IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 34 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2500 OF 2023 1 Pundalik Marotrao Ingole (Deshmukh), Age 45 yrs., Occ. Agri., R/o Chikala, Tq. Mudkhed, Dist. Nanded. 2 Shivaji Madhavrao Lakade, Age 34 yrs., Occ. Peon, R/o Kalyan Nagar Society, CIDCO, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. … Applicants … Versus … 1 The State of Maharashtra Through The Police Inspector, Vimantal Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 2 Sarita 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 applicants Mr. A.D. Wange, APP for respondent No.1 Mr. V.S. Kadam, Advocate for respondent No.2 ... CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 07th AUGUST, 2025 2025:BHC-AUG:22429-DB 2 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 ORDER : ( PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) 1 Present application has been filed initially for quashment of First Information Report vide Crime No.169/2023 dated 16.05.2023 registered with Vimantal Police Station, Nanded, for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 later on by way of amendment for quashing the proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No.873/2023 pending before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nanded. 2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. A.D. Hande for applicants, learned APP Mr. A.D. Wange for respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. V.S. Kadam for respondent No.2. 3 Learned Advocate appearing for applicants has taken us through the entire charge sheet including First Information Report. He submits that as per First Information Report and charge sheet, present applicants are accused Nos.3 and 4. First Information Report has been lodged by widow of deceased, who had committed suicide. Even if we take First Information Report and contents of charge sheet as it is; yet, the ingredients of the offence are not made out. The deceased had left suicide note, wherein he refers persons by name ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ and states that they are 3 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 from Chikal. Complete names have also not been taken and it is stated that deceased had given hand loan to present applicants and other accused persons and when deceased was demanding the repayment, they are refusing. The entire charge sheet does not say or there is no such investigation to show as to how much amount was taken as hand loan by present applicants and when it was taken. Some message conversation from the WhatsApp appears to have been taken, but it is not in respect of present applicants. Another photograph was also considered in respect of handwritten chit, but it is also not in respect of present applicants, but it is in respect of original accused No.1. Therefore, when there is absolutely no evidence and persons referred as ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ are the applicants, the Investigating Officer ought not to have even made the applicants as accused. 4 Per contra, learned APP as well as learned Advocate for respondent No.2 strongly opposed the application and submit that since the charge sheet is filed, the prosecution will make an endeavour that the identity of the accused is established. There is suicide note in the form of WhatsApp message to the informant wife and in the mobile of deceased photo of a chit was found and, therefore, the authenticity and legality of the said chit would be established at the time of trial. Therefore, this is not a fit 4 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 case where the Court should exercise its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5 Before turning to the facts, we would like to have a glance at the legal position in respect of offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, for which we must take note of Section 107 of I.P.C.. For that purpose we would like to rely on the decisions in Dilip Ramrao Shirasao and others vs. State of Maharashtra and another [2016 ALL MR (Cri) 4328], Sanju alias Sanjay 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.)] and R. Shashirekha vs. State of Karnataka and others [2025 INSC 402]. Taking into consideration the ratio laid down in all these authorities and the fact in the present case, definitely, ingredients of any of the offences under which charge sheet is filed are not at all attracted. Further, it has been observed in one of the recent Judgments in Mahendra Awase vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh [2025 INSC 76] that merely for the satisfaction of informant Investigating Officer should not file charge sheet against accused, arrayed in offence 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 - 5 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 “In a case of abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the deceased to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code would not be sustainable.” 6 Now, in view of said legal position we would consider the facts. The widow of deceased lodged First Information Report on 16.05.2023. She has stated that her husband Sunil Rangrao Ingole (Deshmukh) was serving as a 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 has some work and thereafter he would go to office. Around 10.30 a.m. he gave phone call to the wife and told her that he is in the office now. She had also received phone call around 4.00 p.m. from her husband asking, as to whether the key has been given by the driver ? She said ‘Yes’. But husband did not return late night. She gave phone call around 10.00 p.m., but she could not establish contact with her husband. She was under impression that he might have 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 told that he has gone to Parbhani and would return around 7.00 to 7.30 a.m. Her husband did not return as stated and, therefore, informant contacted her father-in-law and called him to Nanded. Her father-in-law arrived around 6 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 12.00 noon. When they tried to contact Sunil again and again, they found that his phone has been switched off. Around 18.47 hours on 13.05.2023 she received a WhatsApp message from her husband’s mobile stating that due to harassment he is taking the extreme step. Informant tried to establish contact 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 person asked, as to whose number it was ? She then told that the said number belongs to her husband and then that person told that her husband is near Hi-tech city. The informant, her sister, cousin father-in-law and other persons went to the place told by the person. They found two persons present there, who took them near the husband. They found Sunil was in unconscious state, however, there was foul smell to his body indicating that he might have consumed some poisonous substance. Sunil was then shifted to Aadhar Hospital, Nanded. When informant checked his mobile, she saw the photo of chit having his signature. The said chit was found in torn condition on the office table of her husband on 15.05.2023. Sunil succumbed on 16.05.2023 and then First Information Report has been lodged. 7 Thus, First Information Report indicates and statements of other witnesses also on the same line indicate that one WhatsApp message and alleged suicide note has been left. The first and the foremost fact then is as 7 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 regards WhatsApp message is concerned, whether it can be considered as the suicide note and if it is to be taken as suicide note, then till 18.47 hours of 13.05.2023 Sunil was alive. Because unless he typed the message, it cannot be sent on the WhatsApp number of the wife. At this stage even if we consider 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 vkgs gsekul ;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;k iSls ekxq Fkdyks vkgs rj ekb;k oj fg osG vkys c?kk gs dls >kys cktqyk ekb;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 these men is the money I have given to them. Shivaji Lakde, Pundalik de Chikal, Shantanu de Degloor, Sai Malegaon, these are the responsible persons, Boothla Sir from Nagar city also, I am tired of asking for money from all of them, see, this time has come on me. Now, these people are turned out, these people have caused me a lot of trouble. So I am taking extreme step. These people are responsible for it.” Translated by the Senior Translator and Interpreter, High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. 8 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 Thus, it can be seen that as per the prosecution story, persons referred as ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ in the above note are the applicants. Sunil then has stated in the said chit that he had given amount to these persons and they have not returned. The chit does not say the full name of the present applicants and how much amount was given by Sunil and when. The informant – wife appears to be totally unaware about these financial transactions between her husband and applicants, if we presume that ‘Shivaji Lakade’ and ‘Pundlik De’ are the present applicants. There is statement of father of deceased, who has also not stated that he was aware about the financial transactions of his son. He states that after he had received the phone call from the informant, he came to Nanded from Wadi Mukhtyarpur, Tq. Mudkhed, Dist. Nanded. He states that they had gone to Bhagya Nagar Police Station to lodge missing report of Sunil and they were then tracing the location of Sunil’s mobile. Around 5.30 p.m. Sunil’s mobile started working and his location was near Aasna Bridge. He then states that when they were going, they received a phone call from Sunil’s mobile on informant’s phone stating that Sunil is in unconscious condition near Aasna Bypass road. 8 The second piece of evidence i.e. photograph of a chit in the 9 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 mobile phone of Sunil and then it is stated that chit was found in torn condition on his office table on 15.05.2023. It is not against the present applicants and, therefore, we will not consider the said evidence. 9 At the cost of repetition, we would like to say that from the said WhatsApp message it cannot be gathered that names reflect the present applicants and even if it is reflected, how much amount was taken by applicants and when is not clear. We cannot get any answer in respect of same from the evidence. There is also no statement in statement of any witness under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that at any point of time the present applicants had contacted Sunil. Therefore, even if the prosecution had established even prima facie that Sunil had committed suicide; yet, the nexus between his suicide and present applicants cannot be seen from the contents of First Information Report as well as charge sheet. It would be then an abuse of process of law if applicants are asked to face the trial. Case is made out for exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, following order. ORDER i) Criminal Application stands allowed. ii) The proceedings in Sessions Case No.29/2025 pending before 10 34_Cri.Appln_2500_2023 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded arising out of First Information Report vide Crime No.169/2023 dated 16.05.2023 registered with Vimantal Police Station, Nanded, for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, stands quashed and set aside as against applicant Nos.1) Pundalik Marotrao Ingole (Deshmukh) and 2) Shivaji Madhavrao Lakade. ( SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) agd