Sudam Kondiba Gophane v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC22 Jan 2026APPLN/5029/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence; bail pending appeal; POCSO Act 2012 Section 8; IPC Section 354-A(i); Special Judge Jalna; Special Case No. 238 of 2023; Criminal Appeal No. 1079 of 2024; Criminal Application No. 5029 of 2024; appeal through Legal Aid; fixed-term sentence; fine Rs.3,000/- deposited; no misuse of bail during trial; victim PW 1 cross-examination to be tested against memo of appeal grounds; incident of 05.09.2021; Aurangabad Bench; neutral citation 2026:BHC-AUG:2661; decided 22.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment (Special Case No. 238 of 2023, judgment dated 23.10.2024) suspended till final disposal of the appeal; applicant to be released on the same terms and conditions as were imposed by the trial Court. ¶¶24

Sudam Kondiba Gophane vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant should be suspended and he released on bail pending final disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 1079 of 2024. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

The applicant was on bail throughout the trial and neither the prosecution nor the victim alleges misuse of liberty or threat to the victim; this weighed in favour of allowing the application.

¶¶22

Ratio / Principle

The sentence being of fixed term, the applicant can be called upon to undergo it if the appeal is not decided in his favour; the fine amount stands deposited.

¶¶22

Key takeaways

The questions put to the victim in cross-examination will have to be tested in the light of the grounds raised in the memo of appeal; in that view the present application was allowed and the sentence suspended till final disposal of the appeal.ratio¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad (Rajnish R. Vyas, J.), allowed a criminal application for grant of bail and suspension of sentence moved through Legal Aid in Criminal Appeal No. 1079 of 2024, which challenges the judgment and order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the Special Judge, Jalna in Special Case No. 238 of 2023 convicting the applicant under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.3,000/-, with default sentence) and under Section 354-A(i) of the Indian Penal Code (no separate sentence). Allowing suspension, the Court observed that the applicant was on bail throughout the trial and it is not even the case of the prosecution or the victim that he misused the liberty or threatened the victim; that the sentence is of fixed term and he can be called upon to undergo it if the appeal fails; that he has deposited the fine amount; and that the questions put to the victim (PW 1) in cross-examination will have to be tested in the light of the grounds raised in the memo of appeal. The sentence was suspended till final disposal of the appeal and the applicant was ordered to be released on the same terms and conditions as were imposed by the trial Court.

¶1

905-APPLN-5029-24.odt

¶2

2026:BHC-AUG:2661

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5029 OF 2024 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1079 OF 2024

¶6

Sudam Kondiba Gophane ..APPLICANT VERSUS

¶7

State of Maharashtra and Another ..RESPONDENTS

¶8

Mr. Suvidh S. Kulkarni, Advocate for applicant (appointed through Legal Aid) Mr. V.K. Kotecha, A.P.P. for respondent no.1 – State Mr. Mayur Subhedar, Advocate for respondent no.2

¶9

CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. DATE : 22^nd JANUARY, 2026

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

. This is an application for grant of bail and suspension of sentence. The applicant /original accused has preferred an appeal through Legal Aid challenging his conviction under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, by which he was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of Rs.3,000/-. He was also convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 354-A(i) of the Indian Penal Code, however no separate sentence was imposed upon him. The default sentence was also imposed.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the sentence imposed upon the applicant is of fixed term and he is duty bound to undergo

¶13

1 / 4

¶14

905-APPLN-5029-24.odt

¶15

the same once the appeal is decided otherwise. He further submitted that all throughout the trial he was on bail and he did not misuse the liberty and had cooperated for early completion of trial. He submitted that after pronouncement of judgment of conviction on 23^rd October, 2024 in Special Case No. 238 of 2023 by Special Judge, Jalna, he surrendered to the custody of the Court and preferred an application for suspension of sentence, which was allowed. He invited my attention to the testimony of PW 1, who is the complainant, and contended that the evidence of PW 1 is not reliable and conviction on the basis of such evidence ought not to have been awarded.

¶16

Per contra, learned A.P.P. opposed the application and contended that the offence committed against the victim is serious and sentence may not be suspended.

¶17

Mr. Subhedar, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2/victim has opposed the application by advancing argument that the appellant was of sixty-five years and the victim was fourteen years, at the relevant time and the evidence laid by prosecution is reliable and cogent.

¶18

With the help of respective counsel, I have gone through the record of the case. It is the case of prosecution that on 05^th September, 2021 at 05:00 p.m., when the victim was plucking fruits, the accused came near the victim, caught her hand and pressed her chest. The said incident was then reported to the respondent – police station on the same day.

¶19

2 / 4

¶20

905-APPLN-5029-24.odt

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that if the evidence of victim is perused, there are contradictions and omissions and in fact it was the case of false implication.

¶22

It is necessary to observe that the applicant was on bail all throughout the trial and it is not even the case either of prosecution or the victim that the applicant has misused the liberty or threatened the victim. The sentence imposed upon the applicant is of fixed term and he can be called upon to undergo the same, if appeal is not decided in his favour. The applicant has also deposited the fine amount. Testimony of the victim shows that the questions put to her in cross-examination will have to be tested in the light of grounds raised in memo of appeal. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to allow the present application. Hence, the following order :-

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(I) Criminal application is allowed.

¶25

(II) The sentence imposed upon the applicant in Special Case No. 238 of 2023 by Special Judge, Jalna vide judgment and order dated 23^rd October, 2024, convicting the applicant for commission of offence punishable under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 354-A(i) of the Indian Penal Code of three years’ rigorous imprisonment is suspended, till final disposal of appeal.

¶26

3 / 4

¶27

905-APPLN-5029-24.odt

¶28

(III) The applicant be released on same terms and condition as were imposed by the trial Court.

¶29

( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. )

¶30

SSD

¶31

4 / 4

Sudam Kondiba Gophane v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudam Kondiba Gophane v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Rohan S/O Rajendrasingh Yadav vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Ranapratap Nagar, Nagpur

Prashant Shrikrushnarao Deshmukh and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Khadan, Dist. Akola

Rajkumar S/O Ladharam Israni and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Jaripatka Ps, Nagpur

Yunus Ahmed Khan Babu Khan Rangrej and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Hanuman Pandurang Katke vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Satish Venkati Javade vs the State of Maharashtra and Another