Samadhan Vikram Bhil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026:BHC-AUG:20250 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1683 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 219 OF 2026 Samadhan s/o Vikram Bhil, Age : 18 years, Occupation : Labour, R/o. Khairave, Taluka Shahada, District Nandurbar.

... Applicant

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Officer, Sarangkheda Police Station, Taluka Shahada, District Nandurbar.

2.

X Y Z .....

Mr. Sushil P. Pandit, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. V. V. Jahagirdar, APP for Respondent No.1-State Ms. Pooja Apache, Advocate for Respondent No.2 (Appointed) .....

CORAM :

ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

Reserved on : 05.05.2026 Pronounced on : 06.05.2026 ORDER :

1.

Applicant seeks suspension of sentence and grant of bail as a result of his conviction for offence under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC recorded by the Special Court in Special Case (POCSO) No. 56 of 2020 vide judgment and order dated 11.03.2026.

-22.

It is pointed out that accused is said to be relative of victim. That, there is no convincing evidence. That, on solitary stray sentence in cross, trial court has convicted the accused. Moreover, main accused no.2 against whom there are serious allegations, is already acquitted. That, in FIR there are no allegations. That, there is false implication on account of dispute over piece of land, of which there is admission by victim. He pointed out that spot has not been proved by prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. That, there are several lacunas in prosecution case and so, appeal has been preferred, but it will take sufficiently long to be heard and for above reasons, relief of suspension of sentence is urged for.

3.

Learned APP as well as learned counsel for complainant, have both opposed on the ground that serious offence is proved to be committed. That, applicant who is relative of victim, has misused his position. That, father of the victim has personally seen the act and he has deposed to that extent. For above reasons, they both oppose relief of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

4.

Heard. Perused the papers. At this point, evidence of victim at Exhibit 38 is visited, where she has stated that on 18.12.2017 while she was going to the field, present applicant, her relative, followed

-3her to the river bed and committed sexual intercourse with her and thereafter threatened her. She deposed that he also had sexual intercourse with her in the field three times on different dates. Her father, who is examined as PW2, also claims to have seen the act of sexual intercourse when he went in search of his daughter. Therefore, here, there are severe allegations of committing rape on a minor victim who was said to be studying in 9th standard and who belonged to reserved category. After appreciating the evidence of in all 7 witnesses, conviction has been recorded. Moreover, applicant is said to be relative to victim and therefore there is charge for commission of offence under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC. Taking the same into account, this Court does not find it a fit case to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

I.

Criminal Application stands dismissed.

II.

Fees of the learned counsel appointed to represent respondent no.2 is to be paid by the High Court Legal Services Subcommittee, Aurangabad as per Rules. [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.] vre