ROHIT RAMESH THORATversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

                                                    43-APEAL-916-2024.doc

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                        APPEAL NO.916 OF 2024
                                  WITH
                INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3812 OF 2024
Rohit Ramesh Thorat                             …..Appellant
      Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Anr.                 …..Respondents

Mr. Shailesh Chavan with Mr. Sujit Nikam, for the Appellant.
Mr. Nitin N. Nikam, for Respondent No.2.
Mr. P. M. Mane, Dhebewadi, Police Station,
Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP, for the Respondent-State.

                               CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.
                                DATED : 17th FEBRUARY 2026
P.C.:-

1.       The Appellant has preferred the present Appeal challenging the

conviction.


2.       The Appellant has filed the present Application, as the

Appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under

Sections 363, 366A, 376, 376(2)(n), 376(3), and 403 of the Indian

Penal Code, as well as under Sections 4, 5(1), and 6 of the POCSO

Act. The Appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment from 4

years to 20 years under different provisions of the IPC and POCSO


Suresh                                                                 1/4
                                                      43-APEAL-916-2024.doc

Act along with fines. The trial Court directed that all sentences shall

run concurrently and further ordered compensation fo Rs.50,000/- to

the victim from the fine amount.

3.       It is the case of the prosecution that the victim is of 15 years

and 5 months of age. The Accused kidnapped her took her in a lodge

and he had sexual intercourse with her without her consent.

Thereafter, police apprehended the Accused and he was released on

bail.

4.       The learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submitted that

during the course of the trial, the Appellant was on bail. It is

contended that the Appellant and the victim were known to each

other and were in a love relationship. On the said date, the victim

voluntarily accompanied the Appellant, and with her consent, they

stayed in a lodge. It is further submitted that as per the medical

report, there is no evidence of sexual intercourse, and therefore the

offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is not

made out. The C.A. report also supports the defence version. The

evidence of the victim itself shows that she was having a love affair

with the Appellant and that she willingly went with him and stayed

with him. Hence, no case is made out against the Appellant. It is


Suresh                                                                   2/4
                                                      43-APEAL-916-2024.doc

further submitted that the Appellant has been in jail for the last one

year and ten months. Therefore, it is prayed that the Appellant be

released on bail and suspensed the sentence.


5.       The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/victim

opposed the Application stating that the Appellant is a married

person. He is having one son there is no question of having love

affair between the Appellant and victim both of them and the

medical report shows that there were bite marks on her shoulder and

breast. The medical report proves that there was sexual relation

between both of them. The Trial Court has observed that the victim is

15 years and 5 months of age. He took her in a lodge and had sexual

relation with her. He sexually abused her by pretending that he is

having love affair with her. He is married person. Therefore, prayed

to reject the Application.

6.       Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.


7.       After going through the evidence of the victim, it appears that

the victim, who was aged about 15 years, had an infatuation with the

accused and used to chat with him. She used to chat with him on

mobile WhatsApp and used to meet him whenever he called her.


Suresh                                                                   3/4
                                                   43-APEAL-916-2024.doc

When they fled away, she accompanied carrying her clothes with her.

She knowingly went with him; however, considering the age of the

victim, who was about 15 years and 7 months old, she was not

mature enough to understand the difference between love and lust.

The Applicant took her to satisfy the lust and pretended that he loves

her. The minor girl was a child who was not aware about the sexual

relations. She went with him they stayed together. She has narrated

what happened in the lodge and the medical report shows that they

had sexual relations. Considering the age of the victim, and the fact

that the Appellant who is a married person having one son

knowingly took her and satisfied his lust, this is not a fit case for

granting bail and to suspend the sentence. Hence, the Application is

rejected.




                               (MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.)




Suresh                                                                4/4