Bombay High Court

SANJAY RAMCHANDRA GOSAVIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Decided: 19 August 2026
Disposal: Allowed

Holding

The appeal is allowed and bail is granted to the appellant.

Summary

The appellant, Sanjay R. Gosavi, appealed against the denial of bail for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleging a 15‑day delay in filing the FIR and claiming the allegations were false. The prosecution contended that the appellant was involved in a serious rape offence and should not be released. The court noted the delay in the FIR, the appellant’s prolonged pre‑trial detention of 11 months, and that the alleged act appeared consensual on a prima facie basis. Balancing these factors, the judge inclined to grant bail. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the lower court’s order set aside, and bail was granted on a bond of Rs.25,000 with sureties, subject to restrictions on movement and tampering with evidence.

Issues considered

Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the appellant’s prolonged pre‑trial custody justify granting bail under Section 14‑A of the SC & ST Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Whether the nature of the alleged offence (rape) warrants denial of bail despite the procedural delays.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 333, 351(2), 64, 78
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14-A, 3(1)(i)(ii), 3(1)(r)(s)

Subjects

bail
rape
SC & ST Act
delay in FIR
pre‑trial detention
criminal procedure

Judgment

Digitally
signed by
DINESH
DINESH SADANAND
SADANAND SHERLA 28-apeal-391-26.odt
SHERLA Date:
2026.08.21
19:35:27
+0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 391 OF 2026

Sanjay R. Gosavi …Appellant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents.

…………..
Mr. Bhalchandra S. Shinde for the Appellant.
Mr. V.N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent/State.
Ms Ekta Patil i/b Mr. Prashant Hagare for the Respondent No.2.
…………..

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE : 19.08.2026.

P.C. :

1. This appeal under Section 14-A of the of the Scheduled Caste
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short
“SC & ST Act”) takes exception to the order dated 25.03.2026
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Indapur, Pune
below Exhibit-3 in Special Case No. 776 of 2025.

2. By the order impugned, the learned Additional Sessions
Judge has rejected the application for bail filed by the appellant,
who is in custody in C.R. No. 554 of 2025 registered at Indapur
Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 64,
78, 351(2) & 333 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and
Sections 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(1)(i)(ii) of the SC & ST Act.

Dinesh S. Sherla 1/3
28-apeal-391-26.odt

3. It is the case of the prosecution that the present appellant,
on the date of incident, had barged into the house of the
prosecutrix and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned
APP for the State, and the learned counsel for respondent No.2.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is a
delay of about 15 days in lodging the First Information Report. It is
submitted that with ulterior motive false allegations are made
against the appellant. It is submitted that the appellant is in jail for
11 months and the trial is still at the stage of framing of charge.
It is therefore, submitted that the appellant may be released on
bail.

6. On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondent/State
and learned counsel for respondent No.2 submit that the appellant
is involved in a serious offence of rape. It is submitted that
considering the nature of the crime, the appellant may not be
released on bail.

7. I have perused the statement of the prosecutrix. There is a
delay in lodging the First Information Report. Prima facie, the
alleged act appears to be consensual. The appellant is in jail for 11
months. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am

Dinesh S. Sherla 2/3
28-apeal-391-26.odt

inclined to release the appellant on bail. In the result, the following
order is passed.
ORDER
(a) The Appeal is allowed.

(b) The impugned order is set aside.

(c) The appellant shall be released on bail in C.R. No. 554
of 2025 registered at Indapur Police Station, Pune for the
offences punishable under Sections 64, 78, 351(2) & 333 of
the BNS and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(1)(i)(ii) of the SC & ST
Act, on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with
one or two sureties in the like amount.

(d) The appellant shall not enter into the limits of Indapur
Police Station except to attend the dates before the trial
court till the conclusion of the trial.

(e) The appellant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.]

Dinesh S. Sherla 3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…