[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Sanjay Sampat Chandanshive vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 January, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:1524
917.APPLN.2000.2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2000 OF 2025
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 955 OF 2025
Sanjay Sampat Chandanshive,
Age : 54 Years, Occu : Nil.,
R/o. Tembhurani, Tq. Jafrabad,
Dist. Jalna ...APPLICANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Tembhurani, Tq. Jafrabad,
Dist. Jalna
2. X.Y.Z. (Victim) ...RESPONDENTS
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 955 OF 2025
***
Ms. Helkute Nirmala K., Advocate for the Applicant (Through Legal
Aid)
Ms. U. S. Bhosale, APP for Respondent - State.
Ms. Jamdhade Pratibha R., Advocate for the Victim (Through Legal
Aid)
***
CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.
DATE : JANUARY 16, 2026
PER COURT :
1. This is an application for grant of bail and suspension of
sentence.
2. The applicant who is the original accused No.1 was
convicted by the Special Judge, Jalna in Special Case No.196 of 2023,
917.APPLN.2000.2025
for commission of an offence punishable under Section 377 of the
Indian Penal Code and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
seven years and to pay fine. He was also convicted for commission of
offence punishable under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and
directed to suffer imprisonment for a period of one year, so also
deposit the pay of fine. The sentences were ordered to run
concurrently.
3. Sofar as offences under the provisions of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act are concerned, the applicant was
acquitted as well as for commission of offence punishable under
Section 66-E of the Information Technology Act.
4. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has
examined total 11 witnesses.
THE STORY OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT CAN BE SAID TO BE AS
UNDER:
5. On the day of incident, the victim, who was a boy aged of
15 years (age was not proved by the prosecution) was taken by the
accused in a dilapidated quarter and there he was subjected to
unnatural sex. The video of said incident was prepared by accused
No.2, which was seen by PW-5.
917.APPLN.2000.2025
6. PW-5 then showed the said video to PW-1, who was the
father of the victim.
7. On the basis of information supplied by PW-1, the first
information report was registered.
8. During the course of investigation, the victim was
subjected to medical examination. It is in this background the
applicant was charge-sheeted, tried, and convicted for the commission
of offence punishable under Sections 377 and 506 of IPC.
9. Ms. Helkute, learned appointed counsel, submits that there
is absolutely no evidence to show that the victim was subjected to any
unnatural sexual intercourse, since the medical evidence in support of
the case of the prosecution is missing. She further submitted that even
the age of the victim was not proved and the co-accused were
acquitted. According to her, the acquittal of the applicant under the
provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and
Information Technology Act, was not challenged either by the State or
the victim, and therefore findings in that regard have become final.
10. Per contra, learned APP, Ms. Bhosale, has supported the
judgment and has categorically stated that though the age might not
917.APPLN.2000.2025
have been proved by the prosecution, the fact remains that the
testimony of PW-5, PW-1 and PW-2 is consistent. she submits that
nothing has been brought on record by way of cross-examination to
disbelieve the story advanced by the prosecution.
11. The learned counsel for the victim, Ms. Pratibha
Jamdhade, has supported the stand of the learned APP and has
submitted that there are absolutely no grounds made out by the
applicant for suspension of his sentence.
12. I have gone through the record of the case and the paper
book produced by the learned counsel for the applicant. It is necessary
to mention here that, in order to bring home the charge, the
prosecution has examined total 11 witnesses. Though PW-4, the
Medical Officer, has not stated anything about the injury on the private
part either of the victim or of the accused, the fact remains that PW-2,
who was at the relevant time, studying in the 8 th standard, has
categorically stated that he was subjected to the unnatural sex.
Nothing has been brought on record to show that there was any
attempt for false implication the applicant. The only stand taken by
the applicant regarding false implication is that, on the day of the
incident, accused No.1 had been to the stall which was run by PW-1
917.APPLN.2000.2025
and had eaten something there, due to which the dispute arose. Prima
facie, I do not find it to be a sufficient ground for false implication of
the appellant. The appellant was not on bail during the course of trial.
Now, by judgment of conviction, the presumption which is available to
the accused of innocence is lost. In that view of the matter, there is no
merit in an application for suspension of sentence. Hence, the same is
rejected.
13. Since the paper book is already tendered across the bar by
the learned counsel for the applicant, the matter can be fixed for final
hearing, as the accused is behind the bars.
14. The learned counsel for the appellant was appointed by the
legal aid, her fees be quantified as per Rules.
15. The learned counsel for the victim has ably assisted the
Court and she was appointed by the Court to represent the victim, her
fees be quantified to the tune of ₹ 7,000/-.
16. List the Criminal Appeal No.955 of 2025 on 30th January
2026.
( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. )
