-1- Cri.Appln.854.2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 854 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 154 OF 2025 Hakim Mahmood Kazi, Age : 34 years, Occu. : Driver, R/o. Ramnagar Sanja, Tq. & Dist. Dharashiv. … Applicant Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Police Station Anandnagar, Dharashiv, Tq. & Dist. Dharashiv. 2. X.Y.Z. … Respondents …… Mr. V. B. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. Vaishali S. Chaudhari, APP for Respondent – State. Mr. Swapnil Mule, Advocate for Respondent No.2 (Appointed through Legal Aid). ...… CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. DATED : 22 APRIL 2025 ORDER : 1. Present application is for suspension of substantive sentence and grant of bail on account of conviction and sentence awarded by learned Special Judge, Osmanabad in Special Case No. 80 of 2019 dated 03.01.2025. 2. In support of relief, it is submitted that, applicant was 2025:BHC-AUG:11585 -2- Cri.Appln.854.2025 tried by Special Judge in above case on the charge of commission of offence punishable under sections 363, 366A, 376(1) of Indian Penal Code and under sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. It is submitted that, prosecution has examined over 9 to 10 witnesses. He pointed out that, age of the victim is not substantiated or proved. On this count, he took this court through the evidence of medical expert and would submit that, in the light of his testimony victim could be major and not minor. That apart, there are good grounds in appeal which is preferred challenging the conviction. However, the appeal is of 2025 and it will take long to be heard and decided. Hence, he seeks relief of suspension of sentence and grant of bail. 3. Learned APP opposed on the ground that serious offence is proved to be committed. That, on full-fledge trial guilt has been recorded. Even learned counsel appointed for respondent no.2 - informant strongly opposed and rather proposed that appeal itself be heard finally. 4. Heard. Perused the papers. Vide Special Case No.80 of 2019 applicant was charge sheeted and tried for above offences, both under penal sections as well as under the provisions of POCSO Act. Victim, according to prosecution, was 15 years of age. In -3- Cri.Appln.854.2025 support of age, PW7 Headmaster of the School appears to be examined. Opinion expressed by examining medical doctor is by way of margin on radiology report. Such issues can be dealt in appeal. Sentence awarded is of 10 years. Multiple sexual intercourse on the minor are reported and shown to be proved through medical evidence. Resultantly, taking the nature and gravity of the offence into consideration, relief as prayed cannot be granted. 5. The application is rejected. (ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.) Tandale