Disposed¶40

Yuvraj Prakash Godase v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC17 Jul 2025BA/3771/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application withdrawn with leave; speedy-trial direction to Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras to dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 by 31-10-2025; accused in custody since 01-11-2021; Division Bench liberty order dated 10-01-2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 754 of 2022; victim/prosecutrix examined; 7 prosecution witnesses remaining; POCSO trial timeline; Bombay High Court, Ashwin D. Bhobe, J., 17-07-2025.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the Criminal Bail Application granted; the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras directed to conclude and dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 expeditiously and at any rate on or before 31 October 2025; parties to cooperate in early disposal and not seek unnecessary adjournments. ¶40

Yuvraj Prakash Godase vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant, incarcerated since 1 November 2021, was entitled to relief in light of the liberty granted by this Court's Division Bench order dated 10 January 2023 to move a fresh bail application if the trial in Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 was not concluded within one year. +1 more

¶38

Court's answer

Leave was granted to the Applicant to withdraw the present Criminal Bail Application, the victim/prosecutrix having been examined.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

Considering the liberty granted by the order dated 10 January 2023, the fact that the trial remained unconcluded even as on date, and the Applicant's incarceration from the year 2021 together with his request for withdrawal, this was held to be a fit case for directing the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras to conclude the trial and dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 expeditiously, at any rate on or before 31 October 2025.

¶38

Key takeaways

As part of the terms of disposal, the parties to the proceedings stated that they will cooperate in the early disposal of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 and will not seek unnecessary adjournments.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.), Criminal Bail Application No. 3771 of 2024, decided 17 July 2025: The Applicant, in jail since 1 November 2021 in connection with Special (POCSO & Atro.) Case No. 93 of 2021 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras, had earlier been declined bail, the Division Bench having by order dated 10 January 2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 754 of 2022 dismissed his appeal with liberty to file a fresh bail application if the trial did not conclude within one year. The trial not having concluded, this Court by interim order dated 20 June 2025 requested the trial Court to ensure examination of the victim on 24 June 2025. When the matter was called on 17 July 2025, counsel stated that the victim/prosecutrix had been examined and, on instructions, the Applicant sought to withdraw the Bail Application. Held: leave to withdraw granted; and considering the continued incarceration since 2021 and non-conclusion of the trial despite the liberty granted, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras was directed to conclude and dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 expeditiously and at any rate on or before 31 October 2025, the parties stating they would cooperate and not seek unnecessary adjournments. The prosecution stated that 7 further witnesses remained, to be examined within 2 months, with trial completion undertaken within 3 months. Application disposed of accordingly.

¶1

20-BA-3771-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3771 OF 2024

¶4

Mr. Yuvraj Prakash Godase Versus

¶5

...Applicant

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents

¶7

Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Bhalchandra Mote and Mr. Suyash Nitin Khose, learned Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Tanveer G. Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. Mr. Ghanasham Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2. HC-07 Mr. B. B. Pawar attached to Velapur Police Station, Solapur Rural is present in the Court.

¶8

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 17^th JULY 2025.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Heard Mr. Shirish Gupte, learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent and Mr. Ghanasham Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶11

On 20^th June 2025, the following order was made by this Court :-

¶12

“1. Heard Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. T. G. Khan, learned A.P.P. and Mr. Ghanasham Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶13

The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 10^th January, 2023 had made the following order :-

¶14

“1. After hearing learned Senior Advocate for the Appellant at length, when this Court was not inclined to grant relief of bail, learned Senior Advocate, on instructions, seeks leave to

Page 1 of 4

Gitalaxmi

20-BA-3771-2024.doc

withdraw the present Appeal with liberty to file a fresh application for bail before the trial Court if, the trial arising out of Special (POCSO & Atro.) Case No. 93 of 2021 does not conclude within a period of one year from today.

¶19

It is submitted that, the Appellant is in Jail from 1st November 2021. Taking into consideration the fact that, the Appellant is in jail since 1st November 2021, we expect that, the mandate of the POCSO Act in conducting trial will be adhered to by the learned trial Court.

¶20

3. Appeal is dismissed in the aforesaid terms.”

¶21

Mr. Gupte, learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant states that there is no much progress in the matter before the trial Court, after the order dated 10^th January 2023.

¶22

Mr. Khan, learned APP for State and Mr. Ghanasham Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 state that the progress before the Trial Court was delayed for the reasons attributable to the Accused in the said crime. Mr. Khan, learned A.P.P. and Mr. Ghanasham Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 state that the matter before the learned trial Court is now fixed on 24^th June, 2025. Mr. Ghanasham Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 on instructions from Respondent No. 2 states that the victim would be made available before the learned Trial Court on 24^th June, 2025 for examination. Statement accepted.

¶23

Mr. Gupte, learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant states that the Advocate for the Applicant shall cross-examine the said witness (victim) on the said date.

¶24

Considering the observations made by the Hon’ble Division Bench on 10^th January, 2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 754 of 2022, the learned Trial Court is requested to ensure the examination of the victim on the date fixed in the matter i.e.

Page 2 of 4

Gitalaxmi

20-BA-3771-2024.doc

on 24^th June, 2025. In the event the examination of the victim is not completed on the 24^th June, 2025, then the learned Trial Court to consider listing the matter at its earliest convenience so as to ensure completion of examination of the victim.

¶29

Parties to the proceedings shall cooperate for the early completion of examination and cross-examination of the witness (victim).

¶30

At the joint request of the parties, list this Application on 17^th July, 2025.”

¶31

Today when the matter was called out, Mr. Shirish Gupte, learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant submits that the victim/prosecutrix has been examined. He submits that in view of the oral testimony of victim/prosecutrix, he has instructions from the Applicant not to press the present Bail Application and withdraw the same. He, however, makes a request that the trial in Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 be directed to be concluded in a stipulated time, considering the Applicant is in jail from the year 2021. Leave to withdraw the present Bail Application is granted.

¶32

Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent submits that the prosecution would be examining further 7 witnesses in the present crime. He on instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that said witnesses will be examined within a period of 2 months from today. He submits that the trial can be concluded within a period of 3 months from today.

¶33

Mr. Ghanshyam Jadhav, learned Advocate for Respondent No.

Page 3 of 4

Gitalaxmi

20-BA-3771-2024.doc

2 has no objection for disposal of the present Bail Application with a direction to the learned Trial Court for early disposal of the trial.

¶38

This Court by order dated 10^th January 2023 had granted liberty to the Applicant to move a fresh Bail Application if the trial of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 is not concluded within a period of 1 year from 10^th January 2023. As per the records and the statements made by the parties, the trial is not concluded even as on date. In such circumstances, considering the Applicant being incarcerated from the year 2021 and a request made by the Applicant today of withdrawal of the present Bail Application, this would be a fit case for directing the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras to conclude the trial and dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 expeditiously and at any rate on or before 31^st October 2025.

¶39

Parties to the present proceedings state that they will cooperate in the early disposal of Special (POCSO) Case No. 93 of 2021 and will not seek unnecessary adjournment.

¶40

Criminal Bail Application disposed of in the above terms.

¶41

[ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.]

¶42

Digitally signed by GITALAXMI GITALAXMI KRISHNA KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2025.07.17 21:39:17 +0530

¶43

Page 4 of 4

¶44

Gitalaxmi

Yuvraj Prakash Godase v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yuvraj Prakash Godase v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Siraj Salim Sayyed and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shauba Bapu Khandekar vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivani Vishal Agarwal vs the State of Maharashtra

Namdeo Sayappa Metakari vs State of Maharashtra

Sahil Bhimgsingh Rathod vs State of Maharashtra

Vishwanath @ Bablu Dagdu Ahire vs State of Maharashtra