Bombay High Court
Shruti Bapu Katakdound @ Shruti Nitin ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 7 October, 2024
Author: Neela Gokhale
Bench: A. S. Gadkari, Neela Gokhale
2024:BHC-AS:39487-DB
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.574 OF 2023
1. Shruti Bapu Katakdound @
Shruti Nitin Hatkar,
Age : 35 years, Occu: Service,
Having address at E/703, Regalia
Society, Datta Mandir Road,
Opp. N.C.P. Office, Wakad, Pune,
Maharashtra.
2. Smruti Bapu Katakdound @
Smruti Abhijit Vatkar,
Age: 37 years, Occu: Doctor,
Having address at 301,
Building G, Comfort Zone Society,
Opp. Ambad, Talathi Office, Nashik. .....Applicants
Vs.
1. The State Of Maharashtra,
At the instance of Sakinaka Police
Station, Mumbai.
2. Chhaya Maruti Sadaphule,
Age: 48 years, Occu: Household,
Residing at Ekta Committee,
Indira Nagar, Jari Mari,
Kurla-Andheri Road,
Sakinaka Police Station,
Mumbai - 400 072. .....Respondents
Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar with Mr. Prathamesh Mandlik, for the Applicants.
Mr. Anand S. Shalgaonkar APP, for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Shailesh Kharat, for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
DR NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 20th SEPTEMBER, 2024.
PRONOUNCED ON : 07th OCTOBER, 2024.
1/8
::: Uploaded on - 07/10/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 08/10/2024 00:16:41 :::
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
JUDGMENT :
- (Per Dr. Neela Gokhale, J.)
1) The Applicants seeks to quash Criminal Proceeding bearing
Sessions Case No.280 of 2023 pending on the file of the City Civil &
Additional Sessions Judge, Dindoshi arising out of C.R.No.2357 of 2022
dated 15th December 2022 registered with Sakinaka Police Station, Mumbai
for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 384, 323, 504 and 506 read
with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC').
2) Facts of the case in brief are as under:-
2.1) It is alleged in the FIR that, the Respondent No.2 has five
daughters and one son. Daughter Sonali was taking education in Mumbai
University in the year 2012 and got acquainted with one Atish Bapu
Katakdound. They fell in love and were in a relationship for past 7-8 years.
2.2) The Applicants are married sisters of Atish. Atish's parents were
aware of the relationship and they agreed to get them married. However,
they demanded dowry from the Respondent No.2's parents which they were
unable to bear. Since Sonali's parents were unable to satisfy the dowry
demands, Atish's family members rejected the marriage proposal. Despite
this, Atish continued the relationship and promised to marry her. Atish's
mother and sisters threatened Sonali and told her to leave Atish alone.
2.3) It is further alleged that, even Sonali tried to tell Atish that
since it was not possible to marry, they should part ways. However, Atish
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
continued to meet her at her place of work and pursue her. On the
assurance of marriage, Atish established forcible sexual relations with
Sonali leading to lodging of FIR No.508 of 2021 with the Sakinaka Police
Station against him. Thus, their relationship was terminated.
2.4) Sonali had attempted suicide by drinking phenyl leading to the
relationship being reestablished between Sonali and Atish. Atish arranged
for accommodation for himself and Sonali by borrowing Rs.5 Lakhs from
Sonali. They purchased household items for the house and used to reside
there from time to time.
2.5) On 10th December 2022, the Respondent No.2 and her family
members had gone to Latur for a family function. On 14 th December 2022,
the other daughter of the Respondent No.2, namely, Rupali telephoned her
and informed her that the marriage of Atish was fixed with some other girl.
Sonali was devastated and sunk into depression. On 14 th December 2022,
Sonali telephoned Atish and was crying loudly. At 6.30 p.m. on the same
day, Rupali telephoned the Respondent No.2 and informed her that Sonali
was seriously ill. The Respondent No.2 and other family members
immediately returned to Mumbai. It was thereafter learnt that Sonali along
with her friend Ramesh went to the Banquet hall where Atish was getting
married. They were not allowed to enter the premises and hence, Sonali
was extremely depressed and continuously crying.
2.6) It further appears from the FIR that between 3 and 5 p.m. on
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
the same day, Sonali committed suicide by hanging herself from the roof of
her house with a saree. She has also left behind a suicide note apologizing
to her family and blaming Atish and his parents for ruining her life. It is
stated in the note that Atish had abused her sexually on the assurance of
marriage and requested that they should fight for justice for her, who was a
rape victim. It is in these circumstances that the Respondent No.2 filed the
impugned FIR against Atish, his parents and his two sisters, Shruti and
Smruti. The present Application is filed by Shruti and Smruti.
3) Notice was issued to the Respondent No.2 and Advocate
Shailesh Kharat was appointed as her counsel from the panel of Legal
Services Committee, High Court, Mumbai. Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar learned
counsel appears for the Applicants and Mr. A.S. Shalgaonkar, learned APP
represents the State.
4) Mr. Bhutekar submits that, the FIR does not disclose any
offence against the Applicants and their names were included only to create
pressure on Atish as a vendetta against their family. He submits that, it is a
cooked up case and both the Applicants were married and were living
separately since 2010 and 2014 separately. Moreover, the Applicant No.1
resided in Pune and was in Germany from 2 nd November 2018 upto 13th
June 2019. He also points out that the deceased Sonali had also registered
another FIR in April 2021 against Atish and had not carried it forward.
Moreover, allegations of dowry do not establish abetment to suicide. Mr.
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
Bhutekar thus urges the Court to quash the impugned FIR qua these
Applicants.
5) Mr. Kharat pointed out that the investigation report reveals that
the cruelty was inflicted upon Sonali collectively by all the accused
including the present Applicants. They were all in connivance with each
other and had extracted five lakhs rupees from her. Having abused her
physically and mentally including establishing sexual relations with her,
Atish and his family members including the Applicants herein had called off
the marriage for non-payment of dowry. Mr. Kharat draws our attention to
whatsApp chats between the parties which according to him established the
relationship between the parties. Thus, Mr. Kharat prays that the
Application be dismissed.
6) Mr. Shalgaonkar has supported the case of the prosecution.
7) A plain but careful reading of the FIR indicates a relationship
between Atish and the deceased Sonali. It appears that Atish maintained the
relationship with Sonali despite resistance and opposition from his own
family members. His parents had clearly told Sonali that they were not in
agreement with a proposal of marriage between Atish and herself. Despite,
this expressed communication, Sonali and Atish continued their
relationship even to the extent of arranging residential accommodation and
living in the same from time to time. Atish had promised to marry her and
their relationship was completely consensual.
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
8) We have perused the suicide note purported to have been left
behind by Sonali. It is evident that the note has been written in a extremely
emotional and desperate state of mind. In any case, the suicide note does
not mention the names of the Applicants herein. We do not find any remote
connection between any act done by the Applicants herein and the suicide
committed by Sonali.
9) Section 306 of the IPC makes abetment to commit suicide as an
offence. Section 107 of the IPC, which defines the abatement of a thing,
reads thus:
"Section 107 - Abatement of a thing.- A person abets the
doing of a thing, who--
First.--Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.--Engages with one or more other person or
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an
act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that
conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly.--Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission,
the doing of that thing.
Explanation -- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation,
or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is
bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or
attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to
instigate the doing of that thing." (underline supplied)
10) In the facts of this case, second and third category in Section
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
107 of IPC, will have no application. Hence, the question is whether the
Applicants instigated the deceased to commit suicide.
11) The Supreme Court in the matter of Mohit Singhal & Anr. v. the
State of Uttarakhand & Ors.1 has held that, to attract the first clause, there
must be instigation in some form on the part of the accused to cause the
deceased to commit suicide. Hence, the accused must have mens rea to
instigate the deceased to commit suicide. The act of instigation must be of
such intensity that it is intended to push the deceased to such a position
under which he or she has no choice but to commit suicide. Such instigation
must be in close proximity to the act of committing suicide.
12) The facts in the present case do not demonstrate any
instigation by the Applicants herein for Sonali to commit suicide. These
Applicants are not even named in the suicide note. There are only generic,
vague and omnibus allegations against them in the impugned FIR. The FIR
does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence by these Applicants.
In these circumstances, we have no hesitation in holding that no prima facie
case is made out against these Applicants and continuance of their
prosecution shall amount to an abuse of process of law.
13) In view of the aforesaid discussion, Criminal Proceedings
bearing Sessions Case No.280 of 2023 pending on the file of the City Civil &
Additional Sessions Judge, Dindoshi arising out of C.R.No.2357 of 2022
1 2023 INSC 1035
sns 02-apl-574-2023-J.doc
dated 15th December 2022 registered with Sakinaka Police Station, Mumbai
are quashed and set aside qua these Applicants.
14) Rule is accordingly made absolute.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)
Digitally
signed by
SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN Date:
2024.10.07
19:23:20
+0530
