Bombay High Court
Dhananjay Hanumantrao Sonawane vs State Of Maharashtra, Through The ... on 11 October, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.247 OF 2023
Dhananjay Hanumantrao Sonawane ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
------------
Mr. Akhilesh Jaiswal, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for State/Respondent.
------------
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 11th OCTOBER 2023
PC :
1. The Applicant has challenged the order dated 13th March
2020 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Pune, below Exhibit-
6 in Sessions Case No.128/2017. By the impugned order, the
learned Judge has rejected the Applicant's Application for
discharge.
2. Heard Mr. Akhilesh Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the
Applicant and Mr. A.R. Patil, learned A.P.P. for State/Respondent.
3. The prosecution story is that the Applicant was working
Digitally
signed by
ASHWINI
as a Senior Clerk in Establishment Branch No.1 in the zonal office
ASHWINI JANARDAN
JANARDAN VALLAKATI
VALLAKATI Date:
2023.10.13
16:52:35
+0530
Ashwini V
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 22:30:22 :::
2 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
of Nira Devdhar Project. The Accused No.2 was the Executive
Engineer. Karbhajan Vithoba More was employed as Senior Clerk
in Sub-division No.3. In the year 2014-15, Karbhajan was due for
promotion under the scheme of Assured Career Progression. It was
the case of the prosecution that the Applicant did not submit the
complete report in that behalf. He did not send copies of Caste
Validity Certificate in spite of correspondence made by the superior
office. Because of this, Karbhajan was frustrated and committed
suicide on 4th April 2016 by hanging himself. The F.I.R. was lodged
on the same date by his daughter Komal. It was registered vide
C.R. No.30/2016 at Bhor police station under Section 306 r/w 34
of I.P.C. The F.I.R. mentions that the suicide note was found in the
pant pocket of the deceased. In that suicide note, the deceased had
blamed the present Applicant and also the Executive Engineer. The
first informant gave her supplementary statement on the next date
and referred to the further part of the suicide note where there
was a reference to two private money lenders. The investigation
was carried out and the charge-sheet was filed. The other Accused-
Bapusaheb Pawar was discharged by the Assistant Sessions Judge,
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 22:30:22 :::
3 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
Pune vide his order dated 6th February 2018 passed in Sessions
Case No.128/2017. The Applicant's discharge Application however,
was rejected by the impugned order.
4. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that, in the
entire charge-sheet, there is absolutely nothing against the present
Applicant to show that he was in any way responsible for the
deceased not getting the promotion. He submitted that, though the
suicide note mentions the Applicant's name, however, this is more
out of misunderstanding and frustration, rather than the facts in
this case, that the deceased had mentioned his name. He
submitted that the statements of the Applicant's colleagues as well
as the employees in the higher office also indicate that, the
Applicant was not responsible for the deceased not getting the
promotion. He further submitted that the record shows that the
deceased was taken in the service on the basis of his Caste
Certificate that he belonged to a Scheduled Tribe. However, the
Caste Validity Certificate and the Caste Certificate mentioned that
the deceased belonged to a Scheduled Caste. On this ground, the
deceased was denied promotion. For this reason, the Applicant can
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 22:30:22 :::
4 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
not be held responsible. Learned Counsel for the Applicant relied
on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Madan Mohan Singh vs. State of Gujarat and another as reported
in (2010) 8 SCC 628. According to the learned Counsel, in that
case the Hon'ble Supreme Court had referred to the suicide note of
the deceased and has observed that it was more in the nature of
departmental complaint suggesting some mental harassment on
the part of the deceased. He submitted that the facts in the
present case are similar and, therefore, the ratio of that Judgment
is applicable to the present case.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposed these submissions. He invited my
attention to the various statements of the relatives of the deceased
and also to the suicide note. In the suicide note, it is mentioned
that the Applicant was responsible for misplacing the confidential
report for the year 2009-2010 pertaining to the deceased. That had
caused hindrance in the promotion of the deceased. He submitted
that this may amount to mental harassment and therefore, Section
306 of I.P.C. is attracted.
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 22:30:22 :::
5 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
6. I have heard these submissions. With the assistance of
both the learned Counsel, I have perused the charge-sheet annexed
to the present Applicant. While it is true that the suicide note
mentions the name of the present Applicant, the suicide note also
mentions the names of two private money lenders. The grievance
of the deceased against the present Applicant appears to be that he
had misplaced the confidential report for the year 2009-2010.
However, in that connection, the statement of one Arun Palange is
important. The said witness was working as the main Clerk in the
Establishment office of the said project. He has stated that there is
noting in the documents that the confidential reports from 2005 to
2011 were sent to the Pune office. However, in that list, the
confidential report of 2009 and 2010 is not mentioned. All these
confidential reports were given to the present Applicant for
sending them to Pune. Thus, these documents show that the
confidential reports for the year 2009-2010 was not given to the
present Applicant. Therefore, from the record it does appear that
the said report could not have been misplaced by the present
Applicant simply for the reason that it was not handed over to him.
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 22:30:22 :::
6 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
Learned Counsel for the Applicant rightly relied on the earlier
letters addressed by the deceased to the Executive Engineer. In
particular, he referred to the letter dated 31st March 2012 in which
the deceased had stated that, because of his domestic difficulties,
his mental condition was not proper and, therefore, that particular
confidential report could not be submitted by him to the office.
The statement of Dattatray Pasalkar mentions that the deceased
was employed on the basis of the certificate that he belonged to a
Scheduled Tribe but he had not produced the Validity Certificate
regarding that. That was the reason why he was not considered for
promotion. This also indicates that for this lapse, the Applicant can
not be held responsible. Thus, there is hardly any material against
the present Applicant showing his involvement in the entire
process. Therefore, at this stage, there is substance in the
statement of the learned Counsel for the Applicant that the acts
attributed to the Applicant may not amount to abetment to suicide
as required under Section 306 r/w 107 of I.P.C. Arguable points are
raised and, therefore, the matter deserves admission.
7. Hence, the following order:
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 22:30:22 :::
7 of 7 15-REVN-247-2023
ORDER
i) Admit.
ii) There shall be interim-relief in terms of prayer
clause (F).
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
