Allowed

Asha W/O. Bhanudas Wadmare and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Oct 2018APPLN/2687/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal application sought quashing of an FIR allegingabetting suicide under Section 306 IPC. The High Court quashed the proceedings, holding the allegations were vague, the timeline implausible, and the evidence insufficient to establish malice.

What did the court decide?

The First Information Report Crime No. 475 of 2017 and all proceedings initiated on the basis of the said crime to the extent of the applicants are quashed and set aside.

Asha W/O. Bhanudas Wadmare and Others Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

(Judgment) (1) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Criminal Application No. 02687 of 2018

¶4

District : Beed

¶5

`1. Asha w/o. Bhanudas Wadmare,`
`Age : 55 years,`
`Occupation : Nil,`
`R/o. Thoratwadi,`
`Behind Reporter Bhavan,`
`Beed, Taluka & Dist. Beed.`
`2. Vishal s/o. Bhanudas Shejal,`
`Age : 30 years,`
`Occupation : Education / Nil,`
`R/o. Swarajy Nagar,` `.. Applicants`
`Dnyaneshwar Colony,` `(Original`
`Beed, Taluka & Dist. Beed.` `accused)`
`3. Shaikh Irfan @ Lala`
`s/o. Shaikh Samad,`
`Age : 29 years,`
`Occupation : Labour,`
`R/o. Nagar Road, Balepir,`
`Near Sahara Hotel, Beed,`
`Taluka & Dist. Beed.`
`4. Momin Abdul Shakil`
`s/o. Abdul Rahim,`
`Age : 38 years,`
`Occupation : Labour,`
`R/o. Dhondipura,`
`Sarafa Line, Beed,`
`Taluka & Dist. Beed.`
`versus`
`1. The State of Maharashtra,`
`Through P.S. Officer,`
`Shivajinagar Police Station,`
`Beed.`
`... Contd.`

¶6

(Judgment) (2) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶7

2. Lata w/o. Keshav Ugalmugle, Age : 34 years, Occupation : Household, .. Respondents. R/o. Police Colony, Shivajinagar, Beed, Taluka & Dist. Beed. ........... Mr. Vilas P. Savant, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. A.A. Jagatkar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent no.01. Mr. R.D. Khadap, Advocate, for respondent no.02.

¶8

...........

¶9

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE &
 SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI,JJ.

¶10

 DATE : 22ND OCTOBER 2018

¶11

JUDGMENT [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :

¶12

01.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By
consent, heard finally.

¶13

02.Present application has been filed by
original accused Nos.01, 02, 03 and 05 by invoking
inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of
Code of Criminal Procedure in order to quash First
Information Report (FIR) vide Crime No. 475 of 2017
dated 03-07-2017, registered with Shivaji Nagar,
Police Station, Beed Dist. Beed, for the offence
punishable under Section 306 read with 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(Judgment) (3) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶15

03.Respondent No.2 has lodged the aforesaid FIR
stating that, her husband deceased Keshav Ashruba
Ugalmugale was serving as police constable with Police
Headquarters, Beed. She along with her husband and
children were residing in the police quarter. Her
husband was suspended on the ground that, he had
demanded bribe on 19-06-2015 on the report lodged by
Police Inspector Gondkar of Anti Corruption Bureau,
Beed. She contends that, her husband had not demanded
nor accepted any amount. However, during the course
of suspension period he was given Head Quarter
posting. He was required to incur expenditure for
Court proceeding and also for the domestic purpose. He
was required to take hand loan from private
moneylenders such as, (i) Lala R/o In front of Sahara
Hotel, Javednagar, Beed, (ii) Shakil R/o In front of
Santoshi Mata Talkies, Beed, (iii) Wadmarebai R/o Near
Reporter Office, Beed, (iv) Munna Gaikwad R/o Indira
Nagar, near Natyagruha, Beed, (v) Vishal R/o In front
of S. P. Office, Beed and (vi) present applicant
Police Head Constable Dhanwade. She also contends
that, her husband had taken loan from GPF and also
from Patsanstha as well as from her parlour business
and repaid the loan taken from these persons.
However, the interest amount was outstanding, and
therefore, all the private money lenders were giving
threat to her husband on his mobile to kill him. Her
husband had stopped using the Sim Card. Then all
those persons used to come to their house in police

¶16

(Judgment) (4) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶17

colony and used to pressurize her husband to refund
the interest amount and for that purpose they used to
give threat to kill him. Her husband was fed up, and
therefore, he committed suicide by leaving a suicide
note on 30-06-2017 due to the harassment by the
private moneylenders. Therefore, she has filed the
FIR stating that, all these persons have abetted the
commission of suicide by her husband.

¶18

04.The applicant has contended that, he has been
falsely implicated. The FIR does not disclose full
name of the applicant nor any specific role has been
attributed to him. The brother of the deceased is
also in police department and he had contested the
election of Patsanstha of the police employees against
the present applicant and the brother of the deceased
was defeated in the said election. Therefore, the
applicant has been implicated by the informant at the
behest of her brother-in-law. It is stated that, the
alleged suicide was committed on 30-06-2017, however
the FIR came to be lodged on 03-07-2017. The
inordinate delay has not been explained by the
informant. Deceased Keshav was already suspended in
Anti Corruption Case and the trial was going on. The
last date in that proceeding was 27-06-2017 and
deceased committed suicide on 30-06-2017. The said
case might be the real reason for him to commit
suicide. The allegations are bogus, and therefore, he
prayed for quashment of the FIR.

¶19

(Judgment) (5) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶20

05.The application has been objected on the
ground that, there is evidence against the present
applicants. Deceased had left a note before
committing suicide. Handwriting expert opinion has
been received. It has been opined that, the chit is
in the handwriting of the deceased.

¶21

06.Heard learned advocate Mr. V. P. Savant for
the applicant, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor Ms. P.
V. Diggikar for State and learned Advocate Mr. R. D.
Khadap for respondent No.2. Perused the police
papers. All the learned advocates have argued in
support of their respective contentions.

¶22

07.The fact that emerges is that, deceased was
already suspended due to the Anti Corruption Case
against him. According to the informant her husband
had taken hand loan from the present applicant. The
statements of the witnesses as well as the FIR would
show that none of them have stated as to how much
amount was taken from the applicant. It was tried to
be submitted that some amount was transferred in the
account of the applicant by deceased, however that
kind of evidence appears to have not been produced
before the police even till date, though it can be
said that the informant might be possessing the same.
The prosecution is relying mainly on the suicide
note. Perusal of the same would show that, only the

¶23

(Judgment) (6) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶24

names of the present applicants have been mentioned.
It is mentioned that the applicant no.03 is a private
moneylender. Only the first or last names of other
applicants has been mentioned. After mentioning
their names, it is stated that her husband had repaid
the loan. Still all the applicants along with one
more person i.e. Police Constable Dhanwade were
threatening and defaming the deceased. Perusal of
the suicide note would show that it is silent on the
point as to how much amount was taken from each of
the applicants / accused. When the amount allegedly
taken from each of them has been repaid to each of
them, even the police papers would show that in the
statements of witnesses, vague statements are made
that all the accused persons used to come to the
house of the deceased and used to harass him. If the
deceased had the feeling that these persons were
harassing him, there was no hurdle for him to lodge a
complaint against all these persons much prior to the
date of incident.

¶25

08.We cannot forget that deceased was a police
constable. If at all there was any harassment, he
could have gone to the police station to lodge a
report against those persons. It also appears from the
FIR that, offence against deceased was lodged around
19-06-2015. The deceased has committed suicide on
30.06.2017. So for almost two years how much amount
could have been taken by deceased as loan, is a

¶26

(Judgment) (7) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶27

question. It is stated that he has taken loan from six persons. It is also stated that, the principal amount was repaid by taking loan from GPF as well as by taking loan from Patsanstha . Collection of evidence by police does not support this fact. It is also not stated by any of the witnesses that, all these persons from whom deceased had allegedly taken loan were knowing each other. There is no question of common intention on their part when they were interested in getting their money back. If we presume for a moment that, they had extended the amount to the deceased, they would not be interested in his death. It appears that, from some of them deceased might have taken any amount but when he had decided to commit suicide he would have interested to protect his family members from those persons from demand of amount after his death, and therefore, it appears that he had implicated the names in the suicide note.

¶28

09. Therefore, taking into consideration the evidence that has been collected and the nature of the allegations, this is a fit case where the inherent powers of this Court are required to be exercised to quash the FIR as it is within the parameters laid down in State of Haryana and Others Versus Bhajan Lal and Others., [1992 Supplement- 1 Supreme Court Cases, 335].

¶29

10.Hence the following order.

¶30

(Judgment) (8) Cri. Appln. No. 02687 of 2018

¶31

(a) The application is allowed.

¶32

(b) The first information report bearing Crime No. 475/2017, dated 03.07.2017, registered with Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed, District Beed, for offence punishable under Section 306, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and proceedings initiated on the basis of said crime, to the extent of applicants, are quashed and set aside.

¶33

(c)Rule made absolute in the above terms.

¶34

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) ( T.V. Nalawade ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶35

...........

¶36

puranik / CRIAPPLN2687.18

Asha W/O. Bhanudas Wadmare and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asha W/O. Bhanudas Wadmare and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhukar S/O. Raghunath Kendre and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vikas S/O. Bhiwaji Waghmare and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dnyaneshwar @ Kailaspati S/O. Ishwar Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Abdullah S/O. Ziya Ahmed Shah and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sachin S/O. Prakash Sapkale and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sachin S/O. Prakash Sapkale and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.