Sanjay Hardas Bhagchandani vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr.

ik-104173342 Bombay High Court 19 December 2025 • Criminal Appeal No.1174; CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1174 of 2022; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.94 of 2025; Criminal Appeal No.2486 of 2009; Criminal Appeal No.2487 of 2009; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No. 1098 of 2024; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174; Criminal Appeal No.1174 • 20 min read

Judges (1)

R.M. Joshi Delivered

Counsel (6)

Siddh Vidya & Associates Firm Divya Maniar Counsel Appellant Ganesh Shelar Counsel Respondent Mayur S. Sonavane Counsel Respondent Shalaka Karkar Counsel Appellant Siddh Vidya Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

State of Maharashtra Respondent Sanjay Hardas Bhagchandani Appellant

Case Significance

Sanjay Hardas Bhagchandani vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr. is a Bombay High Court decision dated December 19, 2025 (citation: ik-104173342). The appellant challenged his conviction under Sections 376(2)(f)(n) and 506 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, with a sentence of 20 years rigorous imprisonment. The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant, finding the victim's evidence unreliable due to unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and the accused successfully rebutting the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act through cross-examination and defense witnesses. The case was heard by Justice R.M. Joshi. Counsel appearing: Divya Maniar (counsel for appellant), Ganesh Shelar (counsel for respondent), Mayur S. Sonavane (counsel for respondent), Shalaka Karkar (counsel for appellant), Siddh Vidya (counsel for appellant).

Summary

The appellant challenged his conviction under Sections 376(2)(f)(n) and 506 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, with a sentence of 20 years rigorous imprisonment. The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant, finding the victim's evidence unreliable due to unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and the accused successfully rebutting the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act through cross-examination and defense witnesses.

What was the outcome of Sanjay Hardas Bhagchandani vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr.?

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-104173342)