##PAGE1##

1

62-appa-1034-25.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.1034/2025

IN

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 624/2025

Prem s/o Nilkanth Naidu Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through P.S.O. P.S.

Hinganghat and another

Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders

of Coram, Appearances, Court's

orders or directions and

Registrar's orders

Ms. Naina Dhoke, Adv. h/f Mr. Mahesh Rai, Advocate for Applicant

Mr. A.R. Chutke, APP for Respondent

CORAM: NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.

DATED : 24^th DECEMBER, 2025

1. The present application is filed under Section 430

of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the

applicant/appellant seeking suspension of sentence and

release on bail pending final disposal of the appeal. The

applicant has challenged the judgment and order dated

28.11.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO),

Court No.1, Hinganghat, in Special (Child) Case No.

19/2019, whereby the applicant–accused has been

convicted for the offences punishable under Section 354 of

the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous

imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in

default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months;

under Section 354-A of the Indian Penal Code and

sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years

with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous

imprisonment for three months; and under Section 354-

A(1)(iv) punishable under Section 354-A(3) of the Indian

Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment

2

62-appa-1034-25.odt

for two years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to

suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant

submits that the applicant was on bail throughout the trial

and has not misused the liberty so granted. It is further

submitted that the trial Court has not properly appreciated

the evidence on record and that the prosecution case

suffers from material omissions and contradictions.

Learned counsel submits that the sentences imposed are

for a short term and that the appeal is not likely to be

taken up for final hearing in the near future. It is also

contended that since the sentence awarded is less than ten

years, hearing of the victim is not mandated at this stage.

On these grounds, a prayer is made for suspension of

sentence.

3. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

appearing for the respondent–State opposes the

application and submits that if the applicant is released on

bail, there is a likelihood of misuse of liberty. It is further

submitted that the trial Court, after due appreciation of

the evidence, has rightly convicted the applicant and that

no case is made out for interference.

4. I have considered the rival submissions and perused

the record. It is not in dispute that the applicant was on

bail throughout the trial and there is no material on record

to indicate misuse of liberty. The sentences imposed are

for a short duration, and the appeal is likely to take its

own time for final disposal. Without entering into the

merits of the case at this stage, this Court is of the

considered view that the applicant has made out an

3

62-appa-1034-25.odt

arguable case, warranting suspension of sentence pending

appeal. Accordingly, the application stands allowed.

5. The substantive sentence imposed upon the

applicant by the judgment and order dated 28.11.2025

passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Court No.1,

Hinganghat, in Special (Child) Case No. 19/2019, is

hereby suspended till final disposal of the appeal. The

applicant shall be released on bail on the following

conditions:

I. The applicant shall execute a Personal Bond of Rs.

10,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the trial Court.

II. The applicant shall report to the trial Court on

every first Tuesday in two months, until further orders.

III. The applicant shall furnish his current residential

address and mobile number to the concerned trial Court

and shall inform the Court promptly in case of a