Allowed¶36

Padmabai Babasaheb Wani v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC8 Jan 2026APPLN/1262/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; abetment of suicide; Section 306 IPC; parity / para materia allegations with co-accused already quashed; loan recovery pressure on deceased; Crime No.385/2023 Vaijapur Police Station; charge-sheet No.108/2024; Sessions Case No.72/2024; Criminal Application No.3457/2023 relied on; Aurangabad; 2026:BHC-AUG:1667-DB; decision dated 08-01-2026.

What did the court decide?

Quashment of the FIR bearing Crime No.385 of 2023 (Vaijapur Police Station, dt. 18.07.2023), the charge-sheet/final report No.108/2024 dated 10.04.2024, and the consequential proceeding in Sessions Case No.72 of 2024 pending on file of the Sessions Judge, Vaijapur, District Aurangabad, against the applicant Padmabai Balasaheb Wani. ¶36

Padmabai Babasaheb Wani vs the State of Maharashtra and Another — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.385/2023 and the consequential proceedings in Sessions Case No.72/2024 against the applicant (Padmabai Balasaheb Wani) deserve to be quashed, the allegations against her being para materia with those against accused no.1 Kiran Rajput, whose FIR and proceedings have already been quashed.

¶28

Court's answer

The allegations against the applicant are para materia with those against accused no.1; and, except for the statements of the family members of the deceased (the informant and his wife), the charge-sheet brings no other evidence on record indicating abatement of the deceased to commit suicide on the part of the applicant.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The learned Advocate for respondent no.2 and the learned APP, called upon to demonstrate material distinguishing the applicant's case from that of accused no.1-Kiran Rajput (against whom the FIR and proceeding are already quashed and set aside), could bring no such material to the notice of the Court.

¶29

Key takeaways

In that view of the matter, for the reasons recorded by the Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Application No.3457/2023, the present Criminal application deserves to be allowed.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Abetment of suicide - quashing of FIR on parity with co-accused. Padmabai Balasaheb Wani (original accused) sought quashment of the FIR in Crime No.385/2023 (Vaijapur P.S., dt. 18.07.2023) for offences under Sections 306, 506, 504 r/w 34 IPC and of the consequential Sessions Case No.72/2024, arising from the suicide of Pravin Jore on 04.01.2023, allegedly abetted by the accused persons while pressing for payment beyond a repaid loan. The Court found the allegations against the applicant para materia with those against accused no.1 Kiran Rajput, whose FIR and proceedings had already been quashed by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Application No.3457/2023; apart from the statements of the informant and his wife, the charge-sheet disclosed no other evidence indicating abatement by the applicant, and counsel for the respondents could point to no material distinguishing her case. Relying on the reasons recorded in Criminal Application No.3457/2023, S.G. Chapalgaonkar, J. allowed the application and quashed the FIR, the charge-sheet/final report No.108/2024 (dt. 10.04.2024) and the Sessions Case against the applicant. (Bombay HC, Aurangabad Bench, 08.01.2026)

¶1

appln-1262-2025.odt

¶2

(1)

¶3

2026:BHC-AUG:1667-DB

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1262 OF 2025

¶5

Padmabai Balasaheb Wani, Age 37 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Patil Galli, Taluka Vaijapur, District Aurangabad. ..Applicant

¶6

(Orig. Accused)

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Investigation Officer, Vaijapur Police Station, Tq. Vaijapur, District Aurangabad.

¶9

Balnath s/o Nivrutti Jore, Age 62 years, Occu. Retired, R/o Patil Galli, Tq. Vaijapur, District Aurangabad. ..Respondents

¶10

Mr. S. D. Jayabhar, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. V. M. Lomte, APP for Respondent No.1. Mr. U. V. Khonde, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶11

…

¶12

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : 08^th JANUARY, 2026.

¶13

FINAL ORDER:-

¶14

The applicant/accused seeks quashment of FIR in Crime No.385/2023 registered with Vaijapur Police Station, District Aurangabad for offences punishable under Sections 306, 506, 504 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and consequential proceeding in Sessions Case No.72/2024 pending before Sessions Court at Vaijapur.

¶15

On information of respondent no.2, Crime No.385/2023 dated

¶16

18.07.2023 came to be registered against two accused persons

¶17

appln-1262-2025.odt

¶18

(2)

¶19

including applicant. In short, it has been alleged by informant that on 04.01.2023 his son Pravin Jore died on account of strangulation. It is further alleged that on 02.01.2023 while informant was at home alongwith his wife, their son Pravin came at home after closing electrical shop. He was mentally disturbed. When informant asked reason for his disturbed mental condition, he told that he obtained loan on interest from accused persons. Although loan amount was repaid, accused persons were pursuing for payment of further amount. On 04.01.2023 at about 04.50 pm informant received phone call from Nilesh Jore informing that Pravin has committed suicide by strangulation at home. According to informant, deceased Pravin committed suicide due to abatement of accused persons.

¶20

It appears that, on completion of investigation, final report/charge-sheet No.108/2024 has been filed on 10.04.2024 in Court of Magistrate, who committed case for trial to Sessions Court. Accordingly, Sessions Case No.72/2024 was registered. During pendency of aforesaid proceeding, accused no.1-Kiran Rajput filed Criminal Application No.3457/2023 before this Court for quashment of FIR and further proceeding in Sessions Case No.72/2024 registered pursuance to FIR. This Court after considering contents of FIR and charge-sheet observed in paragraph nos.11 and 12 as under:

¶21

appln-1262-2025.odt

¶22

(3)

¶23

“11. We are afraid that these allegations even if taken on their face value will not indicate that the applicant was harassing deceased Pravin in order to recover the money allegedly due and payable to them. The allegations in the FIR and the statements are pertinently silent with respect to the nature and extent of harassment, so also the tentative period thereof. Most importantly the allegations only suggest pressure tactics adopted by the applicant for the purpose of recovery of money. These allegations fall grossly short of establishing the ingredients of Sections 107 and 306 of the IPC in as much as mens rea for forcing the deceased to end his life is not made out even if entire material is assumed to be true and correct on its face value. We are aware that the matter is yet to go to trial, however, for the present, even if the entire material gathered by prosecution is assumed to be true, the charge under Section 306 of the IPC cannot be sustained. We are, therefore of the considered opinion that the FIR and criminal prosecution against the applicant deserves to be quashed since essential elements of the offence are not made out on the basis of material gathered by the prosecution.

¶24

12. It may be stated that the deceased has committed suicide on 04.01.2023 and the FIR is lodged on 18.07.2023 i.e. after a period of six and half months. It will also be pertinent to mention here that the Investigation Agency had tried to record statements of family members after the demise during the course of initial investigation when accidental death case was registered. However, the informant and his family members had not given their statements at that stage though there was opportunity. The record also indicates that on 17.06.2023 after repeated telephonic calls the informant and his family members had visited the Police Station for recording their statements, however, they left the Police Station without giving any statement to the police authorities. The FIR is lodged on 18.07.2023 i.e. after a period of one month from 17.06.2023.”

¶25

and finally quashed FIR and further proceeding in Sessions Case No.72/2024 to the extent of accused no.1-Kiran Rajput.

¶26

appln-1262-2025.odt

¶27

(4)

¶28

Perusal of FIR and charge-sheet would show that allegations against applicant/accused no.1 are para materia with allegations against accused no.1. Even contents of charge-sheet would show that except family members of deceased i.e. informant and his wife no other evidence is brought on record indicating abatement to deceased to commit suicide on part of applicant.

¶29

The learned Advocate appearing for respondent no.2 as well as learned APP were called upon to demonstrate any other material that would distinguish case of applicant from case of accused no.1-Kiran Rajput against whom FIR and proceeding is already quashed and set aside. However, they could not bring to notice of this Court any such material.

¶30

In that view of matter, for reasons as recorded by Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Application No.3457/2023, present Criminal application deserves to be allowed. Hence, following order:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

a. Criminal Application is allowed.

¶33

b. The FIR bearing Crime No.385 of 2023 registered with Vaijapur Police Station, District Aurangabad on 18.07.2023 for offences punishable under Sections 306, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC as well as charge-sheet/final report No.108/2024

¶34

appln-1262-2025.odt

¶35

(5)

¶36

dated 10.04.2024 and consequential proceeding in Sessions Case No.72 of 2024 pending on file of the Sessions Judge, Vaijapur, District Aurangabad, are hereby quashed against present applicant-Padmabai Balasaheb Wani.

¶37

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE

¶38

Devendra/January-2026

Padmabai Babasaheb Wani v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padmabai Babasaheb Wani v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rangnath Marutirao Bhise Died Thr Lrs Mudrikabai Rangnath Bhise Died and Ors. vs Tulsabai Sopan Bhore and Another

Anusaya Alias Sulekha Mohanrao Jagtap vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Deepak Vijay Dubbewar and Others vs Subhadrabai Manohar Dubbewar and Others

Shantabai Buddhaji Barge and Others vs Meenatai Ramesh Barge and Others

Kavita Nagesh Nalge and Others vs Bhagyashree Satyanarayan Nalge and Others

Santosh Tukaram Nagare and Another vs the State of Maharashtra and Another