Bombay High Court

LAXMAN BABAN NETKEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 17 August 2026
Disposal: Dismissed

Holding

The bail application was dismissed, and the trial court was directed to expeditiously complete the trial and final arguments.

Summary

The applicant, Laxman Baban Netke, was charged with offences under Sections 34, 376, 376(2)(n), 376(2)(f) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, with the alleged victim being his own daughter. He filed a bail application, arguing that the trial was nearly complete and that the trial court should be directed to finish the trial and final arguments promptly. The Court noted that deciding the merits of the case at the bail stage could prejudice the pending trial and therefore chose not to entertain the bail request. Instead, the Court ordered the trial court to expedite the trial and final arguments in accordance with law. All other contentions of the applicant were left open, and the bail application was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with serious sexual offences against his minor daughter under the IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the pending status of the trial warrants expediting the trial rather than granting bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 376, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n), 506
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 12, 4, 8

Subjects

bail
sexual offences
POCSO
Indian Penal Code
minor victim
trial expeditious
criminal procedure

Judgment

42.BA.4293.2025.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO.4293 OF 2025

Laxman Baban Netke .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents
....................
 Mr. Satyajeet P. Dighe, Advocates for Applicant (appointed through
legal aid).
 Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent No.1 – State.
 Mr. Padmasinh P. Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
 GPSI – S. T. Tonde, Daund Police Station.
...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 17, 2026
P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Dighe, learned Advocate for Applicant appointed

through legal aid ; Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State

and Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2.

2. Considering that Applicant is Accused for offences under 34,

376, 376(2)(n), 376(2)(f) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

read with Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and victim happens to be his own daughter

and learned APP informs the Court that the trial has almost been

completed and date of arrest of the Applicant being 05.05.2023, it

would be appropriate if Trial Court is directed to expeditiously

complete the trial as well as final arguments in accordance with law.

1 of 2
42.BA.4293.2025.doc

3. This in my opinion is the appropriate course of action rather

than dwelling into merits of the matter, lest it would affect the decision

in the trial.

4. In view of the above, learned Trial Court is directed to

expeditiously complete the trial as well as the final arguments strictly

in accordance with law.

5. All contentions of the Applicant are otherwise expressly kept

open.

6. Bail Application is dismissed.

H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Digitally signed
by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HARSHADA SAWANT
HANUMANT Date:
SAWANT 2026.08.17
21:24:18
+0530

2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…