Bombay High Court
Eknath S/O. Madhukar Khode vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Khamgaon Rural ... on 13 January, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:401
1 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.562/2023
Eknath Madhukar Khode,
aged about 38 Years, r/o Garadgaon,
Tahsil Khamgaon, District Buldhana. .. Appellant
- Versus -
1. State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Khamgaon Rural, P.S.Tq. Khamgaon,
District, Buldhana.
2. X.Y.Z.
Victim in Crime No.37 of 2013
Through P.S.O.Khanmgaon Rural
District Buldhana. .. Respondents
-----------------
Mr. Ashish R Fule, Advocate (appointed) for the Appellant.
Ms.Sneha Dhote, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1/State.
Ms.F.N.Haidari, Advocate (appointed) for Respondent No.2.
----------------
CORAM: NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATE OF RESERVING THE JUDGMENT: 08.01.2026.
DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE JUDGMENT: 13.01.2026.
JUDGMENT
1) This is an Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth referred to as "Cr.P.C." as short) against the Judgment and Order dated 09.02.2023, passed by the 2 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt learned Additional Sessions Judge Khamgaon, in Atrocity Special Case No.03/2013 convicting and sentencing the Appellant as follows:-
a) For the offence punishable under Section 235 (2) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 452 of the IPC and sentence to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Five Years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rs. One Thousand only).
b) In default to pay fine, the accused further shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Four months.
c) for the offence punishable under Section 354-A (1) (i) of the IPC and he is sentenced to under go Rigorous Imprisonment for Three Years and pay fine of Rs.500/- (Rs.
Five Hundred only).
d) In default to pay fine, the accused further shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for One month.
e) for the offence punishable under Section 3 (i) (xi) of the SC & ST Act and he is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Five Years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rs. One Thousand only).
f) In default to pay fine, the accused further shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Four months.
3 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt
g) All the substantive sentences shall run
concurrently.
h) The accused was in jail from 27.04.2013 to
29.06.2013 & from 23.06.2022 till date of judgment i.e. 09.02.2023. He is entitled to set off for that period under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
2) The prosecution's case, as revealed from the police report, is as under:-
The informant (hereinafter called to as the 'Victim') was residing with her family comprising husband, five daughters, one son and father-in-law at village Garadgaon, Tq. Khamgaon, District Buldhana. The Accused was also residing in the same village behind the Victim's house. The husband of the Victim had gone to Mumbai with his mother for her treatment. The incident took place on 26.04.2013 at 01.30 am. At that time, the Victim was in one room along with her daughters and son and the father-in-law, who was suffering from paralysis was in the hall. They all were sleeping. The Appellant entered the Victim's house and pulled her saree. The Victim raised hue and cry, due to which her daughters and father-in-
law woke up. The Victim tried to catch-hold the Appellant, however, he fled away. Due to the chaos, the neighbourers gathered. On the 4 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt next day morning, the Victim went to the concerned Police Station and lodged the report against the Appellant and Crime bearing No.37 of 2013 came to be registered for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 354(A)(1)(i) of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) and for the offence punishable under Sections 3(i)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short SC and ST Act).
3) During the investigation, the spot panchnama was drawn, the statement of witnesses were recorded, the Appellant came to be arrested, the relevant documents were collected and on completion of the investigation, the Charge-Sheet came to be filed. On committal, the learned Trial Court framed the Charge against the Appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 354(A)(1)
(i) of the IPC and for the offence punishable under Sections 3(i)(xi) of the SC and ST Act, below Exhibit-10. The Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the Charge, the prosecution examined the Victim as PW-1, the neighbourer of the Victim Vinod V. Wankhade is examined as PW-2, the spot panch Baban Ingle is examined as PW-3, the daughters of the Victim are examined as PW-4 and PW-5, the Investigating Officer Kalpana Barawkar is examined as PW-6, the another Investigating Officer Rupali Darekar 5 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt is examined as PW-7, the Head Master of the School, where the Appellant was studying is examined as PW-8, and the Tahsildar, who issued the caste certificate to the Victim is examined as PW-9. The relevant documents such as the caste certificate of the victim, the extract of the School register of the Appellant, the panchnamas, the FIR etc. were brought on record in the evidence of these witnesses.
4) After the prosecution filed the evidence closer pursis, the statement of the Appellant came to be recorded under Section 313(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Appellant stated that, due to outstanding bill of grocery, he was falsely implicated. On appreciating the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court passed the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the Appellant as above.
5) Heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant, the learned APP for the State and the learned Advocate for the victim. Scrutinized the evidence available on record.
(a) It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Appellant that, though several neighbours gathered on the spot, only one neighbourer is examined. The said neighbourer deposed that he heard the sound of the victim's husband and he contradicts the victim. The daughters of the Victim are not the eye witnesses to the 6 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt incident. The case entirely rests on the testimony of the victim and her testimony do not inspire confidence. The Appellant is entitled for benefit of doubt. The Investigating Officer mechanically applied the provisions of SC and ST Act. The Appeal be allowed and the Appellant be acquitted.
(b) It is submitted by the learned APP that, the victim's husband was not at home and the Appellant entered the house and outraged the modesty of the victim. One of the neighbourer, who is an independent witness has been examined. Daughters of victim supports the prosecution's case. The spot panchnama show that, the entrance to the house was from the hall. The prosecution proved the Charge and the learned Trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and no interference was called in the Appeal.
6) The learned Advocate for the victim submits that, she adopts the submissions made by the learned APP.
7) From the evidence of the victim, who is examined as PW-2 and the evidence of the victim's daughter, who are examined as PW-4 and 5, it is clear that the victim's husband was not present at home at the time of the incident as he had taken his mother to Mumbai for treatment. The prosecution's case entirely rests on the testimony of the victim and her daughters. Their evidence show that, 7 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt at the time of incident, they all were sleeping. The incident happened between 1.00 a.m to 1.30 a.m. Though, one of the daughter of the victim i.e. PW-5, deposed that, at the time of the incident, the Appellant, came to their house and caught hold hand of the victim, and the victim screamed, the victim took the Appellant in the hall, in her cross-examination, she deposed that she was sleeping and she had not witnessed the incident. From this, the evidence of this PW-5 is not of much assistance to the prosecution.
8) The Victim deposed that, the Appellant entered the house and pulled her saree and she raised hue and cry, so her father in-law and daughters got up. She deposed that she tried to catch hold the Appellant, however he managed to escape. The another daughter of the victim is examined as PW-4. Her evidence do not corroborate the testimony of the victim. She deposed that, at the time of the incident, the Appellant entered the house, he caught-hold the hand of the Victim and the victim took the Appellant in the hall and the Appellant somehow rescued himself and fled away from the spot and they raised hue and cry. The evidence of PW-4 - daughter of the victim do not show that, the victim raised hue and cry, when the Appellant caught-hold her hand. On the contrary, her evidence show that, the Victim took the Appellant in the hall. There is material 8 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt inconsistency in the testimony of both the star witnesses of the prosecution. It is strange, as to why the Victim took the Appellant in the hall, as deposed by PW-4. The natural reaction of the victim would have been to push the Appellant or assault him. However, the same is not seen from the evidence on record. This evidence on record creates reasonable doubt about the prosecution story that the Appellant tress-passed in the victim's house and outraged her modesty.
9) As is clear from the evidence of the victim, her father-in- law was a paralytic. This indicate that the victim's father-in-law was in such a position that he could not have resisted any incident. What has come in the cross-examination of the victim that, for taking her father-in-law to bathroom, the doors were left open. There is no evidence on record to show that, the washroom/ bathroom of the victim's house was outside the four-walls of the house so as to keep the doors open in the night. Therefore, the explanation of the victim as to why the doors of the house were kept open is required to be seen with doubt. Undisputedly, the Appellant was known to the victim as he was residing behind her house. The re-appreciation of the evidence on record show that, the genesis of the incident is not brought on record by the prosecution.
9 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt
10) The neighbourer, who is examined as PW-2 and the spot panch, who is examined as PW-3, did not support the case of the prosecution. The other evidence is that of the Police Officers, the Head Master of the School, where the Appellant had studied and that of the Competent Authority, who issued the caste certificate of the victim.
11) The evidence on record do not give the assurance in respect of the Charge or the prosecution's case. In the light of material inconsistency in the evidence of the Victim and her daughter PW-4, the prosecution failed to prove the charge against the Appellant. This being the position, the Appellant becomes entitled for acquittal. Resultantly, the Appellant succeeded. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
i) The Appeal is allowed.
ii) The conviction and sentence recorded by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon, in Atrocity Special Case No.03/2013 against the Appellant is hereby quashed and set aside.
10 3-cri.appeal 562-23,J.odt
iii) The Appellant is acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 354(A)(1)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and for the offence punishable under Sections 3(i)(xi) of the SC and ST Act.
iv) The Appellant is behind bars and he be released forthwith, if not required in any offence.
v) The fine amount paid by the appellant be refunded.
vi) The muddemal articles be dealt-with as per the operative order of the learned Trial Court.
vii) The Record and Proceedings be sent back to the learned Trial Court.
viii) Fees of the learned appointed Advocate for Appellant is quantified at Rs.10,000/-(rupees ten thousand only), same be paid accordingly by the High Court Legal Services Authority.
ix) Fees of the learned appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2 is quantified at Rs.10,000/-(rupees ten thousand only), same be paid accordingly by the High Court Legal Services Authority.
(NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.) Kavita Signed by: Kavita P Tayade Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 13/01/2026 10:56:41