- 1 - criappln511.24.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 923 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 511 OF 2024 NANA @ NANASAHEB BHIMAJI KOLPE ..Applicant VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER .. Respondents Mr. Prashant Prabhakar Giri, Advocate for Applicant Mr. A. V. Lawate, APP for the Respondent/State Ms. C. P. Raktate, Advocate for the informant. CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED: 10th JULY, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. The present Applicant has preferred this application under section 482 of the Code of criminal procedure for quashing of FIR as well as Chargesheet in connection with Crime No. 0204 of 2023 registered with Belwandi Police Station, Tal. Shirgonda, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offence punishable under section 306 read with Section 34 of Indian penal code. 2. It is the case of the Informant Laxman i.e. father of Deceased- Anand that Anand had a love relationship with Manisha Gore-niece of the Present Applicant for 2 and ½ years. This relation being not - 2 - criappln511.24.odt approved by the present applicant and the co-accused, they assaulted and harassed Anand and lodged a case in Shirpur Police Station against him. 3. On 29/05/2023, in morning 08:15 am the informant went to his field for the purpose of repairing a broken pipeline and discovered his son-Anand had committed suicide by hanging on a tree branch using a nylon rope. Shortly, police arrived and took Deceased-Anand to a rural hospital where the doctors declared him dead prior to 12:30 pm. Upon completion of investigation FIR was registered and a suicide note was discovered which disclosed that the present applicant along with other co-accused have repeatedly threatened him and attempted to kill him. Exasperated and distressed by their repeated harassment, he committed suicide. 4. The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that by no stretch of imagination it can be said that Applicant has abetted deceased to commit suicide. According to him, apart from the chit written by the deceased, there is no evidence in order to show involvement of the applicant in present crime. It is submitted that the deceased was stalking and threatening the niece of Applicant to - 3 - criappln511.24.odt commit suicide if she refuses to marry him. In order to substantiate the same he drew attention of the court to the NC No. 69/2023 registered by the niece of the Applicant against the deceased. So also an FIR No. 214/2023 was lodged against the deceased for molesting her and for virally circulating her photographs on social platforms. He further submits that referring to the contents of the chit left by the deceased it cannot be assumed that there is proximity between the alleged threats and act of suicide is concerned. In order to substantiate the above arguments he places reliance on judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in case of Swarangi Meena Vishnu Vagadkar and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and another reported in Criminal Application No. 4189/2023, Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2002 (5) SSC 371, Prakash vs State of Maharashtra reported in 2024 SSC Online SC 3835, Nishit Patel vs State of Maharashtra reported in 2025 SCC Online Bom 2397. 5. The learned APP and learned appointed Counsel empathetically opposed the above contentions. It is canvassed that the applicant is named in the suicide note to have caused assault upon the deceased and repeatedly harassed him thereby instigating him to commit - 4 - criappln511.24.odt suicide. It's further submitted that at this stage it cannot be said that there is no proximity between the alleged threats and act of commission of suicide by deceased. According to them, it is matter of evidence to be recorded and appreciated during trial. It is further argued that prima facie evidence on record fulfills the requirements of constitution of offence punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code. In order to substantiate the above arguments reliance is placed on para 16 of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Mahendra KC vs The State of Karnataka in Criminal Appeal No. 1238/2021. 6. Prima facie perusal of the record though indicates that there was suicide note left behind by the deceased naming the present applicant and other co-accused persons to be responsible for his death. There are documents placed on record indicating that there was a complaint filed against the deceased by the niece of Applicant for forcing her to marry him, for using her photographs in order to defame her and to cause obstruction for her marriage. 7. No doubt to establish abetment to commit suicide, the prosecution has to show that there was proximity between the alleged - 5 - criappln511.24.odt threats and suicide being committed by the deceased. In the case of Mahendra KC (Supra) cited by prosecution, it's clear that this court, without having the benefit of evidentiary record collected during trial, cannot delve into the role of trial court and examine the veracity of allegations. At this stage, the court can only see as to whether the allegations in the FIR prima facie establishes the elements of the offence alleged against Applicant. 8. In case of Swarangi (supra) the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dealing with the issue wherein there was positive evidence to indicate no proximity between quarrels and act of commission of suicide. As far as judgment in case of Nishit Patel (supra) is concerned, perusal of the same shows that the suicide note was not found therein for a period of 5 months from date of commission of suicide by the deceased and contents of the suicide note were not indicating instigation of petitioner therein to commit suicide by demanding payment of money borrowed by him. In this backdrop, in paragraph no. 23, it is held that suicide note does not reveal any proximity between act of accused and death. Now, this Court would be required to see whether the fac - 6 - criappln511.24.odt ts of those cases in which these judgment are passed are similar in nature to apply them to the instant case. 9. In the case in hand, suicide note is left by the deceased indicating threat being given to the deceased which lead him to commit suicide. However, for want of any specific date mentioned therein, it is not open for this Court to hold so. Needless to say that it is open for the prosecution to prove the date of writing of note with other material on record and then findings could be recorded about proximity. Suffice it to say that there is evidence to show threats of serious nature being issued by accused persons to drive the deceased to end his life. 10. In so far as contention of applicant about the possibility of deceased committing suicide due to applicant’s niece refusing to marry him is concerned, this becomes defence of accused and the same would be substantiated during trial and it does not become a reason for quashment of proceedings. It would be relevant to take note of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, wherein it is held thus :- - 7 - criappln511.24.odt “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report of the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other material, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the un-controverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable - 8 - criappln511.24.odt offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” These observations indicate that unless above parameters are satisfied, question of quashment of proceeding does not arise. Here in this case, the test laid down therein is not satisfied. Hence, this Court finds no reason to quash First Information Report and charge- sheet against applicant. - 9 - criappln511.24.odt 11. Hence, in the view of the above discussion, application stands dismissed. 12. Fees of the appointed learned council is quantified to Rs. 10,000/- and it is to be paid by high court legal service authority, sub committee, Aurangabad. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) dyb