misused the liberty so granted or attempted to
influence the witnesses or obstruct the course of
justice. The conduct of the applicant during trial is,
therefore, a relevant circumstance which weighs in his
favour at this stage.
8. The conviction of the applicant is primarily
based on the testimony of the prosecutrix. The
learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out
certain inconsistencies, omissions, and alleged
variances in her version, as also in the testimony of
other prosecution witnesses. It is also urged that there
is a delay of about seven hours in lodging the First
Information Report and that the prosecution has not
offered a satisfactory explanation for such delay. It is
further contended that the medical evidence does not
lend corroboration to the prosecution case and that
the Chemical Analyser's report has not been brought
on record.
9. Without expressing any opinion on the
correctness or otherwise of these submissions, this
Court finds that the issues raised by the applicant are
not frivolous and give rise to arguable points which
will require detailed examination at the stage of final
hearing of the appeal. The evidentiary appreciation
undertaken by the trial Court, the effect of the alleged
delay in lodging the FIR, and the extent of
6 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
corroboration by medical and other evidence are
matters which fall within the domain of appellate
scrutiny.
10. The offences for which the applicant has been
convicted are undoubtedly serious in nature. However,
seriousness of the offence, by itself, cannot be the sole
ground to deny suspension of sentence, particularly
when the appeal is likely to take time for final
disposal and the applicant has already undergone a
part of the substantive sentence.
11. Having regard to the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, the nature of evidence, the
conduct of the applicant during trial, and the
principles governing the exercise of jurisdiction under
Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the
applicant has made out a case for suspension of
sentence pending appeal.
12. The substantive sentence imposed vide the
judgment and order dated 19.11.2025 in Sessions
Case No. 295/2021 by the Additional Sessions
Judge-3, Nagpur is hereby suspended till final disposal
of the appeal. The applicant shall be released on the
following terms.
I. The applicant shall execute PR bonds in the
sum of Rs.20,000/- with one solvent surety in the like
amount.
7 6-APPA-990-2025.odt
II. The applicant shall report to the trial Court on
the first day of every calendar month until further
orders.
III. The applicant shall furnish his current address
proof and mobile number to the concerned trial Court
and shall inform the Court of any change in address or
the contact number.
The criminal application is disposed off.
(NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.)
MP Deshpande
Signed by: Mr. M.P. Deshpande
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 19/12/2025 18:29:41
