1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 194 OF 2026 The State Of Maharashtra ...Applicant VERSUS Ramesh Laxman Pawar ...Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr.B.B. Kulkarni, AGP, for the Applicant-State. Mr.Yogesh Patil, for the Respondent. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. : . The challenge in this Application is to the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, Pune, whereby the learned Judge has allowed the Discharge Application of the Respondent. 2. It is prosecution’s case that the Respondent was the Superior officer of the deceased, who has committed suicide. The deceased left behind suicide note stating that due to mental harassment allegedly caused by the Respondent, he was compelled to take the extreme step of ending life. 3. It is contention of the learned APP that the deceased was serving as a Junior Technician at the Yavat Branch of Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. The Respondent was serving in the same NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Digitally signed by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2026.10.06 10:08:37 +0530 1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble office as an Assistant Engineer and deceased was working under his supervision. It is alleged that the deceased was subjected to continuous mental harassment by the Respondent, which ultimately led him to commit suicide. The suicide note specifically refers to the harassment by Respondent and attributes responsibility for the suicide to him. The statement of witness recorded during the investigation also supports the allegations made by deceased. In particular, the statement of Mr.Pralhad Ranpise, who was working with the deceased as his colleague, supports the allegations regarding harassment and threat of suspension by the Respondent. This witness has further stated that Respondent had prepared a letter in the name of the deceased and was supposed to give the same to him. The statement of the said witness is relevant as he was working with the deceased and speaks about the conduct of the Respondent. It is therefore, submitted that the material collected during the investigation discloses acts of instigation and abetment on part of the Respondent. However, this fact is not considered by the learned Judge and has passed impugned order which is erroneous and and requested to allow the Application. 4. It is contention of the learned for the Respondent that there is no evidence produced on record to show that the Respondent had mentally harassed the deceased with an intention to drive him to commit suicide. 1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble The Respondent had reported the conduct of the deceased to the Executive Engineer and thereafter Deputy Executive Engineer had issued a show- cause notice to the deceased. The deceased had submitted his reply to the said notice and suicide occurred approximately 48 days after the reply. Therefore, there was no proximity between the alleged conduct of Respondent and the commission of suicide. The learned counsel further submitted that allegations contained in the suicide note are vague and no specific allegations regarding harassment and abuse have been mentioned. There was no instigation and abetement on part of the Respondent. The learned counsel further submitted that the statement of witnesses do not establish that Respondent had mentally harassed the deceased. He further submitted that the Respondent was discharging his official duties and that asking deceased, who was working as technician to perform electrical work or to recover pending electricity bills could not amount to instigation to commit suicide. The learned Sessions Judge has passed well reasoned order, no interference is required in it and requested to reject the Application. 5. The learned counsel for the Respondent relied on :- (i) Vinod Shivkumar V/s. The State of Maharashtra1 (ii) Shri.Santosh Kisan Darekar & Anr V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.2 1 2026 INSC 867 2 2016 SCC Online Bom 12856 1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble 6. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned order and documents produced on record. 7. Admittedly, the Respondent was superior officer of the deceased. It is alleged that, in the suicide note, the deceased has specifically stated that he was subjected to continuous mental harassment by the Respondent and has attributed responsibility for his suicide to the Respondent. 8. The learned Sessions Judge has relied upon the period of 48 days between the report submitted by the Respondent and the commission of suicide. However, the prosecution case is of continuous harassment. Therefore, merely because 48 days had elapsed between the report and the suicide. At this stage, it cannot be said that, there was no proximity between the alleged conduct of the Respondent and the suicide, particularly when the deceased himself referred to the Respondent in the suicide note. 9. The statement of Mr.Pralhad Ranpise, colleague of the deceased supports the allegations made by the deceased in the suicide note. At the stage of discharge, the suicide note cannot be overlooked. It has to be considered along with the statement of the witnesses and the other material collected during the investigation. It is true that the deceased was working as a Junior technician and he was supposed to do his work. Page 4 of 6 1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble However, the allegations are not merely that the Respondent directed the deceased to perform work. The allegations are that such conduct was accompanied by continuous harassment, abuse threats of suspension and other acts which according to prosecution ultimately resulted in the deceased taking such an extreme step. 10. The learned Sessions Judge has also observed that the suicide note does not contain the exact words of abuse allegedly used by the Respondent and that the allegations therein are vague. However, at the stage of discharge, the Court ought not to discard the material merely because every detail of the alleged incidents has not been mentioned in the suicide note. The evidentiary value of the suicide note and the effect of the statements of the witnesses are matters which can be properly assessed during trial. 11. The learned Sessions Judge has given considerable importance to the absence of eyewitness to the alleged harassment. There is statement of Mr.Ranspie who has stated about harassment by the Respondent. Moreover at the stage of discharge, the Court is not required to conduct a meticulous appreciation of evidence or determine whether the prosecution will ultimately be able to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The material is required to be considered for the limited purpose of finding out whether a prima facie case exists against the accused 1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble 12. It is also necessary to consider that, at the time of the incident no one knows mental condition of the deceased, if he writes something before his death it gives some value and suicide note has to be considered along with other evidence. In the present case the statement of the Mr.Pralhad Ranpise supports the contention of the deceased in the suicide note that he has committed suicide because of the harassment of the Respondent. However, these facts are not considered by the learned Sessions Judge. 13. I have gone through the case laws cited by the learned counsel for the Respondent. The facts of cited case and present case are different. Hence, not applicable. 14. In view of above, I pass following order. ORDER (i) The Revision Application is allowed. (ii) The impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, Pune dated 4th August 2025 in Sessions Case No.166 of 2017 is quashed and set aside. (iii) All pending Applications are disposed of. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)