ASIF ASGAR ALI SAIYYEDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

                      Gokhale                            1 of 4                   24-ia-4127-25


                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4127 OF 2025
                                                    IN
                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 805 OF 2023

                     Asif Asgar Ali Saiyyed                                 ..Applicant
                           Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                        ..Respondents

                                                  __________
                     Mr. Sumit Patil i/b. Amit Icham for Applicant.
                     Ms. Gauri S. Rao, APP for State/Respondent.
                     Ms. Sneha B. Pandey (Appointed Advocate) for the Respondent
                     No.2.
                                                  __________

                                        CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
                                                RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.

                                        DATE     : 22 SEPTEMBER 2026
                     PC :

                     1.           This is an application for grant of bail pending the

                     Applicant’s Criminal Appeal No.805 of 2023. In the past, he had

                     preferred Criminal Application No.2392 of 2023 which was

                     withdrawn as is noted in the order dated 03.10.2024. Due to

                     passage of time, we have heard the learned counsel for the

                     Appellant again for consideration of bail on merits.


                     2.           The Appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions

        Digitally
        signed by
        VINOD
VINOD   BHASKAR
BHASKAR GOKHALE
GOKHALE Date:
        2026.09.29
        10:41:10
        +0530
                                    2 of 4                   24-ia-4127-25


Judge-2, Nashik, vide the Judgment and order dated 12.04.2023

passed in Special (POCSO) Case No.73 of 2020. The Appellant was

convicted for commission of the offences punishable under

sections 376(3), 376(2)(n), 376(2)(f) of the IPC and under

sections 4(2), 5(n), 5(l), 5(j)(ii) r/w. Section 6 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. He was sentenced to

suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10000/- and in

default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for six months. The

Appellant is in custody since 09.04.2020.


3.        Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the age

of the victim is not proved. It appears to be a case of consensual

relationship. The defence of the Applicant was that the victim was

his wife. The Applicant has examined DW-2 Prashant Bhalerao in

support of his defence that the Applicant was married to the

victim.


4.        Learned APP, as well as, learned counsel for the

Respondent No.2 submitted that the evidence of the victim herself

is contrary. In any case, she was below 18 years of age and,
                                    3 of 4                24-ia-4127-25


therefore, the offence is clearly made out.


5.        We have considered these submissions. We have perused

the evidence and the impugned judgment. The victim was

examined as PW-1. The accused was the husband of her Aunt. She

has deposed that the incident took place at the end of 2019. She

has stated that the Applicant had established forcible sexual

relations with her. She had become pregnant. She had gone to

Civil Hospital, Nashik. Thereafter, the police were informed and

the FIR was lodged. The FIR is produced at Exhibit-26.


6.        The evidence of PW-4 Dr. Swapnaja Sanap shows that

the ossification test was conducted and the age of the victim was

between 12 to 14 years. She had become pregnant. The DNA of

the fetus, as well as, samples of the victim and the Applicant were

taken. The DNA report shows that, DNA of the victim and the

Applicant matched with      the product of conception. The clear

opinion is that, both of them were concluded to be biological

parents of product of conception of the victim. Thus, there is

strong evidence against the Applicant. The offence is serious. The
                                    4 of 4                 24-ia-4127-25


sentence is imprisonment for life. No case for grant of bail is made

out. The Application is rejected.




(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)              (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)