Satish Alias Pappu Jagannath Gaikwad Vs the… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2025)

Satish Alias Pappu Jagannath Gaikwad Vs the… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant to be released on bail in Crime No.0217 of 2024 on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with surety of the like amount, subject to conditions: (a) not to pressurize prosecution witnesses or tamper with prosecution evidence; (b) not to enter village Yesgaon, Taluka Gangapur, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar till conclusion of trial.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Satish alias Pappu Jagannath Gaikwad should be granted regular bail in connection with Crime No.0217 of 2024 (Waluj Police Station) for offences under BNS 2023 Sections 137(2), 64(2), 65, 351(2), POCSO Section 6 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(2)(v).

Court's answer

The statement of the daughter of the informant does not allege that the applicant committed any overt act of sexual assault on her.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant's conduct showed he took the girl to Pune for her admission to the Ashram School; the applicant and the girl are residents of the same village — facts weighed in favour of release.

Key takeaways

Considering all these aspects, the law laid down in Sunil Mahadev Patil (Bail Application No.1036 of 2015) and the principle that bail is rule and jail is exception, the bail application deserved to be allowed on conditions.ratio¶¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Bail — Regular bail — Offences under Sections 137(2), 64(2), 65 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Crime No.0217 of 2024, Waluj Police Station, District Aurangabad (City). Informant's 15-year-old daughter reported missing; she was later left at Pune by the applicant for admission to Ashram Shala. Held: victim's statement does not allege any overt act of sexual assault by the applicant; applicant and the girl are residents of the same village; relying on Sunil Mahadev Patil v. State of Maharashtra, Bail Application No.1036 of 2015 (decided 03-08-2015), and the principle that bail is rule and jail is exception, bail granted on personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with like surety, with conditions not to pressurize witnesses or tamper with evidence and not to enter village Yesgaon, Taluka Gangapur, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar till conclusion of trial. (Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.)

2025:BHC-AUG:28080

1 9 BA.988.2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

9 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 988 OF 2025

SATISH ALIAS PAPPU JAGANNATH GAIKWAD VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sunil B. Surse. APP for Respondent / State : Mr. S. B. Narwade. Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Kachru Ananda Ingle.

CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 06^th October, 2025.

P.C.:

1 Heard.

2 This is an application for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.0217 of 2024, registered with Waluj Police Station, District Aurangabad (City), for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2), 65 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3 The informant averred in the report that her daughter, aged about 15 years, was missing. They took a search for her and

2 9 BA.988.2025.odt

thereafter, the report was lodged alleging that someone might have eloped with her. Subsequently, the applicant left the informant’s daughter in Pune for the purpose of admitting her to the Ashram Shala.

4 The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of love affair between the applicant and the daughter of the informant. They went to Pune as the daughter of informant was willing to join the school and her parents were not allowing her to go to the school. The applicant has roots in the society and he will not flee away from trial. The trial will take a long period. Considering the age of the daughter of informant and that it is a case of love affair, it is lastly prayed to allow the application.

5 The learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 strongly opposed the application and submitted that the applicant is involved in the serious crime. The applicant has committed aggravated sexual assault on the daughter of the informant, who is 15 years old. If the applicant is released on bail, he will pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper the evidence. It is lastly prayed to reject the application.

6 Perused the charge-sheet, particularly, the report and the statement of the daughter of informant and other witnesses.

3

9 BA.988.2025.odt

7 The conduct of the applicant shows that he tried to reach the daughter of the informant to Pune for joining her to the Ashram School. It is not alleged by the daughter of informant in her statement that the applicant has committed overt act of sexual assault on her. The applicant and the daughter of informant are resident of one and the same village. Considering all these aspects and the law laid down by this Court in the case of Sunil Mahadev Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra, in Bail Application No.1036 of 2015 , decided on 3^rd August, 2015 and also on the principle that bail is rule and jail is exception, the application deserves to be allowed on certain conditions. Hence, the following order:-

O R D E R

I. The application is allowed.

II. The applicant in connection with Crime No.0217 of 2024, registered with Waluj Police Station, District Aurangabad (City), for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2), 65 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with surety of the like amount on following conditions:-

4

9 BA.988.2025.odt

a) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner.

b) The applicant shall not enter into village Yesgaon, Taluka Gangapur, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, till the conclusion of trial.

[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]

nga