High Court
Legal Reasoning
cria-358.2466.Now turning towards the chit, it is to be noted that it isstated to be written by Bhanudas and the handwriting isidentified by the son. Therefore, prima facie, we accept that it isin the handwriting of the deceased. The note / chit runs thus:-“ ek÷;k ‘ksrkr dkyok e/;s ik.kh vk.kqu lksMY;kewGs eh R;kpkukokoj tho nsr vkgs dkj.k gs gk dkyok ek>k vlqulq/nk ;kph /kedh nsoqu vkEgh nxM dk<r ukgh gs ik.kh ;soqnsr ukgh dkj.k ek÷;k cktqyk dks.kh ukgh eh ,dVk vkgs eykgs =kl lgu >kyk ukgh gs rdzkj nksu o”kkZiklqu vkgs eyk 10QqV tkxk ?ksmu gs vxksnj ek÷;k lkscr ,dne izsekus jkghysuarj jLrk >kyk dh nxM Vkdqu iqUgk ek÷;k lkscr rdjhjhdsyh eh ,dne ‘kkgq o xjhc ek.kql vkgs- gs ek÷;k MksD;kP;koj xsy Eg.kqu eh ;kapk =kl daVkGqu tho nsr vkgs eyk gaxjxk¼i-d-½ ;sFkhy xkokr ;kaph U;k; dj.kkj ,dgh ek.kql ukgheyk ukQj J/nk Js;’k Jou Jhdkar ekQ djk dh eh dksukdMstkoq eyk dks.khgh lkFk fnyk fdaok vkEgh rqeP;k lkscr vkgseyk nqljk ekxZ uOgrk Eg.kqu eh tho nsr vkgs- eyk =klns.kkjk lekt gkVdj ikVhy vkgs- jke dkacGs gaxjxk 1½rqG’khjke ckykth irkGs gaxjxk 2½ ;kno ckykth irkGsgaxjxk 3½ izdk’k ckykth irkGs gaxjxk 4½ lqHkk”k jktjkeirkGs gs 4 feGqu eyk =kkl gksrk Eg.kqu eh tho nsr vkgseyk ;kph U;k; feGkok iksyhl LVs’ku eq[ksM ftYgk ukansMfpB~Bh Hkkuqnkl euksgjjko nLrqjs gaxjxk- vkiyk Hkkuqnkl- J/nk rq Vsa’ku ?ksoq udks eyk ekQ dj” cria-358.247.English translation of the said note / chit reads as under:-“ I am giving my life (committing suicide) because of thewater being brought in the canal in my field. Even thoughthis canal is mine, I am being threatened (by them) that wewill not remove the blocked stones and will not allow waterto flow. Because I have no one by my side, I am alone. Icannot bear this. This complaint has been for two years.They took 10 feet of my space, these people behaved wellwith me initially, then when the road was constructed,placed stones and complained again to me. I am a verysimple and poor person. Because it is gone over my head, Iam dying because I am tired of it. Not a single person inHangarga village can give justice to me on this matter.Shraddha, Shreyash, Shravan, Shrikant, I am sorry, whomdo I go? No one supported me or said we are with you. Iam giving my life because I had no other choice. Thecommunity that is bothering/troubling me is Hatkar Patil.Ram Kamble, Hangarga, 1) Tulshiram Balaji Patale,Hangarga, 2) Yadav Balaji Patale, Hangarga, 3) PrakashBalaji Patale, Hangarga 4) Subhash Rajaram Patale, thesefour together were troubling me, so I am giving up (mylife). I want justice. Police Station, Mukhed, District-Nanded, A letter from Bhanudas Manoharrao Dasture,Hangarga.Yours only,BhanudasShraddha you don’t worry. “ (Translated by Senior Translator and Interpreter, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) cria-358.2487.From the above contents, it can be seen that Bhanudashad grievance regarding non removal of the stones from thecanal, which he says that it was belonging to him. But then inthis chit also he has not mentioned that any legal action wastaken by him or not. Further, it is stated that nobody wassupporting him and therefore, he felt that he has been left withno option. At one place he says that he is troubled by HatkarPatil community. But then the present applicant is not from thatcommunity. What was the acts of harassment given to him havenot been given in detail. Mere mention of the word “harassment”is not sufficient. There was no overt-act attributed whichamounts to abetment within Section 107 of the Indian PenalCode. The legal position that stands, can be considered from thedecisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dilip S/o Ramrao Shirasaoand others vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2016 ALL MR(Cri) 4328, Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of MadhyaPradesh, 2002 Cri.L.J. 2796; Madan Mohan Singh vs. State ofGujrat and another, reported in (2010) 8 SCC 628; S.S.Chheena vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan reported in 2010 All MR (Cri)3298 (S.C.)., Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)(2009) 16 SCC 605. This Court has already considered the legalposition in the matter of Uddhav Bhaurao Shinde vs. the State of cria-358.249Maharashtra and another (Criminal Application No.1067 of 2023,decided on 9th December 2024). 8.Thus, the perusal of the entire material in the charge-sheetincluding the FIR, will not make out an offence under Section306 of the Indian Penal Code much less with common intentioni.e. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It would be therefore,unjust to ask the applicant to face the trial. Though theamendment has not been carried out, as in the meantimecharge-sheet has been filed, we have no hesitation in quashingthe FIR, Charge-sheet as well as the further proceedings arisingout of the same. Hence we proceed to pass the following order:- O R D E R(I)The Application stands allowed.(II)The Charge-sheet No.29 of 2024 i.e.proceedings in R.C.C. No.67 of 2024 pendingbefore the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,Mukhed, District-Nanded for the offence punishableunder Section 306 read with Section 34 of theIndian Penal Code, arising out of the the FirstInformation Report vide Crime No. 270 of 2023dated 17th September 2023 registered with Mukhed cria-358.2410Police Station, Taluka-Mukhed, District-Nandedstands quashed and set aside as against applicant -Rama s/o Sambhaji Kamble. (III)Fees of learned Advocate Ms. Laxmi R.Thakur, who is appointed to represent the cause ofrespondent No.2 is quantified at Rs.5,000/-, to bepaid by the High Court Legal Services SubCommittee, Aurangabad.[ROHIT W. JOSHI] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] JUDGE JUDGE asb/JAN25
Arguments
cria-358.241 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.358 OF 2024Rama S/o Sambhaji Kamble,Age-58 years, Occu:Agri.,R/o-Hangarga (Pk), Tq-Mukhed,District-Nanded ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station, Mukhed, Tq-Mukhed, District-Nanded,2) Shreyash S/o Bhanudas Dasture, Age-19 years, Occu:Education, R/o-Hangarga (Pk), Tq-Mukhed, District-Nanded. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. Govind G. Suryawanshi Advocate for Applicant. Mr. N.R. Dayama, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1. Ms. Laxmi R. Thakur Advocate for Respondent No.2 (Appointed) ... CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND ROHIT W. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 2nd JANUARY, 2025 ORDER [PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] :1.Present Application has been filed for quashing the FirstInformation Report (for short “the FIR”) vide Crime No. 270 of cria-358.2422023 dated 17th September 2023 registered with Mukhed PoliceStation, Taluka-Mukhed, District-Nanded for the offencepunishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IndianPenal Code. 2.Heard learned Advocate Mr. Suryawanshi for the applicant,learned APP Mr. Dayama, for respondent No.1 and learnedAdvocate Ms. Thakur appointed to represent the cause ofrespondent No.2.3.Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that theapplicant has been arrayed as accused No.1, however the suicidenote which has been left by the deceased Bhanudas would showthat there was no overt-act committed by the applicant. The landbelonging to the applicant is not adjacent to the land of thedeceased so that there could have been any loss to the deceasedor gain to the applicant. It appears that there was a disputeraised by the deceased since last about two years in respect ofthe canal. The suicide note blames everybody stating thatnobody was in his favour. The ingredients of the offence underSection 306 and 107 of the Indian Penal Code are not at allattracted, so also there was no question of common intention of cria-358.243the applicant with the co-accused. Therefore, it would be unjustto ask the applicant to face the trial. 4.Learned APP as well as learned Advocate appointed torepresent the cause of respondent No.2 vehemently submittedthat the name of the present applicant is mentioned in thesuicide note as the person who was responsible for the death ofdeceased Bhanudas. Statements of witnesses are alsosupporting. It has been stated that the present applicant, who ishaving land adjacent to the land of the deceased, raised disputeby throwing stones in the canal near the boundary of the field.Though Bhanudas was fighting, nobody supported him. Now, thecharge-sheet is filed with the learned Judicial Magistrate FirstClass, Mukhed, District-Nanded on 15th February 2024, let thetrial be conducted.5.Respondent No.2, informant is the son of the deceased. Inthe FIR he has stated that he resides at Nanded at present forNEET Classes. It is also stated that though they are from villageHangarga, the construction of house was in progress atHangarga and therefore, his father Bhanudas, mother and twobrothers were residing in the rented premises at village Degloor. cria-358.244Bhanudas used to go up and down to look-after his 35 acres ofland in Hangarga. Informant was informed around 10.00 a.m. on25th June 2023 by his maternal uncle that Bhanudas hasconsumed poisonous medicine around 8.00 p.m. on the previousday and has been admitted to Finix Hospital, Nanded. Theinformant went to hospital, where he found that his father was inunconscious state and was under treatment. While undertreatment on 17th July 2023 when need was felt for money,informant searched for ATM Card of the deceased. At that timehe found note on a chit. The fact was then informed by him tothe relatives. Unfortunately Bhanudas expired on 29th August2023. Thereafter the FIR has been lodged on the basis of thesaid chit. The statements of the witnesses are almost on thesame line. They have tried to say that the applicant has his landadjacent to the land of Bhanudas. However, it is to be notedfrom the statement of witness Ramesh Ware, who is father-in-law of Bhanudas, that he was cultivating the said land on behalfof or for Bhanudas. But then he says that since last two yearsthere was dispute on account of throwing of stones in the canaladjacent to the boundary of Gut No.80. He has not explained asto where the dispute was raised, whether any action beforeTahsildar or Civil Court was taken on behalf of Bhanudas or by cria-358.245Bhanudas. Mere statement that there was dispute, will not besufficient. If there was no action for assertion of right, denial ofsuch right cannot be considered. Mother of the deceasedBhanudas has also given similar statement. So also the widow ofBhanudas has also given similar statement. She further statesthat around 5.00 p.m. of 24th June 2023 Bhanudas had lefthome i.e. at Degloor by saying that he is going to purchasevegetables. He did not return till night, but around 10.00 p.m.she was informed by her uncle that Bhanudas has consumedpoisonous medicine and has been taken to Nanded fortreatment. She went to Finix Hospital at Nanded, where shefound her husband in unconscious state, where the informanthas also gone. She states that her brother Shivraj had given herbag which was on the person of her husband. When need arosefor money, they searched for the ATM Card of deceasedBhanudas, which they could found in the pocket of the shirtwhich Bhanudas was wearing on the day of incident. The ATMCard was found along with the chit. Thus, it is to be noted thateven from her statement we are unable to get that there wasany overt-act attributed to the applicant. It is not her case alsothat on the day of incident applicant had met Bhanudas.