Bhanudas Ganpati Natkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026:BHC-AUG:15006 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4851 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 220 OF 2026 Bhanudas Ganpati Natkar, Age : 57 years, Occu : Labour, R/o : Aasangaon, Taluka Partur, District : Jalna. (at present in jail) ... Applicant

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Police Station Ashti, Taluka Partur, District Jalna.

2.

X. Y. Z.

... Respondents .....

Mr. Sunil P. Koli, Advocate for the Applicant (appointed through Legal Aid) Mr. V. M. Jaware, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Neha Udhavant h/f Mr. S. J. Salunke, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

.....

CORAM :

ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

Reserved on : 06.04.2026 Pronounced on : 09.04.2026 ORDER :

1.

Instant application is for suspension of sentence on account of conviction dated 16.10.2024 recorded by learned Special Judge, Jalna in Special Case No. 210 of 2023.

-22.

Learned counsel pointed out that present applicant was arraigned as accused no.2 and was tried vide above Special Case which came to be decided on 16.10.2024. He further pointed out that, there is false implication. That, no specific role is attributed to the applicant and he is not the main accused. That, there are allegations of removing clothes, but the same are not proved. That, here, there was no corroborative medical evidence, i.e. in the sense that, examining doctor had not noticed any injury on the person of victim. That, there are good grounds to be dealt at appeal. That, as appeal would take sufficiently long time to be heard, it is prayed that sentence be suspended.

3.

Learned APP has strongly opposed on the ground that serious offence is proved to be committed. That, victim was barely of 14 to 15 years of age. That, role of present applicant is crystallized and only thereafter conviction has been rendered.

4.

Heard. Perused the papers. It seems that, crime was registered on report by father of the victim according to whom, his daughter was aged 14 years and studying in 8th standard. Victim daughter had reported that on 23.07.2023 while she was alone, accused no.2 i.e. present applicant gagged her, tied her legs with rope and dragged her

-3to the house and latched the door from inside after which accused no.1 disrobed the girl and penetrated his male organ in her private part. On above accusations, crime was registered bearing no. 220 of 2023 at Ashti Police Station and on completion of investigation, both accused were tried by learned Special Judge, Jalna vide Special Case No. 210 of 2023 which ended up in conviction by judgment and order dated 16.10.2024 against which appeal seems to have been preferred and during pendency of the same, present application for suspension of sentence is pressed into service.

5.

After hearing above submissions and on going through record and papers, as submitted, it is emerging that, though present applicant is arraigned as accused no.2, main accused namely Balasaheb was charged for offence under Sections 376DA r/w 34 of IPC. Role of present applicant, as pointed out, has come in the testimony of PW2 victim at Exhibit 48, who had given her age as 14 years. It was he who had initially gagged and dragged victim to the room where accused no.1 was available and thereafter, there was sexual assault on the victim. Further, it has also come in the evidence of the victim that, after she was raped by accused no.1, present applicant i.e. accused no.2 also threatened and called her at filter room and he also subjected victim to sexual assault. Therefore,

-4apparently, as submitted, there are serious allegations and moreover they are proved as trial ended up in conviction. 6.

Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and others v. State of Gujarat (1999) 4 SCC 431 wherein the Hon'ble Apex court has observed that prayer for suspension of sentence should be considered liberally unless there is statutory restriction, and if the sentence for limited duration is not suspended, matter should be expedited.

7.

The other judgment relied, i.e. in the case of Mohan Ambadas Meshram v. State of Maharashtra MANU/MH/2029/2018, is apparently in a Criminal Appeal and not on suspension of sentence. Merits are to be gone in appeal and not at this stage and hence, said ruling cannot be taken aid of by the applicant. 8.

Considering the magnanimity of the charge which is proved, it is not desirable to grant bail or to suspend sentence as prayed. In view of the above judgment relied by the counsel for the applicant, this court is ready for hearing the appeal itself, if so desired. Hence, the following order :

-5ORDER The application is dismissed.

[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.] vre