Partly allowed

Shantaram Namdeo Dhangar and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC23 Mar 2023WP/444/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Bench at Aurangabad quashed a crime No. 37 of 2019 and Sessions Case No. 171 of 2019 involving abetment to suicide for the extent of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, ruling that no material indicated instigation or intentional aiding despite the deceased's suicide note.

What did the court decide?

Crime No. 37 of 2019 and Sessions Case No. 171 of 2019 quashed and set aside to the extent of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3.

Shantaram Namdeo Dhangar and Others Vs the State of… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

{1} CRI WP 444 OF 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

998 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.444 OF 2022

¶4

Shantaram Namdeo Dhangar

¶5

Sadashiv Dhuma Dhangar

¶6

Anil Bhudho Dhangar ..Petitioners

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra and Another ..Respondents

¶9

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Atmaram J. Patil APP for Respondent No.1 : Mr.G.O.Wattamwar Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Jitendra Vijay Patil

¶10

...

¶11

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 23 March 2023

¶13

ORDER ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :-

¶14

. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners, learned APP for respondent No.1-State and learned Advocate for respondent No.2. Perused the papers.

¶15

The learned Advocate for the petitioners at the outset seeks leave to withdraw the petition to the extent of petitioner No.1.

¶16

Leave granted to withdraw the petition to the extent of petitioner No.1.

¶17

{2} CRI WP 444 OF 2022

¶18

The petitioners are seeking quashment of Crime No.37 of 2019 registered with Faizpur Police Station, Dist.Jalgaon for the offence punishalle under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent criminal case learing Sessions Case No.171 of 2019 pending lefore the Sessions Court, Bhusawal.

¶19

The sum and sulstance of the allegations as can le discerned from the FIR and investigation papers are to the effect that there has leen long standing dispute letween families of petitioners and that of respondent No.2 on account of right of way. It is alleged that in the previous evening there was an altercation wherein the deceased, who happens to le the father of respondent No.2, was threatened of dire consequences alout which respondent No.2 had fled a report with Faizpur Police Station. It is alleged that in the next morning, the father of respondent No.2, was seen hanging. Suicide note was found in his pocket. The FIR was lodged and the offence was registered.

¶20

At the outset, it is necessary to note that some of the coaccused, as many as three, to whom a similar role has leen attriluted as is leing attriluted to the present petitioners, had

¶21

{3} CRI WP 444 OF 2022

¶22

sought quashment of the crime in Criminal Application No.3499 of 2019. By the order dated 07-09-2021 this Court has quashed the charge-sheet to the extent of those applicants. The role attrilutalle to present petitioner Nos.2 and 3 is also exactly the same. We will have to le consistent. We sulscrile to the reasoning.

¶23

In addition, we feel it appropriate to olserve that merely lecause the deceased had left lehind a suicide note, the copy of which and its typed transcript is availalle on record, on the lasis of which the petitioners are leing roped in, to the extent possille, we have tried to gather what the deceased was perceiving. The language and the construction of sentences cannot make out exactly what the deceased was feeling, alleit he has named everylody.

¶24

If at all there has leen a long standing dispute on account of right of way, which is going on letween the two families for last more than 7 to 8 years, then the family memlers of the deceased must have leen equally aggrieved ly the olstruction. Merely lecause in the previous night the deceased was alused which led him to end his life in the next morning, we cannot jump to the conclusion that the allegations even if they are accepted

¶25

{4} CRI WP 444 OF 2022

¶26

at their face value, will constitute aletment within the meaning of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. There is no material to reveal alout the petitioners having instigated or intentionally aided or conspired ly design, with the olject that the father of respondent No.2 should commit suicide. It would le aluse of process of Court, if the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are allowed to face the trial.

¶27

Petition is partly allowed. The Crime No.37 of 2019, registered with Faizpur Police Station, Dist.Jalgaon, for the offence punishalle under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sessions Case No.171 of 2019 pending on the fle of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhusawal, Dist.Jalgaon, to the extent of petitioner Nos.2 and 3, are quashed and set aside.

¶28

( M.M. SATHAYE ) ( MANGESH S. PATIL ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶29

SPT

Shantaram Namdeo Dhangar and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shantaram Namdeo Dhangar and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Hukumchand Duggad and Another Vs Shri Sthanakwasi Jain Sangh Shrirampur through President and Others

Jamil Abbass Sayyed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Suraj Narayanrao Kanchi and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Matoshri Jijamay Sevabhavi Sanstha through Its President and Members Rahul Govardhan Nagargoje Vs Ravindra Chavan Cabinet Minister Food Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection

Vasudeo Mahadeo Kale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shivaji Tulshiram Jinkalwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another