JUDGMENT :

1. The present Revision challenges the order dated 06.07.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akot, whereby the discharge application 2led by the Applicant under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), came to be rejected.

2. That, on 01/11/2025 one resident of Rukhed, Tq. Akot, Dist. Akola, lodged the report with the Respondent/P.S. Akot (Rural) against the present applicant stating that the Complainant is a transgender. It was further alleged that, in the year 2015 in order to develop his breast, he used to take medicines and pills and that due to medicines his breasts have been developed and in the year 2021 and he started wearing girls' dresses. In the report it was further alleged that, the present applicant who is serving in Indian Army as Agniveer got friendly with him. It was alleged that, the present applicant proposed him for marriage and under the pretext of marriage, the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with him on 28.10.2025. It was further alleged that, on 30/10/2025 the applicant called him at Akot Bus Stand and thereafter took him on Motorbike to one @at and committed sexual intercourse by abusing her in a 2lthy language.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid report, the respondent/P.S. Akot (Rural) has registered the oAence under sections 75, 296, 351 (2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 read with section 18(D) of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 vide Crime No. 493/2025.

SUBMISSIONS OF APPLICANT :

4. The learned Counsel Mr. Thakkar, appearing for the Applicant, submits that, for the oAence under Section 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), to be attracted, the victim must be a woman. In the present case, the victim/Complainant is a transgender person, and, therefore, no oAence under Section 75 of the BNS is made out against the Applicant. He further relies upon the de2nition of the term “woman” under Section 235 of the BNS and submits that, since the term “woman” means a female human being of any age, the oAence under Section 75 of the BNS is not attracted in the present case.

5. Mr. Thakkar, the learned counsel for the Applicant, further submits that Section 75 of the BNS deals with sexual harassment and provides that a man who commits any of the acts speci2ed therein, including physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures, a demand or request for sexual favours, or showing pornography against the will of a woman, is liable to be punished under the said provision.

6. It is further submitted that even the oAence under Transgenders Act 2019 is not made out against the Applicant as the victim transgender has obtained the certi2cate on 12.02.2026 after the alleged incident of sexual assault on 28.10.2025 and 30.10.2025. The oAence thus cannot be made out, as the Complainant was declared transgender after the alleged incidents of sexual assault.

7. Mr. Thakkar, learned counsel for the Applicant, further submits that the allegations, even if taken at face value, indicate that the physical relationship, if any, was consensual and was allegedly entered into on the promise of marriage with the Complainant. He further submits that the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, does not contain any provision corresponding to Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which was struck down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice reported in (2019) 1 SCC (Cri.) 1. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Trial Court ought to have allowed the discharge application and discharged the Applicant from the aforesaid oAences. He, therefore, contends that the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside and that the Applicant deserves to be discharged from the aforesaid crime.

SUBMISSIONS OF STATE :

8. As against this, learned APP strongly opposes the application on the ground that the oAences alleged against the Appl