Bombay High Court

MOHAMMAD BABU GHORIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Disposal: Dismissed

Holding

The court held that there was no change in circumstances and, given the conviction under the POCSO Act with a 20‑year sentence, the bail application was dismissed.

Summary

Mohammad Babu Ghori, convicted under section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to 20 years, filed an interim bail application claiming his mother’s ill health and the need to care for three minor children after being incarcerated for over five years. This was his second such application, the first having been rejected by the same court on 16 January 2024. The State opposed, arguing there was no genuine change in circumstances to justify successive bail pleas. The court examined the record and found no material change in the applicant’s situation and noted the seriousness of the offence and the lengthy sentence. Consequently, the court held that the applicant was not entitled to bail or suspension of the sentence. The interim bail application (No. 146 of 2026) was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to interim bail pending appeal despite a prior rejected bail application.
Whether the alleged change in circumstances (mother’s illness and minor children) constitutes sufficient ground for bail.
Whether a conviction under the POCSO Act with a 20‑year sentence precludes the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

bail
interim application
POCSO Act
change in circumstances
conviction
high court
appeal

Judgment

                                                                                  930 - CRI IA - 146 - 2026.docx


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                          CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
VAIBHAV
                                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
RAMESH
JADHAV
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV RAMESH
JADHAV
Date: 2026.09.10
10:08:14 +0530                    CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 146 OF 2026
                                                      IN
                                        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 398 OF 2023

                      Mohammad Babu Ghori                                    … Applicant
                                   V/s.
                      The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                        … Respondents



                      Ms. Ankita Nishad (through V.C.) with Ms. Radhika Mali for
                      the Applicant.
                      Mr. Shrikant H. Yadav, APP for the State.
                      Ms. Pallavi V. Thorat for Respondent No.2 (Appointed
                      through Legal Aid).



                                                         CORAM         : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

                                                         DATED         : SEPTEMBER 9, 2026
                      P.C.:


                      1.      By the present Application, the Applicant is seeking the following

                      reliefs:

                              “a)     That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to release the Applicant Crime
                              No.216/2021 in Spl. Case no.20 of 2021 registered with Shirala Police Station
                              on 26.05.2021 for offences punishable u/s 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, 1860 on
                              bail, pending the hearing and disposal of the criminal appeal, on such terms
                              and conditions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper;

                              b)     That during the pendency of the present Application, this Hon’ble
                              Court may be pleased to grant ad-interim bail with respect to the aforesaid
                              offence;”

                      2.      Ms. Pallavi V. Thorat, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2,

                      refers to the order dated 16th January 2024 passed by this Court in



                      VRJ                                                                                     1
                                                      930 - CRI IA - 146 - 2026.docx


Interim Application No. 2980 of 2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 398 of

2023 and submits that the same was rejected on merits. She submits

that this is the second Interim Application for bail at the instance of the

Applicant.


3.    Ms. Ankita Nishad, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits

that this is indeed a second Interim Application for bail and has been

filed on the ground that the mother of the Applicant is unwell and that

he has three minor children. She further submits that the Applicant has

been in jail for almost 5 years, 3 months and 13 days as on date. She,

therefore, submits that this is a ground for grant of bail.


4.    Mr. Shrikant H. Yadav, learned APP for the State, opposes this

Application on the ground that the Applicant cannot maintain

successive Applications on the specious plea that there is a change in

circumstances when there is none.


5.    Perused the record with the assistance of the learned Advocates.


6.    By order dated 16th January 2024, this Court, after hearing the

parties, by way of a reasoned order, had declined the request made by

the Applicant in Interim Application No. 2980 of 2023. I do not find any

change in circumstances to entertain the present Application.


7.    The Applicant stands convicted under the POCSO Act and the

sentence imposed on the Applicant is for a period of 20 years. In view of



VRJ                                                                               2
                                                   930 - CRI IA - 146 - 2026.docx


the above, I do not find any case made out for bail or suspension of the

sentence.


8.    Interim Application No. 146 of 2026 is dismissed.




                                          (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)




VRJ                                                                            3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…