924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2682 OF 2026 Usha Raju Waman …Applicant Vs. 1. State of Maharashtra 2. Vikas Bhausaheb Shinde …Respondents AND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2686 OF 2026 Sagar Raju @ Rajendra Waman …Applicant Vs. 1. State of Maharashtra 2. Vikas Bhausaheb Shinde …Respondents Mr. Ashok Shekade, for the Applicant. Mrs. M.R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent-State in ABA-2682-2026. Ms. Savita M. Yadav, APP for the Respondent-State in ABA-2686- 2026. CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P. C.: 1. Heard Mr. Shekade, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and Mrs. Tidke and Ms. Yadav, learned APP for the State. 2. The Applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2682 of 2026 is accused No.2 and Applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2686 of 2026 is accused No. 3. It is the submission of learned counsel appearing for the Applicant that 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt totally false case has been lodged. He submits that there was no transaction whatsoever with the deceased and in fact transaction is with the First Informant. He submits that the deceased is involved in an offence under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 being C.R. No. 131 of 2018 with Ambhora Police Station, District Beed wherein charge-sheet has also been filed being case No.108 of 2018. He submits that in fact the deceased sought money from Accused No.1 who is the husband of the Applicant- Usha Raju Waman and father of Applicant-Sagar Raju @ Rajendra Waman and he has paid Rs.25,000/- on 14th July, 2026, the very day allegedly the Accused No.1 has threatened the Deceased. 3. Mr. Shekade, learned counsel submits that in any case, even as per the prosecution case, from the year 2022 to 14th July 2026, the accused were demanding refund of money which has been paid to the Deceased for giving the same to the labourers for harvesting of sugarcane and although the money has been paid by the Deceased to those labourers, they had not come to do the work. He submits that as per the settled legal position, there should be proximity between the incident in question and the action of 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt abetment. He submits that as the allegation is that for a period of four years, the accused were demanding refund of said money shows that there was no abetment. 4. On the other hand, Mrs. Tidke and Ms. Yadav learned APP submit that the offence is very serious as the Applicants and co- accused were demanding money continuously and threatening the deceased and the deceased died by suicide. Learned APP further submit that there is a suicide note where the role of both the Applicants have been mentioned. Both the learned APP submit that on 14th July 2026, the accused No.1 has called the deceased and told him either to refund the money or he should hang himself and therefore the incident took place. Both the learned APP submit that the offence is very serious where the custodial interrogation is necessary. 5. The prosecution case is set out in Criminal Bail Application No. 391 of 2026 filed by the Applicant-Usha Raju Waman in paragraph No.2, which reads as under :- “2. In short, it is the case of prosecution that informant Vikas Bhausaheb Shinde is the brother of 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt deceased Houserao @ Gautam Bhausaheb Shinde. They belong to Hindu Mang Caste. Accused No.1 is husband of accused no.2 and accused no. 3 is their son. Since last 10 years informant, deceased and their family members were doing sugarcane cutting work under accused no.1 who is their Mukadam at Navhra Karkhana, Shirur. Deceased fixed sugarcutting labourers and the accused no.1 gave an amount of Rs.4,71,000/- to deceased for securing 11 labourers and also gave Rs.6,15,000/- for securing another group of labourers for cutting sugarcane. However, the said labourers did not turn for work and so the accused no.1 to 3 started demanding the aforesaid amount from deceased and harassed her. On 14.07.2026, accused no.1 threatened deceased on phone to give back his amount and abused and threatened him. Due to the harassment given by the accused nos. 1 to 3, on 16.07.2026, the deceased committed suicide by hanging himself by a rope behind Raosaheb Pawar Ghodganga Sakhar Karkhana at Navhra, Shirur leaving behind suicide note in which it was mentioned that the 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt accused nos. 1 to 3 have harassed him for aforesaid money and so he is committing suicide. So, the informant lodged complaint and on the basis of said complaint, this crime came to be registered against accused persons for aforesaid offences. Apprehending arrest, the applicant/accused no.2 has moved present application for grant of anticipatory bail.” (Emphasis supplied) 6. Even as per the prosecution case, the transaction is that Accused No.1- Sagar Raju @ Rajendra Waman for securing labourers for doing the work of harvesting sugarcane paid Rs. 4,71,000/- and Rs.6,15,000/- to the Deceased. However inspite of said payment, the said labourers did not turn up for work. Thus, the accused Nos. 1 to 3 started demanding the aforesaid amount from the deceased. As per the prosecution case, this was being done form the year 2022 to 2026. Even as per the prosecution case, on 14th July 2026, the accused No.1 demanded the money from the deceased and threatened him and also told him to hang himself, if he fails to pay the money. Page 5 of 9 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt 7. Thus, prima facie there is no allegation against the Applicants, i.e., Accused Nos. 2 and 3 of giving threats to the Deceased and in near proximity of the incident of suicide. As per the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Abhinav Mohan Delkar Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.1, even if there is allegation of constant harassment, continued over a long period; to bring in the ingredients of Section 306 read with Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, there has to be a proximate prior act to clearly find that the suicide was the direct consequence of such continuous harassment, the last proximate incident having finally driven the subject to the extreme act of taking one’s life. 8. The observations in paragraph 27 of Abhinav Mohan Delkar (supra) reads as under :- “27. We have already seen that even a rebuke to “go, kill yourself”; often a rustic expression against distasteful conduct, cannot by itself be found to have the ingredients to charge an offence of abetment to suicide. There is no uniformity in how different individuals respond and react under pressure. Many stand up, some fight back, a few run away and certain people crumble 1 (2026) 6 SCC 233 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt and at times take the extreme step of suicide. To put the blame on the pressure imposed and the person responsible for it, at all times, without something more to clearly discern an intention, would not be the proper application of the penal provisions under Section 306.” 9. Thus, what the Supreme Court has stated that “go, kill yourself”, often a rustic expression against distasteful conduct, cannot by itself be found to have the ingredients to charge an offence of abetment to suicide. It has been held that abetment involves a mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to do a particular thing. To bring a charge under Section 306 of the IPC, the act of abetment would require the positive act of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to commit suicide. Without such mens rea on the part of the accused person being apparent from the face of the record, a charge under the aforesaid Section cannot be sustained. Abetment also requires an active act, direct or indirect, on the part of the accused person which left the deceased with no other option but to commit suicide. Thus, on the touchstone of the above law, prima facie, there is no material against the Applicants. Page 7 of 9 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt 10. Although the F.I.R. is also registered under Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (“SCST Act”), reading of the entire F.I.R. does not show that any allegation is made therein of commission of any offence under the SCST Act. Therefore, the prohibition as contained under Section 18A of the SCST is not applicable in the present case. 11. Accordingly, a case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail. In view thereof, the following order is passed:- O R D E R (a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant No.1-Usha Raju Waman and Applicant No.2-Sagar Raju @ Rajendra Waman in connection with C.R. No. 656 of 2026 registered with Shirur Police Station, Pune Rural, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-, each, with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount. 29th September, 2026 924 ABA-2682-2026 =925 ABA-2686-2026.DOC skt (b) The Applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with further investigation. (c) The Applicants shall furnish their cell phone numbers and residential addresses to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto. (e) The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel. (f) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner. 12. The Anticipatory Bail Applications are disposed of accordingly. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 29th September, 2026