Bombay High Court
Sau. Pushpa Kondu @ Dnyandev ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 4 January, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1 16.Cri.APL No.317.14 .odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.317 OF 2014
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.412 OF 2014
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.317 OF 2014
1. Sau. Pushpa Kondu @ Dnyandev Dhengale,
Aged - 35 years, Occu.- Housewife,
R/o. Pardi (Tad), Tq.-Mangrulpir,
Dist. - Washim.
2. Kondu @ Dnyandev Atmaram Dhengale,
Aged - 42 years, Occu.- Agriculturist,
R/o. - Pardi (Tad), Tq. Mangrulpir,
Dist. - Washim.
3. Sau. Sheela Ganesh Ghodekar,
Aged - 30 years, Occu.- Housewife,
R/o. Chikhali, Tq. Mangrulpir,
Dist. - Washim.
4. Ganesh Kondoji Ghodekar,
Aged - 38 years, Occu.- Agriculturist,
R/o. Chikhali, Tq.- Mangrulpir,
Dist. - Washim. ... APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S...
1. State of Maharashtra through
Police Station Officer,
Police Station Mangrulpir,
Tq.- Mangrulpir, Dist.- Washim.
2. Eknath Laxman Falatkar,
Aged 56, R/o. Digras (Br),
Police Station Adhora, Dist.- Buldhana. ... NON-APPLICANTS
::: Uploaded on - 05/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 06/02/2021 15:41:50 :::
2 16.Cri.APL No.317.14 .odt
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.412 OF 2014
1. Mahadev @ Madhav Pundlik Masvadkar,
Aged - 32 years, Occu.- Student,
2. Kishor Pundlik Masvadkar,
Aged - 28 years, Occu.- Student,
3. Pundlik Govind Masvadkar
Aged - 60 years, Occu.- Agriculturist,
4. Sau. Kamal Pundlik Masvadkar
Aged - years, Occu.- Housewife,
All are R/o. Gogri, Tq.- Mangrulpir,
Dist. - Washim. ... APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S...
1. State of Maharashtra through
Police Station Officer,
Police Station Mangrulpir,
Tq.- Mangrulpir, Dist.- Washim.
2. Eknath Laxman Falatkar,
Aged 56, R/o. Digras (Br),
Tq. Adhora, Dist.- Buldhana. ... NON-APPLICANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the non-applicant No.1 in both
applications.
Shri M. V. Rai, Advocate for the non-applicant No.2 in Criminal
Application No.412/2014.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 04.01.2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-
1. Since both the applications impugn same First
Information Report, we are disposing of both these applications by
common judgment.
2. By these applications, the applicants have challenged
the First Information Report No.42 of 2014 dated 25.02.2014
registered with the non-applicant No.1 - Police Station, registered at
the instance of the non-applicant No.2, who is father of deceased
Deepali.
3. The First Information Report No. 42 of 2014 came to be
registered against the applicants in both the applications on
25.02.2014. It has been alleged in the First Information Report that
the applicants have harassed deceased Deepali on the ground of non
payment of dowry, which compelled her to commit suicide by
leaving a suicide note.
4. The applicants in Criminal Application No.412 of 2014
are husband, brother-in-law, father-in-law and mother-in-law of
deceased. The applicants in Criminal Application No.317 of 2014
are brother-in-laws and sister- in-laws of deceased Deepali.
5. This Court on 08.05.2014 issued notice and passed ad-
interim order directing that the charge-sheet shall not be filed until
further orders. Thereafter, this Court on 20.09.2017 admitted both
the applications and continued ad-interim relief granted earlier.
6. In pursuance of the notice, the non-applicant No.2 has
filed his appearance but there is no reply filed by the non-applicant
No.2. The non-applicant No.1 - State has filed reply and it is stated
in the reply that there are allegations of demand of dowry by the
applicants in both the applications and the applicants were
harassing deceased Deepali for non payment of amount of dowry.
7. The applicants in their applications have reproduced
the text of suicide note left by deceased Deepali. There is no dispute
about the contents of suicide note by either of the parties to the
present applications.
8. We have scrutinized the contents of suicide note dated
31.12.2013. After having carefully gone through the contents of
suicide note, we find that there are no allegations in the suicide note
against the applicants either as regards harassment caused by the
applicants or by any other reason blaming the applicants for
committing suicide. In absence of any allegations against the
applicants as regards harassment which corroborates the contents of
First Information Report, we find that the First Information Report
filed by the non-applicant No.2 making allegations as regards
harassment caused by the applicants appears to be improbable.
9. After having considered the contents of First
Information Report in the light of contents of suicide note it cannot
be depicted as expressing anything intentional on the part of
applicants prompting deceased to commit suicide, we are therefore,
of the opinion that continuance of the proceedings against the
applicants would amount to abuse of process of Court. The Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and ors. Vs. Bhajanlal
and ors. reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 in paragraph No. 102
has laid down the criteria for quashing of the First Information
Report. Clause 7 of the paragraph No.102 of Bhajanlal's case (supra)
is squarely applicable to the present case.
10. We therefore, pass the following order.
The First Information Report No.42 of 2014 dated
25.02.2014 registered with the non-applicant No.1-Police Station for
offences under Section 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code against the applicants is quashed and set aside.
11. Criminal Applications stand allowed in above terms.
JUDGE JUDGE
RGurnule
