31-REVN-6-2025 (CR).doc S.S.Kilaje IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2025 (1) Ashok Ramdas Bhavsar (2) Ranjana Dinesh Katale ...Applicants VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Ayush Pasbola a/w Ms. Mrunal Bhide, Mr. Nagraj Tarade and Mr.Kaustubh Salvi, Advocates for Applicants. Mr. Sameer M. Mangaonkar, APP for the State. Mr. Suvarna Yadav, Advocate for Respondent No.2. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. : 1. The challenge in this Revision Application is to the impugned order of rejection of discharge application. 2. It is prosecution’s case that property dispute was going on between the first informant and the applicants. Due to said property dispute the mother of the first informant committed suicide by setting herself ablaze. It is alleged that the said suicide was direct result of the ongoing property dispute with the applicants. 3. It is contention of the learned counsel for the applicants that the deceased had suicidal tendencies. On 17.08.2022, she attempted to commit suicide by swallowing 20 tablets. In her statement before the police, she stated that her husband was suffering from fits and was not SONALI SATISH KILAJE Digitally signed by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date: 2026.09.11 11:12:49 +0530 31-REVN-6-2025 (CR).doc S.S.Kilaje doing any work. She was annoyed and distressed by the burden of housework. She had been undergoing treatment for these issues for about one year. Due to this tension, she consumed the tablets. Learned counsel further submitted that the property dispute with the family members of the deceased had already been settled. Therefore, there was no question of the deceased committing suicide due to property dispute with applicants. There is no case at all against the applicants. However, these facts are not considered by the learned Judge and requested to allow the application. 4. It is contention of learned APP along with the learned counsel for the respondent, that there was property dispute between the applicants and the family members of the deceased. Due to said dispute, the deceased was under mental stress and due to said tension, she committed suicide. Learned APP further submitted that the statement of witness Yogesh Gadri, dated 06.02.2023, shows that on 15.07.2022 the deceased had jumped into a well but survived. She had reportedly stated to said witness that she attempted suicide due to the property dispute with applicants. It supports the prosecution’s case that the deceased committed suicide because of the property dispute with the applicants, thereby establishing prima facie case against the applicants. The learned counsel further submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has passed well reasoned order. No interference is required in it and requested to reject 31-REVN-6-2025 (CR).doc S.S.Kilaje the application. 5. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned order. It appears that on 17.08.2022, the deceased attempted suicide. In her statement before the police, she had stated that she attempted suicide due to family tension and made no allegation against the applicants. The statement of witness Yogesh Gadri was recorded on 06.02.2023, wherein he stated that the deceased had attempted to commit suicide on 15.07.2022. However, this statement was recorded nearby 6-7 months after the alleged incident and after the suicide attempt on 15.07.2022 the deceased again attempted to suicide on 17.08.2022. Notably, in her statement recorded on 17.08.2022, following the incident of 15.07.2022, the deceased did not stated that she had attempted to suicide due to property dispute with the applicants. It shows that the deceased had suicidal tendencies and she committed suicide due to family tension and not property dispute with the applicants. However, these facts are not considered by the learned Sessions Judge. Continuing the trial against the applicants in these circumstances would amount to abuse of process of law and I pass following order. ORDER (i) The Revision Application is allowed. (ii) The applicants are discharged from the Sessions Case 31-REVN-6-2025 (CR).doc S.S.Kilaje No. 325 of 2023 arising out of C.R.No. 09 of 2023 registered with Satpur Police Station. 6. Revision Application is disposed of. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)