Bombay High Court
SANDEEP VITTHAL ZUNJARRAOversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court disposed of the bail application without grant and ordered the trial to be concluded within four months.
Summary
The applicant, Sandeep Vitthal Zunjarrao, has been in custody for five years on charges under Sections 376(J)(N), 328, 506, 34 of the IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8 of the POCSO Act. The applicant’s counsel indicated that all witnesses except the investigating officer have been examined and requested that the bail application not be pressed, seeking instead an expedited trial. The State and a second respondent argued that the investigating officer’s testimony was still pending. The Special Court, noting the prolonged detention and the minimal remaining evidence, dismissed the bail application and directed that the trial be completed within four months. The court also ordered payment of professional fees to the legal‑aid counsel for the second respondent.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused who has been in custody for five years.
- Whether the trial should be expedited given the pending testimony of the investigating officer.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 328, 34, 376(J)(N), 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4, 6, 8
Subjects
- bail
- trial delay
- IPC
- POCSO
- expeditious trial
- custodial detention
Judgment
30-BA-4792-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4792 OF 2025
Sandeep Vitthal Zunjarrao .....Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .....Respondents
.....
Mr. Atharva S. Jagtap i/b Mr. Amit Mane, for the Applicant.
Mr. Ajay Patil, A.P.P., for the Respondent-State.
Ms. Priyanka S. Tiwari h/f Adv. Ashley Cusher, for the Respondent
No.2 (through Legal Aid).
Mr. Amol Khonde, A.P.I., Khadakpada Police Station, Kalyan, present
in Court.
..…
CORAM : SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
DATE : 9th OCTOBER 2026
P.C.:-
1. Mr. Atharva Jadhav, learned Counsel for the Applicant
submitted that the Accused is in jail since last four years. He submits
that the offence is under Section 376(J)(N), 328, 506 and Section 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 6 and 8 of Protection of
Children from Sexual Officences Act, 2012 (POCSO). He further
Manisha 1/3
MANISHA Digitally signed by
MANISHA
BALKRISHNA BALKRISHNA TALEKAR
Date: 2026.10.09
TALEKAR 19:02:10 +0530
30-BA-4792-2025.doc
submits that as on today all the witnesses except the Investigating
Officer are examined.
2. Learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State as well as learned
Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 also submitted that only
the Investigating Officer is yet to be examined.
3. In light of the aforesaid facts, the learned Counsel for the
Applicant submits that he would not press for bail application. He
however submits that the trial be expedited.
4. Taking into consideration the fact that the Applicant is behind
bars since last five years and further taking into consideration that
only the Investigating Officer is remained to be examined, the
learned Special Court taking the trial is directed to dispose of the
matter as expeditiously as possibly preferably within a period of four
months from today.
5. In view of above, Bail Application No.4792 of 2025 stands
disposed of.
Manisha 2/3
30-BA-4792-2025.doc
6. The Office is directed to disburse the professional fees to
learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 who is appointed through
legal aid.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)
Manisha 3/3
Checking your session…