1 / 4 944-REVN-117-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 944 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2026 Sachin Ramnath Nil And Others VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra ….. Mr. Shubham Pawar a/w. Mr. S. R. Mhaske h/f., Mr. Rahul R. Karpe, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. B. B. Gunjal, APP for Respondent – State. ….. CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. DATE : 29 SEPTEMBER, 2026 PC: 1. Heard Mr. Shubham Pawar, h/f., Mr. Rahul Karpe, learned counsel for the applicant, and Mrs. Gunjal, learned APP for State. 2. This is an application challenging the impugned order dated 27 October 2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in Sessions Case No.383 of 2023, whereby the application preferred by the applicants for their discharging came to be rejected. The applicant No.1 is the husband of the deceased, namely, Vidya Sachin Nil, whereas applicant Nos.2 and 3 are stated to be in-laws of the deceased Vidya. 3. On 2 August 2020, the brother of the deceased, namely, Ganesh Kisan Sabale, lodged a report at Shevgaon Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, stating therein that his sister, namely, Vidya aged about 30 Kiran Kawre 2 / 4 944-REVN-117-2026 years, was married to applicant No.1 – Sachin Ramnath Nil in the year 2014. There was physical as well as mental harassment to his sister Vidya at the hands of the applicants and on account of the said harassment Vidya committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial house belonging to the applicants. 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid report, investigation came to be initiated against the applicants. The applicants preferred an application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge before the learned Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Court, vide its impugned order dated 27th October 2025, was pleased to reject the application. Hence, the applicants are challenging the said impugned order before this Court. 5. Mr. Shubham Pawar, learned counsel for the applicants, at the outset, state that applicant No.1 may be permitted to withdraw the instant Revision Application. However, as regards applicant Nos.2 and 3, are concerned, he submits that they are the aged parents of applicant No.1 and deserve to be discharged from the instant Sessions case. He submits that there are no allegations of whatsoever nature against the applicant Nos.2 and 3 and, as such, they may not be made to face the trial as there is no incriminating material against them. He further submits that applicant Nos.2 and 3 cannot, in any manner, be said to be connected with Kiran Kawre 3 / 4 944-REVN-117-2026 the suicide committed by the deceased Vidya and therefore, prays for allowing the instant application. 6. Per contra, Mrs. Gunjal, learned APP, strongly opposed the instant application. As regards applicant Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, she submits that the deceased committed in the matrimonial house belong to the applicants. As such, in view of Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the applicants are liable to be prosecuted. She, therefore, prays for dismissal of the instant Criminal Revision Application. 7. After perusing the entire charge-sheet and hearing learned counsel for the parties, it appears that as regards the allegations of harassment of the deceased Vidya at the behest of applicant Nos.2 and 3, only general allegations have been made against them. The applicant Nos.2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased Vidya. The marriage between deceased Vidya and applicant No.1 took place in the year 2014. She has committed suicide in the year 2021. The material collected by the police discloses that there were quarrels between the husband and wife. However, applicant Nos.2 and 3 are not at all connected with the said quarrels. It is also not clear as to how the applicant Nos.2 and 3 can be said to be responsible for death of deceased as there is nothing to suggest that applicant Nos.2 and 3 have abetted in commission of suicide. On the contrary, the statement of one witness namely Pravin Ramesh Kale Kiran Kawre 4 / 4 944-REVN-117-2026 establishes that the applicant Nos.2 and 3 were living separately as such Vidya has not committed suicide in a house shared by them (Applicant Nos.2 and 3). There is also reference that after the incident, the applicant No.1 seen running towards the house of applicant Nos.2 and 3. 8. In that view of the matter, the application on behalf of applicant Nos.2 and 3 deserves positive consideration. 9. Hence, the instant application, as regards applicant Nos.2 and 3, is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 27th October 2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in Sessions Case No.383 of 2023 quashed and set aside to the extent of applicant Nos.2 and 3 only. 10. Applicant No.1 is permitted to withdraw the instant application, hence, application is dismissed as withdrawn as against applicant No.1. 11. The instant Criminal Revision Application is disposed of accordingly. (SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.) Kiran Kawre