Bombay High Court
Sanjay Govindrao Gadge vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 25 September, 2025
1 911APPLN2954.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
911 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2954 OF 2025
IN APEAL/585/2025
Sanjay Govindrao Gadge
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
...
Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad - Advocate for Applicant
Mr. B. B. Bhise - APP for State
Mr. Ashok Dinkar Raut - Advocate for Respondent No. 2 - Victim
(appointed through Legal Aid)
...
CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATED : 25TH SEPTEMBER, 2025
PER COURT : -
1. This is an Application for Suspension of the Substantive
Sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the learned Extra Joint
Additional Sessions Judge-1, Nanded, vide the Judgment and Order
dated 10.07.2025 passed in Sessions Case No. 67 of 2022, convicting the
Applicant for offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal
Code [in short, "IPC"] and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous
Imprisonment for ten [10] years and pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in
default of payment of fine, to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one [1]
month.
2. The case of the Prosecution, in brief, is as follows: -
2.1. Respondent No. 2 - Victim was residing along with her
family in village Chikala, Dist. Nanded. She was an agricultural labourer.
2 911APPLN2954.2025.odt
On 20.12.2021, she, along with her husband, went to their agricultural
field and thereafter her husband left for another village. The agricultural
field of the Applicant/Appellant is near to the field of the Victim. The
Applicant/Appellant caught hold of her hand and committed rape on her
in between 05:30 pm to 06:00 pm. Though the Victim cried for help, no
one came to rescue her. In the meantime, her husband arrived on the
spot and the Applicant/Appellant ran away. On the night of the next
day i.e. 21.12.2021, the incident was reported to the Tamsa Police
Station, District Nanded, and Crime came to be registered for the
offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant/Appellant,
the learned APP for the State, and the learned Advocate appointed to
represent Respondent No. 2.
4. The Victim is examined as P.W.1. She deposed that, on
20.12.2021, the Applicant/Appellant committed forcible rape on her in
between 05:30 p.m. to 06:00 p.m. In the meanwhile, though she cried
for help, no one came for her rescue. In the meantime, her husband
arrived. Her evidence shows that, she informed her husband about the
incident and thereafter to her in-laws. Thereafter, she called her brother
and left along with him to her parental house at Brahmawadi, and on
the next day, she lodged a report with the Police Station. The evidence
of the Victim's husband, who is examined as PW2, shows that, on
3 911APPLN2954.2025.odt
20.12.2021, he, along with the Victim, went to their agricultural field,
and thereafter he left for Tamsa village at 03:00 pm. for bank work. He
returned to his field around 04:50 pm to 05:00 pm and saw his wife and
the Applicant/Appellant in a compromising position. His evidence shows
that, after his arrival, the Applicant/Appellant ran away from the spot
and the Victim was in lying position and was crying for help. His
evidence further shows that she informed her husband that the
Applicant/Appellant committed forcible intercourse with her.
5. Undisputedly, the Victim was aged 25 years at the time of
the incident. Though the Victim in her evidence deposed that she cried
for help, the evidence of husband nowhere shows that he heard the cries
of his wife for help. He noticed the Applicant/Appellant in a
compromising position when he reached the spot. This indicates that
the relations between his wife and the Applicant/Appellant were
consensual. The medical evidence shows old healed hymenial tears
present. Though the medical evidence indicates three [3] injuries in the
nature of abrasion on the front side of the Victim, that by itself would
not be sufficient to hold that the act was against her wish. The opinion
of the Medical Officer is, "examination findings are within normal limits,
which neither refute nor confirm possibility of sexual intercourse.
Evidence of application of force are present. Samples are kept for FSL
analysis".
4 911APPLN2954.2025.odt
6. Further, though it was rape against the wish of the Victim, it
is strange that she went to her parental house, and the report was
lodged with the Police Station late evening of 21.12.2021, i.e. after a
period of more than 24 hours. This again fortifies the possibility of
consensual relations between the Applicant and the Victim, and lodging
the report at the instance of her husband.
7. The sentence awarded to the Applicant/Appellant is a term
sentence of ten [10] years imprisonment with fine. The
Applicant/Appellant was on bail during the trial and suffered a total five
(5) month's imprisonment. He has paid the fine. The Appeal is of 2025,
and is not likely to come up for final hearing in the near future. In view
of the above, I am inclined to pass the following order.
ORDER
[i] The Application is allowed.
[ii] The sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the learned
Extra Joint Additional Sessions Judge-1, Nanded, vide the
Judgment and Order dated 10.07.2025 passed in Sessions
Case No. 67 of 2022, is hereby suspended till the final
disposal of the Appeal. In the meantime, the
Applicant/Appellant be released on bail on his furnishing
personal bond of Rs.25,000/-, with one surety in the like
amount.
5 911APPLN2954.2025.odt
[iii] The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence, and shall not leave Nanded District until the
disposal of the Appeal.
[iv] Bail before the Trial Court.
[v] The fees of the learned Advocate Mr. Ashok Dinkar Raut
appointed to represent the Respondent No. 2 / Victim is
quantified at Rs. 10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand], which
shall be paid by the High Court Legal Services
Sub-Committee, Aurangabad Bench.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE]
JUDGE
SG Punde
Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 25/09/2025 19:16:24
