FIRST INFORMATIONREPORT/CRIME No. 109 of 2026 · Bombay High Court

07/04/2026, the informant and other returned to their house byconvincing the said Sana. Again at 02.00 O’clock in the night, Sanatelephoned the informant and disclosed that, accused no. 1 wassaying that, she should die and was abusing her. 3. It is due to this continuous harassment, Sana committedsuicide by hanging her in the matrimonial house. The said incidenttriggered the registration of the FIR. The learned counsel for theapplicant submitted that, the offences registered against the applicantare prima facie not attracted since the ingredients of making case for‘abetment’ is missing. She further submitted that, the applicant ismother-in-law who has no criminal antecedents. 4. Ms. Shweta Gandhi, the learned counsel for the applicantin order to buttress her contention has relied upon the judgmentpassed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this court in case of RatanPundlik Salunkhe and others Vs State of Maharashtra and anotherreported in 2016 ALL MR (Cri) 4858 more particularly paragraph No.40 and has contended that there must be an intention to aid, by act orillegal omission, the doing of a thing which results in the commissionof suicide.

She contended that considering the averments made, prima-facie case is made out by the applicant. 5. Per contra, the learned APP has opposed the applicationand has argued that a suicide note was found which was seized duringthe course of investigation. In the said note, it was stated thatapplicant will have to face the consequences regarding harassmentmeted out by her. The learned APP has further submitted thatinvestigation is at an initial stage. 6. With the assistance of the respective counsels, I have gone 3 20aba360.2026..odtthrough the record of the case. In short, it is alleged in the FIR that allthe applicant used to harass the victim and pass comments, due towhich the victim committed suicide. The FIR and the case diary revealthat it was due to harassment meted out, ultimately the victim took adecision to commit suicide. 7. At this stage, it is necessary to mention here that whetherthe allegations made in FIR would constitute prima-facie “abetment” as defined under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, so far as appellant isconcerned, will have to be looked into.

Though the incident isunfortunate, the fact remains that, prima-facie, except the allegationsmade, nothing has been brought on record of this Court. 8. In view of the aforesaid said discussion, and consideringthe observations made by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court incase of Ratan Pundlik Salunke (supra), I pass the following order: ORDER a] The criminal application is allowed. b] In the event of arrest, in connection with Crime No. 109/2026,dated 09/04/2026, registered with Police Station Ganeshpeth, NagpurCity for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 351(2), 352, 80and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of DowryProhibition Act, 1961, the applicant- Naseem Begam w/o Ayyub Khanbe released bail on furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the likeamount. c] The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as andwhen required. 4 20aba360.2026..odtd] The applicant shall cooperate with the investigating agency andshall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or influence thewitnesses directly or indirectly. e] The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court. (RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.)Belkhede, PS