Full Judgment Text
2025 INSC 518
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. /2025
(@SLP (CRL.)NOS. 4795-4797/2025)
SACHIN APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel Ms. Sangeeta Kumar
appearing on behalf of the Supreme Court Legal
Services Committee for the appellant and Mr. Shrirang
B. Varma, learned counsel for the respondent-State at
length.
Operative Portion of the Judgment:
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. /2025
(@SLP (CRL.)NOS. 4795-4797/2025)
SACHIN APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel Ms. Sangeeta Kumar
appearing on behalf of the Supreme Court Legal
Services Committee for the appellant and Mr. Shrirang
B. Varma, learned counsel for the respondent-State at
length.
Operative Portion of the Judgment:
| It is noted that the appellant herein while |
|---|
initially subjected to imprisonment of seven years has
completed actual sentence of eleven years and eight
Signature Not Verified
months. We have found that the orders of the High
Digitally signed by
RADHA SHARMA
Date: 2025.04.21
17:25:25 IST
Reason:
Court and consequently, of the Special Court to be
1
erroneous and the same are liable to be set aside. In
these circumstances, the impugned judgment dated
26.02.2016 and subsequent orders passed therein on
02.03.2016 as well as the order dated 08.03.2016 in
Criminal Appeal No.30/2015 are set aside.
Consequently, the order of the Special Court dated
28.04.2016 passed in Special(POCSO) Case No.5/2013
convicting and sentencing the appellant herein to
suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of
Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment
for six months is set aside.
| Now, what follows is that the original judgment |
|---|
of the Special Court convicting the appellant and
imposing a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven
years survives. However, the unfortunate reality is
that in view of the impugned judgment and orders, the
appellant has undergone eleven years of actual
sentence.
| In the circumstances, we find that to do |
|---|
| complete justice in the matter | , instead of remanding |
|---|
the Criminal Appeal No.30/2015 on the file of the High
2
Court, we exercise our powers under Article 142 of the
Constitution of India and restore the original
sentence imposed on the appellant herein which is
seven years of imprisonment. Since the appellant has
completed eleven years and eight months of
incarceration i.e. a sentence more than that
originally imposed on him, we find that the ends of
justice would be met if, instead of rehearing his
appeal on the original sentence, the matter is
concluded and the appellant is released from jail
forthwith.
| Consequently, the Criminal Appeal No.30/2015 |
|---|
pending on the file of the High Court of Judicature at
Bombay Nagpur Bench, Nagpur is rendered infructuous
and therefore, the same stands disposed of.
| Ordered accordingly. |
|---|
| Resultantly | , the respondent-State and |
|---|
Superintendent, Nagpur Central Jail, Maharashtra are
directed to release the appellant from the jail
| forthwith. |
|---|
3
| The appeals are allowed and disposed of in the |
|---|
aforesaid terms.
……………………………………………………………….,J.
(B.V. NAGARATHNA)
………………………………………………………………..,J.
(SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 21, 2025
4
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4795-4797/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26-02-2016
in CRLA No. 30/2015 08-03-2016 in CRLA No. 30/2015 28-04-2016 in CN
No. 05/2013 passed by the Special Judge, Warora, in Special (POCSO)
Case No.05/2013]
SACHIN Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s)
(IA No. 73732/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
IA No. 73733/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT)
Date : 21-04-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Sangeeta Kumar, AOR
Mrs. Vithika Garg, Adv.
Ms. Vidushi Garg, Adv.
Mr. Hemant Kumar Tripathi, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Permission is granted to learned counsel for the
petitioner to correct the typographical error at ‘page 27’
of the memorandum of Special Leave Petitions to substitute
the words “Odisha”, “Odisha Secretariat” and “Bhubaneswar-
751001” with “Maharashtra”, “CS Office Main Building,
th
Mantralaya, 6 Floor, Madame Cama Road, Mumbai-400032”.
Similarly, the word “Circle Jail, Cuttack at Choudwar”
5
shall be substituted with “Nagpur Central Prison, Nagpur
(MS) as convict prisoner No.C/8959)”.
Leave granted.
The respondent-State and Superintendent, Nagpur
Central Jail, Maharashtra are directed to release the
appellant from jail forthwith.
Hence, operative portion of the judgment is being
released today while the detailed judgment will be
released shortly.
The appeals are allowed and disposed of.
(RADHA SHARMA) (DIVYA BABBAR)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
(O PERATIVE PORTION OF THE JUDGMENT IS PLACED ON THE FILE)
6