SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 1976

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Vibha Kankanwadi, Abhay S.Waghwase, JJ.
Ramdas – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Application No. 342 of 2022
Decided On : 16-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Vijay Vasantrao Deshmukh, Advocate, M.M.Nerlikar, Advocate, Sunita G.Sonawane, Advocate

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid for abetment of suicide under Sec. 306 IPC, emphasizing the importance of evidence linking the accused to the alleged offense.

Headnote:

Abetment of Suicide - Land Dispute - Ss. 306, 420, 504, 506 IPC - Sec. 34 IPC - Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. - Sec. 306 IPC, Sec. 107 IPC, Sec. 109 IPC - Mahendra K.C. Vs. State of Karnataka and Another ; (2022) 2 Supreme Court Cases 129, Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh ; (2001) 9 SCC 618, Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (NCT of Delhi); (2009) 16 SCC 605, State of Kerala and Ors. Vs. Unnikrishnan Nair and Ors.; (2015) 9 SCC 639, Kishori Lal Vs. State of M.P.; (2007) 10 SCC 797, Amalendu Pal Vs. State of W.B.; (2010) 1 SCC 707, Praviee Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal ; (2012) 9 SCC 734, Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke v. State of Maharashtra ; (2018) 7 SCC 781, Ude Singh v. State of Haryana ; (2019) 17 SCC 301, Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab ; (2020) 10 SCC 200, Rajesh v. State of Haryana ; 2020 15 SCC 359

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over land ownership, where the deceased committed suicide allegedly due to harassment and cheating by the accused. The deceased's wife alleged that the accused had cheated her husband in land transactions, leading to financial crisis and subsequent suicide.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations of abetment of suicide and cheating were not substantiated. It noted that the sale transactions were legitimate and there was no evidence of continuous harassment or instigation leading to suicide. The court concluded that the FIR was an abuse of process of law and granted relief to the accused by quashing the chargesheet.

Issues: The issues involved allegations of abetment of suicide, cheating, and harassment leading to the deceased's suicide. The court had to determine the validity of the FIR and chargesheet based on these allegations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the legal principles outlined in Sec. 306 IPC, Sec. 107 IPC, and Sec. 109 IPC to assess the allegations of abetment of suicide. It emphasized the necessity of proving instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid for abetment. The court also considered the absence of evidence linking the accused to the deceased's suicide.

Final Decision: The court allowed the application, quashed the chargesheet, and disposed of the case in favor of the accused, finding that the allegations of abetment of suicide and cheating were not substantiated.

JUDGMENT

ABHAY S.WAGHWASE,J. - All applicants herein have prayed for quashing FIR and charge-sheet arising out of Crime bearing No.0348 of 2021 registered at Belwandi Police Station, District Ahmednagar on 18/8/2021 for the offence punishable under Ss. 306, 420, 504, 506 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

2. Brief facts leading to registration of crime : Informant, who is wife of deceased Gautam Bhanudas Adhav, has set law in motion alleging that, three and half acres land was standing in the name of her husband Gautam. Out of said land, Ramdas has purchased half acre land, however, she was unaware about it. When 7/12 extract was obtained, only one and half acre land was reflected in the name of her deceased husband. When she learnt about it, she questioned her deceased husband, who told her that by cheating him Ramdas had got sale deed executed to the extent of one and half acre land. According to informant, such transaction was behind back of the family. Therefore, a meeting was held in the village but Ramdas flatly denied to return the land and moreover, demanded Rs.21,00,000.00 that too in a period of month. In spite of repeated demand by the deceased to accused Ramdas to return the land, Ramdas and his family members abused him. Therefore, getting fed-up of the same, Gautam hanged himself to a tree on the intervening night of 17/8/2021 and 18/8/2021. That, deceased Gautam had written a suicide note before hanging himself and a chit to that extent was seized by Police machinery. Therein, present applicants are named and hence, crime was registered against Ramdas Popat Adhav, Dada Popat Adhav, Popat Sakharam Adhav and Jijabai Popat Adhav i.e. present applicants.

In the light of such allegations, investigation machinery swung into action and carried out investigation and finally after investigation, chargesheet has been filed in the Court of law. It is above crime and consequential charge-sheet, which is sought to be quashed and set aside by exercising inherent powers under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C.

Submissions

3. Learned Advocate for the applicants submits that FIR is apparently false, afterthought and filed with ulterior motive. He pointed out that present applicants are related to deceased. Deceased Gautam was in financial crisis and he also had bad vices and under such circumstances, he himself entered into sale transactions. Said transactions were duly registered. Learned Advocate invited our attention to both the sale deeds brought on record. According to him, there is no whisper about transactions to be out of money lending transaction. According to him, it was pure sale transaction and deceased was in dire need of money. Therefore, it is his submission that false allegations are levelled in the FIR of money being borrowed and land being kept mortgaged and that exorbitant interest was charged. Learned Advocate for the applicants also pointed out that in this case there is a suicide note. As to when the suicide note was written has not been specified. He also pointed out that it is very clearly written in the suicide note that because of quarrel in the house, deceased committed suicide and as such, applicants should not be held responsible for the suicidal hanging of Gautam. It is his further submission that even considering the FIR as it is, there is no whisper about any abetment or harassment, which was of such nature that deceased would end up his life. Therefore, according to him, offence under Sec. 306 is clearly misdirected against present applicants. It is his next submission that even if so-called sale transaction is concerned, it is much prior to alleged suicide and therefore, it is unreasonable to connect it with suicide. He pointed out that no details are given as to when alleged meeting was held in the village. Rather, according to the learned Advocate, deceased had bad vices and was heavily indebted and further because of the quarrel in the house, he might have committed suicide. Learned Advocate s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top