Jagannath Pandurang Waghare vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.

ik-175513639 Bombay High Court 17 December 2025 • 25 min read

Judges (2)

Manish Pitale Delivered Manjusha Deshpande Coram

Counsel (3)

Pawan Mali Counsel Appellant Rohan Surve Counsel Respondent Sharmila S. Kaushik Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

State of Maharashtra Respondent Jagannath Pandurang Waghare Appellant

Case Significance

Jagannath Pandurang Waghare vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. is a Bombay High Court decision dated December 17, 2025 (citation: ik-175513639). The appellant challenged his conviction under Section 376(2)(f) and (i) IPC and Sections 5(j)(ii) and (l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act for repeatedly raping his own minor daughter while sleeping adjacent to her in a one-room house. The Trial Court had sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of natural life. The High Court upheld the conviction and sentence, holding that the 2018 amendment to Section 376 mandates a minimum of 20 years for rape of a woman under 16, and that once The bench comprised Justices Manish Pitale and Manjusha Deshpande. The judgment was delivered by Justice Manish Pitale. Counsel appearing: Pawan Mali (counsel for appellant), Rohan Surve (counsel for respondent), Sharmila S. Kaushik (counsel for respondent).

Summary

The appellant challenged his conviction under Section 376(2)(f) and (i) IPC and Sections 5(j)(ii) and (l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act for repeatedly raping his own minor daughter while sleeping adjacent to her in a one-room house. The Trial Court had sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of natural life. The High Court upheld the conviction and sentence, holding that the 2018 amendment to Section 376 mandates a minimum of 20 years for rape of a woman under 16, and that once imprisonment for life is granted, it means imprisonment for the remainder of natural life, rejecting the State's sentencing submission.

What was the outcome of Jagannath Pandurang Waghare vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.?

The appellant challenged his conviction under Section 376(2)(f) and (i) IPC and Sections 5(j)(ii) and (l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act for repeatedly raping his own minor daughter while sleepi...

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-175513639)