4-REVN-427-2025 (CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 427 OF 2025 Sagar Narayan Hogade @ Ghogade ...Applicant/s Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. ...Respondent/s _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Laxman R. Shahapur, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Tanvi Kondalkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. : 1. The challenge in this application is to the order dated 6th August, 2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Gr. Mumbai, whereby the bail of the applicant was cancelled. 2. It is prosecution's case that offences under Sections 354-D, 509 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 11(1), 11(4), and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 are registered against the applicant on the complaint of the first informant. It is alleged that the applicant outraged the modesty of the minor daughter of the first informant. The applicant was released on bail by the learned Special Court. Thereafter, on 8th September 2023, the applicant breached the bail condition and entered the jurisdiction of Park Site Police Station. SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.09.11 18:37:39 +0530 4-REVN-427-2025 (CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam 3. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was in custody for three months. The applicant is a security guard and he stays with his aged mother. The applicant undertakes that he will not breach the bail conditions in future. 4. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that the applicant intentionally breached the bail condition and went to the house of the victim where he was standing with a sickle. When the first informant noticed him, he caught hold of him. The allegations against the applicant are serious. The applicant was absconding for one year after the passing of the order. Hence, requested to reject the application. 5. I have heard all learned counsel, perused the impugned order. The applicant was already in custody for three months. He is the sole breadwinner of his family. His aged mother stays with him. The applicant has undertaken that he will not breach the bail conditions, and if the conditions are breached, he is ready to go behind bars. Considering these facts, I pass following order: O R D E R (1) The application is allowed. (2) The impugned order dated 6th August, 2025, passed by learned 4-REVN-427-2025 (CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam Special Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Gr. Mumbai cancelling the bail of the applicant is quashed and set aside. (3) The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Park Site Police Station, nor contact the victim or the first informant directly or indirectly. (4) If the applicant breaches any of the said conditions, his bail shall be cancelled. The revision is disposed of in above terms. 6. Ms. Tanvi Kondalkar, has been appointed by this Court to represent respondent No.2. Professional fees be paid to her as per prescribed Rules. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)