Bombay High Court
Rahul Ambadas Gundure vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 27 November, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:51735
Shubhada S Kadam 904-ia-1185-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1185 of 2025
in
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 120 of 2025
Rahul Ambadas Gundure ... Applicant/s
Appellant/s
versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. .... Respondent/s
Mr. Milan Desai along with Mr. Zafar Gujar, Advocate for the
Applicant/Appellant.
Mr. C.D. Mali, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
Ms. Falguni Brahmbhatt, Advocate for Respondent No.2(appointed
through Legal Aid).
PSI-Usha Khose, Pairavi Officer, MHB Colony Police Station, Mumbai.
CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 27th NOVEMBER, 2025.
P.C. :
1. This application is for suspension of sentence and enlargement
of the applicant/appellant on bail in connection with the impugned
judgment and order dated 19th December 2024 in Special POCSO Case
No. 327 of 2021, whereby the appellant is convicted for offences
punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and
Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
Digitally 2012, and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 20 years with
signed by
SHUBHADA
SHUBHADA SHANKAR
SHANKAR KADAM
KADAM Date: fine.
2025.11.28
11:03:23
+0530
1/5
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 28/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
Shubhada S Kadam 904-ia-1185-2025.doc
2. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submits that the
entire evidence on record, more particularly testimonies of the victim and
her mother are full of inconsistencies and contradictions making them
unreliable to sustain the judgment of conviction. He drew attention of the
Court to the fact that the FIR was lodged in respect of the incident
occurred in January and March 2021. According to him, the victim has
candidly admitted about no incident having occurred in January 2021 in
her examination-in-chief itself. Insofar as the incident of March 2021, it is
argued that the said statement of the victim does not get corroborated
either from the history given to the Medical Officer which is claimed to
have been given by the mother nor from the evidence of mother herself
who denies to have got knowledge of the said incident from the victim. It
is argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 in accordance with law. He drew attention of the Court to the cross-
examination of the victim, wherein she admits that whatever has been
stated in respect of the incident of March 2021 is absent in her statement
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.. It is further pointed out that the
Investigating Officer gave admission about appearance of name of one
Pednekar in the medical papers, however, no investigation has been done
in this regard. It is submission that having regard to this fact, the appellant
has reasonable chance of success in the appeal and since the appeal is
2/5
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 28/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
Shubhada S Kadam 904-ia-1185-2025.doc
not likely to be taken for hearing in short period of time, if the appellant is
not enlarged on bail, the appeal will become infructuous.
3. Learned counsel for respondent 2 as well learned APP
opposed the application. According to them, the victim is proved to be
minor and her testimony is sufficient to prove the incident of March 2021.
Reference is made to the cross-examination of the victim, more
particularly, paragraph No.16 of the cross-examination to argue that in the
cross-examination, the entire incident of March 2021 is put to the witness
and she admitted occurrence of the incident. Learned APP, apart from
raising other contentions, drew attention of the Court to the Statement
under Section 313 of the Cr.PC., wherein it is contended that the accused
has not explained as to why the witnesses are deposing against him.
4. In order to suspend the sentence and to enlarge any convict on
bail, such convict will have to make out case of reasonable chance of his
success in the appeal. At this stage, the Court is not expected to record
any findings on the merit of the case. Pima facie, however, perusal of the
record indicates that there are material contradictions and inconsistencies
in the statement of the victim herself as compared to the FIR and earlier
statements. Apart from this, the evidence of the mother also indicates
that the police had called one more person in connection with this crime
and thereafter, he was let go. Similarly, there is prima facie substance in
the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that there is no
3/5
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 28/11/2025 23:04:00 :::
Shubhada S Kadam 904-ia-1185-2025.doc
investigation with regard to the person whose name reflects from the
medical papers.
5. Having regard to overall facts of the case, it could be said that
the appellant has reasonable chance of success in the appeal. The
appeal is not likely to be taken for hearing in short period of time. The
appellant has no criminal history and he is not likely to flee from justice.
Hence, the following order ;
ORDER
1. The application is allowed.
2. The substantive sentence imposed against the appellant by
impugned judgment and order dated 19th December 2024
passed by Additional Session Judge, Borivali (Div), Dindoshi,
Goregaon, Mumbai in Special POCSO Case No. 327 of 2021
stands suspended till the decision of appeal.
3. The appellant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R.Bond of
Rs.15,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court.
4. The appellant not to directly or indirectly contact the victim or
any family members of the victim in any manner whatsoever till
the decision of the appeal.
5. Any breach of condition, will result in this order being vacated
and appellant being required to undergo the sentence.
The interim application stands disposed of in above terms.
Shubhada S Kadam 904-ia-1185-2025.doc
6. It is clarified that above observations are made on prima facie
consideration of the material on record and the same shall not bind the
parties during the final hearing of the appeal.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
