Court Highlights Serious Inconsistencies in Victim and Complainant Statements, Orders Bail with Strict Conditions While Upholding Trial Merits
In a significant judgment dated October 13, 2026, the Bombay High Court, presided over by Justice Milind N. Jadhav, granted bail to Ganesh Kailas Pawar, a 36-year-old man accused of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his minor daughter. The case, registered under C.R.No.688 of 2025 at Satana Police Station, Nashik, involves serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
The allegations arose from complaints filed by the victim's mother, who accused her husband of sexually assaulting their eldest daughter, aged 15 years and 5 months, on two separate occasions. The applicant was arrested on October 31, 2025, and had been incarcerated for over 11 months prior to this bail application. The Special Court in Malegaon had earlier rejected his bail plea in May 2026, prompting the current application before the High Court.
During the hearing, the applicant's counsel, Mr. Kuldeep Nikam, contended that the case was a fabricated attempt by the complainant mother to "teach a lesson" to her husband following family disputes exacerbated by his alleged alcoholism and domestic altercations. He pointed to glaring contradictions and material inconsistencies in the statements of both the complainant and the victim, including discrepancies in the timeline of the alleged incidents, the presence of family members during the alleged events, and the delay in disclosure of the assault. The defense also highlighted the absence of any injury corroboration in the medical examination report.
Opposing the bail, the Public Prosecutor Mr. Yogesh M. Nakhwa emphasized the gravity of sexual offences against minors, the trauma and stigma that often delay reporting such crimes, and the risk of the accused influencing witnesses if released. The Legal Aid Counsel for the victim supported these submissions, underscoring the protective intent of the POCSO Act and cautioning against premature bail grants in such cases.
Upon detailed examination of the records, Justice Jadhav noted significant contradictions in the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For instance, the complainant's statement indicated the victim disclosed the assault immediately after returning from her maternal home, whereas the victim's earlier statement suggested a delay of about 15 days. Additionally, the number and identity of family members present during the alleged incidents varied between accounts. The Court observed that these disparities went to the root of the allegations and created serious doubts about the prosecution's case at the threshold.
Justice Jadhav emphasized that while the seriousness of the offence and the victim's minority are critical considerations, inconsistencies in core facts may warrant bail. The Court clarified that its observations were strictly limited to the bail stage and did not comment on the guilt or innocence of the accused, which would be determined at trial based on evidence.
Consequently, the Court ordered the immediate release of Ganesh Kailas Pawar on bail subject to stringent conditions: furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of equal amount; mandatory monthly reporting to the Satana Police Station; prohibition on leaving Maharashtra without court permission; non-interference with witnesses or evidence; cooperation with the trial process; and maintenance of updated contact information with the investigating officer. The Court warned that any breach of these conditions would lead to cancellation of bail.
The judgment reflects the delicate balance courts must maintain between protecting the rights of the accused and safeguarding vulnerable victims in sensitive cases involving minors, particularly under the POCSO Act and the newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It also illustrates the judiciary's reliance on scrutiny of evidence and consistency of prosecution narratives when deciding bail applications.
Bottom Line:
Bail - Alleged aggravated penetrative sexual assault by father on minor daughter under BNS and POCSO Act - Bail granted where statements of complainant and victim contained material contradictions and improvements on core facts including disclosure of incident and interval between two alleged incidents - Court held that such inconsistencies created serious doubt at the threshold, though observations were confined to bail.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 64(2)(f), 64(2)(i), 64(2)(m), 65(1), 75, 76, 351(2),
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 4, 6, 10
Ganesh Kailas Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3004097
