The High Court disposed of a criminal writ petition challenging an order refusing discharge under Section 306 IPC. The bench held there was no evidence to connect the petitioner with the suicide and quashed the impugned order.
The impugned order dated 3.7.2015 is quashed and set aside to the extent of the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
crwp1400.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD
909 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1400 OF 2016
GAJANAN S/O TULSHIRAM MORE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTR
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S.S.Gangakhedkar
APP for Respondent : Mr. B.A.Shinde
.....
CORAM: K.L.WADANE, J.
DATED: 6th February, 2018
O R D E R :
Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the
consent of the learned counsel for the parties,
the petition is taken up for final hearing. Heard
learned counsel for both sides.
2.Inthispetition,thepetitioner
challenges the impugned order, dated 3.7.2015,
below Exh.18, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Basmath. By the said order,
application filed by the petitioner for discharge
from the offence punishable under Section 306 r/w
34 of the Indian Penal Code is dismissed.
2crwp1400.16
3.One Smt. Radha Balaji Muley, widow of the
complainant lodged complaint with the police
station, Basmath alleging that the petitioner and
other accused persons were responsible for
commission of suicide by her husband. The
allegations of the prosecution are that deceased
Balaji had borrowed loan from the Basic Finance
Company, Nanded to the tune of Rs.18,000/-. Out
of the said amount, Rs. 13,000/- were handed over
to another accused Sainath Agarwal by way of hand
way. As per the prosecution story, deceased
Balaji used to pay monthly installment towards
loan availed from the Basic Finance Company. On
30.6.2011 deceased Balaji had been to the house of
Sainath Agarwal and requested him to return the
amount of hand loan, since loan installment was
scheduled on 4.7.2011. It is further alleged that
petitioner along with Sainath had abused and
physically assaulted deceased and warned him that
he should not go to the house of Sainath for hand
loan, otherwise they will kill him.
3crwp1400.16
4.Said incident was allegedly witnessed by
one Hiaraman Muley. It is further alleged that
due to insulting treatment given by Sainath and
his family, deceased Balaji committed suicide on
1.7.2011 by setting himself on fire.
5.With the help of learned counsel appearing
for the parties, I have gone through the relevant
record. From the record, it appears that the wife
of deceased namely Radha lodged complaint to the
police station on 8.7.2011, wherein it has been
stated that on 30.6.2011 deceased Balaji had been
to the house of Sainath for demanding the amount
which deceased had given to Saianth as hand loan.
That time, Sainath and his family assaulted Balaji
and threatened to kill him. It is further alleged
that due to insulting treatment by accused Sainath
and his family members, deceased Balaji committed
suicide on 1.7.2011 at about 6.00 a.m.
6.There are two dying declarations of
deceased Balaji recorded by police and the
4crwp1400.16
Executive Magistrate. Both are dated 1.7.2011.
In the dying declaration recorded by police,
allegations seem to be against Sainath and his
family. Similarly, in the second dying declaration
recorded by the Executive Magistrate, allegations
are against Sainath. Sainath was not refunding
the amount which was paid to him and when amount
was demanded from Sainath, he and his fmaily
members assaulted the deceased. So, from the
contents of the complaint as well as the two dying
declarations, there is absolutely no evidence
against the petitioner to connect with the alleged
crime.
7.Learned A.P.P. points out the statements
of witnesses namely Shiwaji Muley and Hiraman
Muley. Both these witnesses have stated that in
the month of January, 2011 i.e. before about six
months of the incident, deceased disclosed with
them that accused Sainath is not repaying the
amount of block insurance. Sainath instructed the
deceased to repay the installment. Thereafter,
5crwp1400.16
after about 2 days, the agent of the Finance
Company namely More i.e. present petitioner
instructed deceased to pay the installment,
otherwise he will take away the tins on the house
of the complainant. Same is the version of
another witness Shiwaji Muley.
8.From the supplementary statement of
Bhanudas Tagade, it appears that in the month of
January, 2011 the present petitioner instructed
the deceased to repay the installment otherwise he
will take away the tins from his house. From the
statement of above referred witnesses and other
witnesses, it appears that petitioner is agent of
the Finance Company and he was insisting deceased
Balaji to repay the amount. The statements of
witnesses cannot be said to be the evidence of the
allegation of abetment to Balaji to commit
suicide. The act of petitioner appears to be in
consonance to the duty with his Finance Company,
but, at no stretch of imagination, it can be said
that petitioner was insisting Balaji to repay the
6
crwp1400.16
amount with intent to lead him to commit suicide.
9.Mr. Gangakhedkar, learned counsel points
out the order passed by this Court in Criminal
Writ Petition No. 991 of 2015, wherein this Court
(Coram : N.W.Sambre, J.) in its order dated
21.8.2015 observed thus : -
" 9. With the assistance, I have
perused the charge-sheet filed in the
petition and considered the rival
submissions made by respective parties.
The offence punishable under Section
306 of the Indian Penal Code is
punishable with imprisonment of either
description for a term, which may
extend to ten years and also fine. It
is required to be noted that it has to
be established that there is an
instigation to commit the offence or
suicide and there has to be a
conspiracy in which the petitioners
have to be engaged to commit such an
offence and should have aided the
commission of offence. So far as the
case in hand is concerned, the
important piece of evidence that is
required to be considered is the
statement of Hiraman Mule. The
statement of said witness is required
to be read as a whole and perusal
thereof depicts a specific attribution
against Sainath Agrawal, accused no.1
about non-repayment of installment of
loan taken from Basic Finance Company,
Nanded though deceased Balaji has paid
Rs.13,000/- to accused no.1, Sainath.
Hiraman then narrates that the
7crwp1400.16
petitioners have abused deceased
Balaji, which according to him, is
based on the hearsay evidence, which
was neither witnessed nor directly
heard by him. "
10.With the above observations, the other
accused persons i.e. relatives of main accused
Sainath have been discharged, against which there
are allegations to some extent. The case of the
petitioner is on better footing. Allegation
against the petitioner for insistence to pay the
installment was prior to six months of the
incident. It is not the fact that one or two days
before the incident the petitioner had threatened
the deceased to take away the tins on the house of
the deceased.
11.Looking to the entire papers of
investigation, I am of the opinion that there is
no sufficient material against the petitioner to
frame the charge. Therefore, Criminal Writ
Petition needs to be allowed. Accordingly, it is
allowed. The order, dated 3.7.2015, below Exh.18,
in Sessions Case No. 14 of 2013, passed by the
8crwp1400.16
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Basmath is
quashed and set aside to the extent of petitioner.
12.Criminal Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs.
(K.L.WADANE, J.)
dbm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Additional Sessions Judge had sufficient material to prevent the petitioner's discharge under Section 306 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Whether the petitioner's insistence on loan repayment amounts to abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
GAJANAN S/O TULSHIRAM MORE
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTR
K.L.WADANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court