Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra
2025 Latest Caselaw 8839 Bom

Bombay High Court

Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 December, 2025

2025:BHC-AUG:35371
                                                                 Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.828 OF 2023
          1. Rajkumar S/o. Ramdas Bhagat,
             Age: 32 years, Occu. Agri.,

          2. Suratbai @ Sarswati W/o. Ramdas Bhagat,
             Age: 58 years, Occu. Agri.,

          Both R/o. Dhokrai, Tq. Shrigonda,
          Dist. Ahmednagar.                                      .... Appellants

                       VERSUS
          The State of Maharashtra                               ..... Respondent

          Appearance :

          Mr. Rajendra K. Temkar h/f Mr. Madhav N. Kalyane, Advocate for
          the Appellants.
          Ms. A. S. Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent - State
          ________________________________________________________________

                                   CORAM               : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
                                   Reserved On         : 3rd December, 2025
                                   Pronounced On : 16th December, 2025

          JUDGMENT:

1. This Appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') is directed

against the Judgment and Order dated 30/08/2023, passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar,

(hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court'), in Sessions Case

No.221/2019, convicting and sentencing the Appellants as follows :

"(1) Accused No. 1 Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat and No.3. Sau.

Suratbai @ Saraswati Ramdas Bhagat are hereby convicted

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

as per provisions of Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and they are sentenced to suffer rigourous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- (Two Thousand) each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months.

(2) Accused No. 1 Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat and No.3 Sau Suratbai @ Saraswati Ramdas Bhagat are further convicted as per section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the office puniushable under Section 304-B(2) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and they are sentenced to suffer rigourous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand) each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for four months.

(3) Accused No. 1 Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat and No.3 Sau Suratbai @ Saraswati Ramdas Bhagat are further convicted as per section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and they are sentenced to suffer rigourous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (One Thousand) each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

(4) Accused No. 1 Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat and No.3 Sau.

Suratbai @ Saraswati Ramdas Bhagat are further convicted as per section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the offence punishable under Section 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and they are sentenced to suffer rigourous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (One Thousand) each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

(5) Accused No. 1 Rajkumar Ramdas Bhagat and No.3 Sau.

Suratbai @ Saraswati Ramdas Bhagat are further convicted as per section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the offence punishable under Section 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and they are sentenced to suffer rigourous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (One Thousand) each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

(6) All the substantive sentences of imprisonment of accused shall run concurrently.

(7) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (8) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (9) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ...

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

(10) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (11) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (12) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (13) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (14) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... (15) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..."

2. The Prosecution's case, as revealed from the Police

Report, is as follows :

[I] The Deceased - Sudeshna was the sister of the first

Informant. The Deceased got married to Appellant No.1 on

10/12/2010. Seven (7) tola gold and Rs.21000/- with the household

Articles were presented in the marriage. Deceased went to her

matrimonial home and started residing with the Appellants, who are

the husband and mother-in-law and the acquitted Accused. For

initially five (05) to six (06) months, the Deceased was treated

properly. Thereafter, the Deceased was being harassed and ill-

treated by the husband and in-laws. The Informant and parents of

the Deceased gave understanding to the Appellants, however in vain.

Once the Deceased was driven out of the matrimonial house and so

she came to reside with her parents. In September - 2012, Deceased

got pregnant. However, ill-treatment continued, which resulted in

her abortion, and she was sent to her parents' house. Deceased was

informed to come with Rs.2 Lakhs for constructing the house and

starting the poultry business. After one month, the Deceased was

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

sent to her matrimonial house after the Informant and relatives gave

understanding to the husband and in-laws of Deceased. However, the

ill-treatment continued. After some days, Deceased became pregnant

for the second time and she was driven out of house on 18/06/2013,

and so she came to her parents' house. Deceased gave birth to one

girl child on 01/10/2013. No one from her matrimonial side came to

meet her. There was exchange of legal notices between both the

sides. The matter was settled and the Deceased went to her

matrimonial house in January - 2014. As the ill-treatment

continued, the Deceased committed suicide by throwing herself in

front of the running railway train on 12/11/2014.

[II] The brother of Deceased lodged the report with the

concerned Police Station. The Spot Panchnama was conducted. The

Inquest was done. The suicide note was found. The dead body was

sent for Postmortem. The statements of the witnesses were recorded.

The Appellants and the acquitted Accused came to be arrested. The

suicide note and the papers submitted by the Informant were sent for

the handwriting expert. During the investigation, it was revealed

that, due to the ill-treatment at the hands of her husband and in-

laws, Deceased committed suicide, and therefore, the Investigating

Officer submitted the Charge-sheet against the husband and in-laws.

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

[III] On committal, the learned Trial Court framed the Charge

against all the Accused persons i.e. the Appellants, the father-in-law,

sister-in-law and mother-in-law of the Deceased below Exhibit - 11, to

which, all of them pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To

prove the Charge, the Prosecution examined in all nine [09] witnesses

and brought on record the relevant documents. On closure of the

evidence by the Prosecution, the statement of the Accused came to be

recorded under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. They stated that, the

Deceased was a short-tempered person and many times, she

threatened of committing suicide. There was no change in her

behavior and she committed suicide. The learned Trial Court, on

appreciating the evidence on record, passed the impugned Judgment

and Order, convicting the Appellants as above and acquitting the Co-

Accused.

3. It is submitted by the learned Advocate of the Appellants

that, the evidence on record do not establish the ill-treatment

required to attract the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC']. The

evidence on record show that, the Deceased was a short-tempered

woman and committed suicide in anger. The evidence on record go to

show that, the husband and in-laws of the Deceased were financially

well-off, having their own house, and therefore, there was no question

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

of demanding Rs.2 Lakhs from the Deceased's parents for

constructing house and for poultry business. The suicide note was

planted, and the report of handwriting expert cannot be accepted, as

there is no evidence that, the handwriting with which the suicide

note was compared was the natural handwriting of the Deceased.

The evidence on record do not prove the Charge and the evidence on

record show that, one day before the incident, Deceased had given in

writing that, she will not threaten to commit suicide. The Witness

No.5 was the got-up witness. Under such circumstances, the

impugned Judgment of conviction and sentence be quashed and set

aside, and the Appellants be acquitted. In support of his contentions,

he cited the Judgments in Ude Singh and Others vs. State of

Haryana; (2019) 17 SCC 301 AND Kashibai and Others vs.

State of Karnataka; (2023) 15 SCC 751.

4. It is submitted by the learned APP for the Prosecution

that, the Judgments cited by the learned Advocate for the Appellants

are on the point of suicide and will not be of any assistance in the

case at hand, as the conviction is for the offence punishable under

Section 304-B of the IPC. There is evidence on record to show that,

the Deceased was ill-treated and harassed. PW - 5 was an

independent witness and her testimony corroborate the testimony of

the Informant. The evidence of the handwriting expert show that,

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

the suicide note was in the handwriting of the Deceased. The written

bonds brought on record show that, petty quarrels used to take place

between the husband and wife, and there was exchange of notices

between both the sides. The learned Trial Court has rightly

convicted and sentenced the Appellants and the Appeal be dismissed.

5. As regards the above-referred decisions cited by the

learned Advocate for the Appellants is concerned, they are in respect

of abetment to suicide. The settled legal position is reiterated in the

said Judgments that, for the purpose of finding out if a person has

abetted commission of suicide by another, the consideration would be

if accused is guilty of the act of instigation of the act of suicide. If the

persons, who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the

action of Accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a

similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be safe

to hold Accused guilty of abetment of suicide. However, on the other

hand, if the Accused by his acts and by his continuous course of

conduct creates a situation which leads Deceased perceiving no other

option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four-

corners of Section 306 of the IPC.

6. In the case at hand, there is no dispute on the aspect that,

the Deceased committed suicide by throwing herself before the

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

running train. The Postmortem Report below Exhibit - 74, which is

admitted by the defence gives the probable cause of death

"Cardiopulmonary arrest due to hemorrhagic shock due to railway

traffic accident". In addition to this, there is evidence of PW - 6

(Jayram Radhan Sonawane), who was operating the train from

Nagpur to Pune on the day of accident and saw one lady on the

railway track.

7. As regards the aspect of ill-treatment and harassment to

the Deceased is concerned, there is no evidence of any eyewitness. On

this aspect, the relevant evidence is that of PW - 1 (Pravin Mohanrao

Mande), the brother of Deceased; PW - 4 (Mahadev Nana Bhosale),

the neighbor of the Deceased's matrimonial house; and PW - 5

(Varsharani Bapu Bhapkar), a friend of the Deceased.

8. There is no dispute in respect of the relations between the

Appellants and the Deceased. The evidence of PW - 1 (Pravin

Mohanrao Mande) that, at the time of marriage, Rs.21000/- was given

as dowry, was an omission, which is proved through the evidence of

the Investigating Officer i.e. PW - 9. The further evidence of PW - 1

(Pravin Mohanrao Mande) show that, the marriage of the Deceased

was settled with free consent of both the sides and in consultation

with each other. His evidence further go to show that, their financial

condition was satisfactory in comparison with the Appellants. In his

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

evidence, he deposed of the mental and physical ill-treatment to the

Deceased (sister) by the Accused persons. However, in the cross-

examination, he volunteered that, the nature of Deceased was

irritative. It has come in the evidence that, after one and half years

of the marriage, when the Deceased was pregnant, the Appellants

had gone for holy Darshan at Vrindavan. His evidence show that, no

grievance was raised in respect of the abortion of the Deceased. It

has come in his evidence that, due to irritative nature of Deceased,

many times hot exchange of words used to take place between the

Deceased and the Accused. His evidence show that, both the sides

were at some fault in frequent disputes and the Deceased was being

convinced by him and the family members to adjust with the

situation. His evidence go to show that, in January - 2014, meeting /

talks took place between both the sides, and it was decided that, they

should enjoy the marital life and the terms were written down. The

Deceased and Accused No.1 had both given in writing in respect of

resolving their disputes / grievances. The writing was confronted to

him and it is elicited that, Deceased had given undertaking that, she

will not repeat the grievance against the Accused persons. In clear

terms, it has come in his evidence that, on the day of incident, there

was exchange of words between the Deceased and Accused, and the

Deceased left the house and went towards Railway track in anger.

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

9. The evidence of PW - 4 (Mahadev Nana Bhosale) show

that, he was the neighbourer of the Appellants and, therefore, knew

them and the Deceased. His evidence show that, quarrel used to take

place between the Deceased and her in-laws. His evidence show that,

the Deceased had given birth to one girl child. On the day of incident,

the brother and mother of the Deceased had come to her matrimonial

house and the quarrel was going on till late night. His evidence show

that, on the day of incident, when he came home at around 03:30

p.m., he was informed by his daughter that, Deceased was missing

and she was under tension. Therefore, he searched for the Deceased

and came to know that, Deceased had gone towards the Railway

track. He and one Uable Sir went towards the Railway track and

Deceased met them on the way. Deceased was very angry and when

they requested her to return, she refused and told them that, she was

going to her parent's house and asked them not to interfere in their

matter and so they came back. Later on, he came to know about the

incident of suicide by the Deceased on the Railway track. His further

evidence in the cross-examination show that, the Deceased was a hot

tempered person and the Accused persons used to complain that, the

Deceased was not behaving properly with them. It has further come

in the cross-examination that, due to the nature of Deceased, many

times quarrel used to take place in the house and several compromise

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

meetings were held to convince the Deceased. In clear terms, it has

come in his cross-examination that, there was no other ill-treatment

to the Deceased in the matrimonial house and the Deceased was not

ill-treated for demand of money. His evidence show that, he did not

know the reason of quarrel on the day of incident. His further cross-

examination show that, when he and Ubale Sir stopped the Deceased

and requested to come back, the Deceased lifted stone to throw on

them and father-in-law of the Deceased had come to take her back,

however due to old age and permanent disability, he was unable to

control the Deceased. It has come in his cross-examination that, on

the day of incident, Appellant No.1 - husband was not present in the

house. It has come in his evidence that, he gave his statement before

the learned Magistrate as per Say of Police.

10. The evidence of PW - 5 (Smt. Varsharani Bapu Bhapkar)

show that, Deceased was her friend. She deposed that, Deceased was

subjected to harassment and ill-treatment by her husband and in-

laws, such as not providing meals to her, not allowing her to meet her

brother, administrating poison to the Deceased, and demanding Rs.2

Lakhs for poultry farm and construction of house. Her cross-

examination show that, she was educated up to 9 th Standard and her

matrimonial home was situated at Hiradgaon, and the Deceased was

the resident of Madhewadgaon. She completed her education in

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

Hiradgaon and Deceased completed her education at Madhewadgaon.

This indicate that, they were not the schoolmates and were residents

of different Villages. Her further cross-examination show that, her

evidence in respect of ill-treatment to the Deceased at the hands of

the husband and in-laws and demand of money for construction of

house and poultry farm was an improvement. It has come in her

cross-examination that, when Deceased used to meet her while

attending the College, she was happy. Her cross-examination further

show that, her last meeting with Deceased was during the Diwali

Festival of 2013. Thereafter, she had no talks with the Deceased

either in person or on the telephone, and when she lastly met the

Deceased, the Deceased was having one female child of four months.

Her cross-examination show that, her statement under Section 161 of

Cr.P.C. was not recorded. The statement was recorded under Section

164 of Cr.PC. Her cross-examination show that, the Informant

accompanied her with her other relatives and there was discussion in

respect of recording the statement and how to depose.

11. On evaluation of the above-referred evidence of the

material witnesses of the Prosecution, it becomes more than clear

that, the Deceased was a short-tempered woman. The evidence do

not establish that, the ill-treatment or harassment was of such a

nature so as to attract the offence punishable under Section 498-A of

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

the IPC. It is needless to state that, it is settled position under the

law that, every harassment or ill-treatment do not qualify the term

Cruelty to attract Section 498-A of the IPC. What the above-

discussed evidence show is that, frequent quarrel used to take place

at the matrimonial house of the Deceased. The evidence further

show that, due to anger, the Deceased took the extreme step of

committing suicide in front of the train. There are material

omissions in the evidence of the witness. The evidence of PW - 5

(Varsharani Bapu Bhapkar) clearly show that, from last one year,

there was no contact between her and the Deceased, and her version

appears to be exaggerated with material omissions. The evidence of

the Informant show that, written assurance was given by the

Deceased that, she will not repeat the grievance. It is elicited in his

cross-examination that, there was exchange of legal notices. Further,

in the written undertaking below Exhibit - 48, signed by the

Deceased and the Appellant - husband, there was no mention about

the cause of abortion, demand of money, ill-treatment and

harassment for fulfillment of demand. The evidence of PW - 4

(Mahadev Nana Bhosale) show that, frequent quarrel used to take

place due to the nature of Deceased. The evidence of these witnesses

examined by the Prosecution fall short of establishing that, the

Deceased was subjected to cruelty at the hands of the Appellants and

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

demand of money. Quarrels by itself will not be incriminating unless

it fall within the term 'cruelty' sufficient to drive the victim to commit

suicide. The clear evidence on record show that, the Deceased was

short-tempered person and she ended her life in anger.

12. The other material piece of evidence relied upon by the

Prosecution is the suicide note, which is Article - A. The evidence of

PW - 2 (Sachin Jaising Shirsath) show that, he was the Panch for the

Spot Panchnama and the Inquest. His evidence show that, the spot of

incident was the Railway track at Shrigonda, and the body was in

Hospital in two pieces. His evidence nowhere show that, the suicide

note was found with the Deceased. His evidence show that, he signed

the papers at the instance of the Police without reading the same.

His cross-examination show that, the chit was shown by the Police to

him in the Shrigonda Hospital and he do not know from where the

chit (Article - A) was seized by the Police. In clear terms, it has come

in his evidence that, the chit was not having wrinkles. Exhibit - 51

(Spot Panchnama) show that, no paper was found on the spot of

incident and nothing was seized from the spot of incident, whereas

Exhibit - 52 (Inquest) speaks of one chit in the right hand of the

Deceased.

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

13. The evidence of PW - 3 (Riyaj Mohammad Hanif

Shaikkh ) show that, on 13/11/2014, he was called at the Railway

Police Station, Ahmednagar, wherein the ornaments and one chit

written on the newspaper and the clothes of the Deceased were seized

under Panchnama at Exhibit - 58. His evidence show that, the said

Articles were produced by Police Constable - Rokade. He further

deposed that, one person Pravin Mohanrao Mande (PW - 1) was

present in the Police Station and he brought two written papers in

the handwriting of Deceased, which were seized by the Police under

Panchnama at Exhibit - 59. His cross-examination show that, PW -

1 (Pravin Mohanrao Mande) informed him the Police that, the said

two written papers were in the handwriting of the Deceased. His

evidence show that, he had no knowledge about the handwriting of

the Deceased. Admittedly, the Prosecution has not examined the said

Police Constable - Rokade, who produced the Articles, including the

chit. Further, the evidence of PW - 9 (Shantilal Sheshrao More), the

Investigating Officer, show that, the admitted handwriting was seized

from the house of the Appellants. This show that, there is glaring

inconsistency in the evidence of the Prosecution in respect of the two

written papers, purported to be in the natural handwriting of the

Deceased. There is absolutely no evidence to show that, the

handwriting on the said two papers were that of the Deceased. The

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

evidence of PW - 9 (Shantilal Sheshrao More), the Investigating

Officer, show that, there was no mention in the Panchnama about

sealing of suicide note and there was no Panchnama of the admitted

handwriting of the Deceased.

14. As seen from the above evidence, the seizure of the alleged

suicide note seized during the investigation is highly doubtful. There

is no clear evidence as to from where the said chit was found. It

remains a mystery. On the contrary, the evidence of PW - 4

(Mahadev Nana Bhosale), who met the Deceased before the incident

of suicide, speak that, the Deceased had lifted the stone to throw on

them. If it is so, the Prosecution's case in respect of the suicide chit is

required to be seen with serious doubt. Resultantly, the evidence of

handwriting expert that, the handwriting on the chit and two papers

matched, or were that of the Deceased, is of no assistance for the

Prosecution.

15. The other evidence is that of PW - 7 (Bhaskar Bhikaji

Bhos), the Special Judicial Magistrate, who recorded the statement

under Section 164 of Cr.PC. It is needless to state that, the

statement under Section 164 of Cr.PC is not the substantive piece of

evidence. The evidence of PW - 9 (Shantilal Sheshrao More) show

the investigation done by him and filing of charge-sheet.

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

16. The re-appreciation of the evidence on record, show that,

the Prosecution's evidence is far from establishing the essential

ingredients for the offences, for which the Appellants are convicted

and sentenced. The evidence on record indicate exaggeration by the

witnesses. The Prosecution utterly failed to establish the demand of

money by the Appellants / Accused persons, cruelty to the Deceased

at the hands of Appellants. The evidence clearly show that, the

Deceased was of short temperament and frequent quarrels used to

take between her and the in-laws and she committed suicide in a fist

of anger. The evidence on record completely fall short of establishing

abetment to suicide. As the evidence on record do not prove the

Charge against the Appellants, the Appellants are entitled for

acquittal. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

[I] The Appeal is allowed.

[II] The conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Trial Court against the Appellants, in Sessions Case No.221/2019 by the Judgment and Order dated 30/08/2023, is hereby quashed and set aside.

[III] The Appellants are acquitted for the offences for which they were charged and convicted by the learned Trial Court by the impugned Judgment and Order.

Criminal Appeal No.828-2023.odt

[IV] The Appellants are behind the bars. They be released forthwith if not required in any other offence.

[V] The fine amount paid by the Appellants pursuant to the impugned Judgment and Order be refunded to them.

[VI] The Muddemal Articles be dealt with as per the operative order of the impugned Judgment.

[VII] The Record and Proceedings be sent back to the learned Trial Court.

[VIII] Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

[NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]

Sameer/December -2025