← Library
Bombay High CourtAPPLN/824/2026application allowed

Sachin Machhindra Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026-02-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh2 pages

2026:BHC-AUG:8714 cran824.26 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 902 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 349 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 824 OF 2026 Sachin S/o Machhindra Jadhav

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and another ...

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Pradeep K. Palve APP for Respondent No.1: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. D.K. Dagadkhair .....

CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.

DATED : 26th FEBRUARY, 2026 PER COURT :- 1.

During pendency of the criminal appeal, criminal application No. 824 of 2026 is filed for recording the compromise and setting aside the impugned judgment and order of conviction, awarded under section 376 of the I.P.C.

2.

Perused the application. Heard learned advocate for the applicant, learned advocate of respondent No.2 and learned A.P.P. for respondent No.1 State. The accused and the prosecutrix are present in the court. Perused the report of the learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The Registrar, in his report, stated that the parties were present before him and agreed with the terms of compromise. Considering the serious nature of crime and the law

cran824.26 -2laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Criminal Appeal No. 5256 of 2025, decided on 05.12.2025, (Sandeep Singh Thakur vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another), more particularity Para Nos. 3 and 14 thereof, the case is made out for compromise. 3.

It is an admitted fact that the applicant-accused and the respondent No.2, his wife, are married on 05.11.2016 and they begotten a girl child viz. Krutika, presently one and half years old. The matter has been settled between the parties and the applicantaccused has assured to cohabit with respondent No.2-wife throughout the life.

4.

In view of above, the application deserves to be allowed. It is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses "A" and "B". 5.

The impugned judgment is set aside. The accused is acquitted and set at liberty under section 375 of I.P.C. However, the State machinery has been used and therefore, the find amount shall be credited to the State Government.

(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/