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 In the past, he had preferred Criminal Application No.2392 of 2023 which was withdrawn as is noted in the order dated 03.10.2024.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 Gokhale VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR 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.)