High Court

Legal Reasoning

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD34 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2500 OF 20231Pundalik Marotrao Ingole (Deshmukh),Age 45 yrs., Occ. Agri.,R/o Chikala, Tq. Mudkhed,Dist. Nanded. 2Shivaji Madhavrao Lakade,Age 34 yrs., Occ. Peon,R/o Kalyan Nagar Society,CIDCO, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. … Applicants… Versus …1The State of MaharashtraThrough The Police Inspector,Vimantal Police Station,Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 2Sarita w/o Sunil Ingole (Deshmukh),Age 32 yrs., Occ. Household,R/o Chaitanya Nagar, Govind Colony,Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. … Respondents...Mr. A.D. Hande, Advocate for applicantsMr. A.D. Wange, APP for respondent No.1Mr. V.S. Kadam, Advocate for respondent No.2...CORAM :SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATE :07th AUGUST, 2025 234_Cri.Appln_2500_2023ORDER : ( PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )1Present application has been filed initially for quashment of FirstInformation Report vide Crime No.169/2023 dated 16.05.2023 registeredwith Vimantal Police Station, Nanded, for the offence punishable underSection 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 later on byway of amendment for quashing the proceedings in Regular Criminal CaseNo.873/2023 pending before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nanded.2Heard learned Advocate Mr. A.D. Hande for applicants, learnedAPP Mr. A.D. Wange for respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. V.S.Kadam for respondent No.2. 3Learned Advocate appearing for applicants has taken us throughthe entire charge sheet including First Information Report. He submits thatas per First Information Report and charge sheet, present applicants areaccused Nos.3 and 4. First Information Report has been lodged by widow ofdeceased, who had committed suicide. Even if we take First InformationReport and contents of charge sheet as it is; yet, the ingredients of the offenceare not made out. The deceased had left suicide note, wherein he referspersons by name ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ and states that they are 334_Cri.Appln_2500_2023from Chikal. Complete names have also not been taken and it is stated thatdeceased had given hand loan to present applicants and other accusedpersons and when deceased was demanding the repayment, they arerefusing. The entire charge sheet does not say or there is no suchinvestigation to show as to how much amount was taken as hand loan bypresent applicants and when it was taken. Some message conversation fromthe WhatsApp appears to have been taken, but it is not in respect of presentapplicants. Another photograph was also considered in respect ofhandwritten chit, but it is also not in respect of present applicants, but it is inrespect of original accused No.1. Therefore, when there is absolutely noevidence and persons referred as ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ are theapplicants, the Investigating Officer ought not to have even made theapplicants as accused. 4Per contra, learned APP as well as learned Advocate forrespondent No.2 strongly opposed the application and submit that since thecharge sheet is filed, the prosecution will make an endeavour that theidentity of the accused is established. There is suicide note in the form ofWhatsApp message to the informant wife and in the mobile of deceasedphoto of a chit was found and, therefore, the authenticity and legality of thesaid chit would be established at the time of trial. Therefore, this is not a fit 434_Cri.Appln_2500_2023case where the Court should exercise its powers under Section 482 of theCode of Criminal Procedure. 5Before turning to the facts, we would like to have a glance at thelegal position in respect of offence under Section 306 of the Indian PenalCode, for which we must take note of Section 107 of I.P.C.. For that purposewe would like to rely on the decisions in Dilip Ramrao Shirasao and othersvs. State of Maharashtra and another [2016 ALL MR (Cri) 4328], Sanju aliasSanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [2002 Cri.L.J. 2796],Madan Mohan Singh vs. State of Gujarat and another [(2010) 8 SCC 628],S.S. Chheena vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan [2010 All MR (Cri) 3298 (S.C.)] andR. Shashirekha vs. State of Karnataka and others [2025 INSC 402]. Takinginto consideration the ratio laid down in all these authorities and the fact inthe present case, definitely, ingredients of any of the offences under whichcharge sheet is filed are not at all attracted. Further, it has been observed inone of the recent Judgments in Mahendra Awase vs. The State of MadhyaPradesh [2025 INSC 76] that merely for the satisfaction of informantInvestigating Officer should not file charge sheet against accused, arrayed inoffence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In Amalendu Pal @Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal [(2010) 1 SCC 707] similar view that of M.Mohan (supra) is taken, wherein it was held that - 534_Cri.Appln_2500_2023“In a case of abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct orindirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely onthe allegation of harassment without there being any positive actionproximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused whichled or compelled the deceased to commit suicide, conviction in termsof Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code would not be sustainable.”6Now, in view of said legal position we would consider the facts.The widow of deceased lodged First Information Report on 16.05.2023. Shehas stated that her husband Sunil Rangrao Ingole (Deshmukh) was serving asa Clerk with Zilla Parishad Employees Credit Society, Zilla Parishad, Nanded.Her husband left house around 7.30 a.m. on 12.05.2023 stating that he hassome work and thereafter he would go to office. Around 10.30 a.m. he gavephone call to the wife and told her that he is in the office now. She had alsoreceived phone call around 4.00 p.m. from her husband asking, as to whetherthe key has been given by the driver ? She said ‘Yes’. But husband did notreturn late night. She gave phone call around 10.00 p.m., but she could notestablish contact with her husband. She was under impression that he mighthave gone somewhere and, therefore, she went to sleep. Around 4.00 a.m.on 13.05.2023 she gave phone call to husband and thereupon husband toldthat he has gone to Parbhani and would return around 7.00 to 7.30 a.m. Herhusband did not return as stated and, therefore, informant contacted herfather-in-law and called him to Nanded. Her father-in-law arrived around 634_Cri.Appln_2500_202312.00 noon. When they tried to contact Sunil again and again, they foundthat his phone has been switched off. Around 18.47 hours on 13.05.2023 shereceived a WhatsApp message from her husband’s mobile stating that due toharassment he is taking the extreme step. Informant tried to establishcontact by voice recording and called her husband to return back. However,a call was received by her from the mobile of her husband, in which a personasked, as to whose number it was ? She then told that the said numberbelongs to her husband and then that person told that her husband is nearHi-tech city. The informant, her sister, cousin father-in-law and other personswent to the place told by the person. They found two persons present there,who took them near the husband. They found Sunil was in unconsciousstate, however, there was foul smell to his body indicating that he might haveconsumed some poisonous substance. Sunil was then shifted to AadharHospital, Nanded. When informant checked his mobile, she saw the photo ofchit having his signature. The said chit was found in torn condition on theoffice table of her husband on 15.05.2023. Sunil succumbed on 16.05.2023and then First Information Report has been lodged. 7Thus, First Information Report indicates and statements of otherwitnesses also on the same line indicate that one WhatsApp message andalleged suicide note has been left. The first and the foremost fact then is as 734_Cri.Appln_2500_2023regards WhatsApp message is concerned, whether it can be considered as thesuicide note and if it is to be taken as suicide note, then till 18.47 hours of13.05.2023 Sunil was alive. Because unless he typed the message, it cannotbe sent on the WhatsApp number of the wife. At this stage even if weconsider the WhatsApp message that was given as the suicide note, that too,sent by Sunil himself, he has stated thus - “eyk fo’okl ?kkr >kkyk ;k ekulkdMqu et tsoM dt vkgsgsekul ;kaP;kdMs eh nsysys iSls vkgsr f’kokth ykdMs iqaMyhd ns fpdkG'karqu ns nsxyqj lkbZ ekysxkao gs vkgsr dkj.khHkqr uxjps lj cqByk ;k lxg;kiSls ekxq Fkdyks vkgs rj ekb;k oj fg osG vkys c?kk gs dls >kys cktqykekb;k ?kjh ekul ;ksysr vkrk ;kyksdkapk eyk [kqipa tkLr =kl >kyk vkgs-Eg.kwu eh Vksdkpa ikÅy mpy vkgs- ;kyk dkjuh Hkwr gs yksd vkgsr- ”English translation of the said portion reads as under - “I was betrayed. The amount of debt I have from thesemen is the money I have given to them. Shivaji Lakde, Pundalikde Chikal, Shantanu de Degloor, Sai Malegaon, these are theresponsible persons, Boothla Sir from Nagar city also, I am tiredof asking for money from all of them, see, this time has come onme. Now, these people are turned out, these people have causedme a lot of trouble. So I am taking extreme step. These peopleare responsible for it.”Translated by the Senior Translator and Interpreter,High Court of Judicature at Bombay,Bench at Aurangabad. 834_Cri.Appln_2500_2023Thus, it can be seen that as per the prosecution story, personsreferred as ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ in the above note are theapplicants. Sunil then has stated in the said chit that he had given amount tothese persons and they have not returned. The chit does not say the fullname of the present applicants and how much amount was given by Suniland when. The informant – wife appears to be totally unaware about thesefinancial transactions between her husband and applicants, if we presumethat ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ are the present applicants. There isstatement of father of deceased, who has also not stated that he was awareabout the financial transactions of his son. He states that after he hadreceived the phone call from the informant, he came to Nanded from WadiMukhtyarpur, Tq. Mudkhed, Dist. Nanded. He states that they had gone toBhagya Nagar Police Station to lodge missing report of Sunil and they werethen tracing the location of Sunil’s mobile. Around 5.30 p.m. Sunil’s mobilestarted working and his location was near Aasna Bridge. He then states thatwhen they were going, they received a phone call from Sunil’s mobile oninformant’s phone stating that Sunil is in unconscious condition near AasnaBypass road. 8The second piece of evidence i.e. photograph of a chit in the 934_Cri.Appln_2500_2023mobile phone of Sunil and then it is stated that chit was found in torncondition on his office table on 15.05.2023. It is not against the presentapplicants and, therefore, we will not consider the said evidence. 9At the cost of repetition, we would like to say that from the saidWhatsApp message it cannot be gathered that names reflect the presentapplicants and even if it is reflected, how much amount was taken byapplicants and when is not clear. We cannot get any answer in respect ofsame from the evidence. There is also no statement in statement of anywitness under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that at anypoint of time the present applicants had contacted Sunil. Therefore, even ifthe prosecution had established even prima facie that Sunil had committedsuicide; yet, the nexus between his suicide and present applicants cannot beseen from the contents of First Information Report as well as charge sheet. Itwould be then an abuse of process of law if applicants are asked to face thetrial. Case is made out for exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Codeof Criminal Procedure. Hence, following order. ORDERi)Criminal Application stands allowed.ii)The proceedings in Sessions Case No.29/2025 pending before 1034_Cri.Appln_2500_2023learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded arising out of First InformationReport vide Crime No.169/2023 dated 16.05.2023 registered with VimantalPolice Station, Nanded, for the offence punishable under Section 306 readwith Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, stands quashed and set asideas against applicant Nos.1) Pundalik Marotrao Ingole (Deshmukh) and 2)Shivaji Madhavrao Lakade. ( SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) agd