[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Amarlal S/O Sonumal Katariya vs The State Of Maharashtra on 20 January, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:2050
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 170 OF 2023
Amarlal S/o Sonumal Katariya,
Aged about 70 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Near Anandpur Satsang Bhavan,
Pakki Kholi, Sindhi Camp, Akola
Tq and Dist. Akola ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
WITH
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 37 OF 2025
Sangita Ajit Popali,
Age 46 years, Occu: Housewife,
R/o Pakki Kholi, Sindhi Camp, Akola
Tq and Dist. Akola ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
***
• Mr. B. P. Pande, Advocate for the Applicants
• Mr. S. K. Shirse, APP for the Respondent/State
***
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J
RESERVED ON : JANUARY 19, 2026
PRONOUNCED ON : JANUARY 20, 2026
COMMON JUDGMENT :
1. In Criminal Revision Application no. 170/2023, there is
challenge to judgment and order dated 28.02.2023 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule on Application Exhibit 9 in Sessions
Case No. 106/2021, whereas, in Criminal Revision Application No.
PAGE 1 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
37/2025, there is challenge to order dated 12.08.2024 passed on
Application Exhibit 41 in Sessions Case No. 106/2021.
2. In nutshell, it is the case of prosecution that, on report of
one Harish Ishwarlal Popali, Dhule City Police Station registered crime
for commission of offence under Sections 306 read with section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code on the premise that Ajit Ishwarlal Popli, husband of
Revision Petitioner in Criminal Revision Application No. 37/2025,
committed suicide. That, they were married in December, 2009. That,
wife picked up quarrel on trivial grounds and insisted for residing
separately and accordingly, since five years both husband and wife were
residing on the first floor of house of informant. According to informant,
accused no. 1 wife was always misbehaving with deceased husband,
continuously harassing him for not taking out, not providing household
expenses. That, in spite of father-in-law of deceased i.e. father of wife
being requested to give understanding to his daughter, he took her sides
and blamed husband. According to informant, on 30.05.2019, wife
picked up quarrel with deceased, who left the house declaring that, due
to her harassment, he felt like committing suicide. On 31.05.2019, dead
body of Ajit fetched from bank of river Tapi, therefore, holding wife and
father-in-law responsible, on above report, police seems to have
registered crime for above offence and on conclusion of trial, they both
PAGE 2 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
were charge-sheeted for trial vide Sessions Case no. 106/2021.
3. Both wife and father-in-law set up applications under
Section 227 of Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C") urging to discharge
them by filing applications Exhibit 9 and 41 respectively and the same
came to be rejected by impugned orders. Hence, present Revision
Applications.
4. Learned Counsel for Revision Petitioners claims false
implication of Applicants in the crime. According to him, firstly, report is
belated as deceased died on 30-31.05.2019 and report is of 04.06.2019
and as such, it is his submissions that, the same is afterthought. He
took this Court to the FIR and would point that, apparently allegations
are of mere quarrel between husband and wife on trivial grounds and
there are no major allegations. According to him, deceased left the house
in the afternoon of 30.05.2019, returned in the evening and again left
the house and subsequently, he went missing but his dead body was
found next day in the river, which according to learned Counsel, is more
than 70 kms away from the house.
5. He further pointed out that, there are no allegations of
inducement and abetment for instigation to commit suicide. It is his
submission that, husband left the house alone in annoyance and anger.
PAGE 3 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
That, there is no material to show either wife or father-in-law to be
responsible. According to him, only role attributed to father-in-law is not
giving understanding to his daughter and pacifying her and beyond that
there are no allegations. According to him, by no stretch of imagination,
case falls in the ambit of abetment to suicide. He specifically submits
that, alleged death is not in proximity to the episode of alleged quarrel,
which took place in the afternoon of 30.05.2019. He pointed out that,
though there are suicide notes, the same are not substantiated to be
authored by deceased. That, even the so called voice messages in the
mobile of deceased are not sufficient to draw inference that there was
abetment. As essential ingredients for attracting the offence of 306 IPC
are patently missing, he criticizes the observations of learned Trial
Court while rejecting the applications for discharge and prays to allow
the revision applications.
6. Learned APP would strongly oppose the applications for
discharge. He also took this Court to the report lodged by informant.
According to him, as family members of deceased were in grief, there
was delay in reporting but according to him, the same itself would not
be sufficient to doubt the prosecution case. He pointed out that, since
beginning wife was picking up regular quarrel and mentally harassing
deceased husband. That, same had become regular affair. He pointed
PAGE 4 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
out that, wife had dared husband to commit suicide and that, she was
keen in seeing him die. Thus, according to learned APP, because of such
utterance and challenge, deceased ended up his life and as there was no
other reason and there being ample material against accused to face the
trial, he justifies the impugned orders.
7. Before adverting to merits of the case, it would be just and
proper to spell out settled legal position while considering discharge
applications under Sections 227 and 228 of the Cr.P.C. It is fairly
settled position that, at such stage, Court dealing with such application
is merely expected to determine existence of prima facie material for
proceeding to frame charge and make accused persons face trial.
Material gathered during investigation is expected to be sifted with
limited purpose to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to
proceed against accused. Neither in-depth analysis nor meticulous
analysis of evidence is expected at such stage. Thus, the only duty of
Court is to ascertain whether there is prima facie material suggesting
existence of essential ingredients for the offences, which are alleged to
be committed.
Above position has been time and again reiterated since the
cases of State of Bihar v/s Ramesh Singh (1977) 4 SCC 39; Union of
India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal and Another (1979) 3 SCC 4, and a
PAGE 5 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
decade back in the cases of Sajjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of
Investigation (2010) 9 SCC 368; Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and
another (2012) 9 SCC 460; State of Tamil Nadu (By Inspector of Police
Vigilance and Anti-Corruption) v. N.Suresh Rajan and Others. (2014) 11
SCC 709; Asim Shariff v. National Investigation Agency (2019) 7 SCC
148; and Ram Prakash Chadha v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) 10 SCC
651.
8. Heard. Perused the charge-sheet. Admittedly, brother of
deceased Ajit, whose dead body was fetched in Tapi River on 31.05.2019,
has set law into motion on 04.06.2019. After giving date of marriage of
his deceased brother Ajit with accused no.1 Sangita dated 19.12.2009,
he has reported that, initially after marriage his brother and accused
no.1 were residing jointly with the family. He reported that, on minor
counts, his sister-in-law Sangita quarreled with his brother as well as
with parents and subsequently, after meeting in the house when
accused no.1 proposed to reside separately with her husband, they were
permitted to occupy the first floor since last five years. Then he reported
that, wife quarreled on the count of not taking her for outings, for not
providing money for household expenses and even suggested giving
divorce. According to informant, understanding was given to her and
even her father i.e. accused no.2 was called to give understanding to his
PAGE 6 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
daughter but according to informant, instead he blamed deceased
husband and asked him to behave properly. He alleged that, he was also
instigating his daughter, as a result of which, harassment to his brother
was aggravated by wife. He alleged that, because of such behaviour of
wife, life of his brother had become unbearable. Then he reported that,
on 30.05.2019 he got phone call from an acquaintance questioning
whether motorcycle bearing no. MH-12-FG-5621 belong to his brother.
Therefore, he and his uncle summoned urgently, then on 31.05.2019 he
claims to have learned from his mother Anjanidevi that on 30.05.2019 at
03.00 pm there was heated exchange of words between deceased and
accused no. 1 and so deceased left the house to go to his sister's place
and again returned at 06.00 pm. However, again accused no.1 picked up
quarrel upon which deceased allegedly said that he met her demands
and fulfilled her wishes but still she quarreled with him and that
henceforth he would not show his face and further said that, wife and
her father had made his life miserable, so he would not live and saying
so, he left the house. Informant claims that, his mother also told that
she tried to intercept him and at that time, wife accused no. 1 again
dared deceased saying that, if he had guts go and die, after which
deceased left on motorcycle and later on, it was revealed that,
motorcycle was found parked on the bridge of river Tapi. In the said
motorcycle, suicide notes as well as mobile of deceased was allegedly
PAGE 7 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
found.
9. Informant claims that, the voice message, at the instance of
accused no. 1 to deceased, were heard and it emerged thereupon that,
deceased declared that because of trouble at the instance of wife and
father-in-law he is committing suicide. It was also revealed that, there
were several voice messages sent by accused no.1, which revealed that,
there was mental harassment to his brother. On 30.05.2019 at 10.30
pm, there was voice message at the instance of wife wherein she
addressed and challenged deceased husband saying that he cannot die
and she was keen in seeing him die and suggested shooting video of
committing death and that she wanted to see. Resultantly, because of
regular mental and physical harassment, deceased committed suicide.
The last whats app message was sent to be around at 10.30 pm.
It is reported that, search of deceased was taken on
31.05.2019 and when not found, missing was lodged. On 01.06.2019 in
the afternoon dead body of his brother was found floating on the river
bank of Tapi, Hence, the above complaint.
10. Here before this Court learned Counsel for Revision
Petitioner would strenuously submit that, there is no evidence about
inducement, abetment or incitement to commit suicide. That, there were
quarrel only on trivial counts and there was no major reason for the
PAGE 8 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
strained relations of husband and wife and moreover, the dead body of
deceased was found 70 kms away from the house and as such, there is
nothing proximit to the alleged death, charge of 306 of IPC by no stretch
of imagination wold attract. He would very emphatically submit that,
there are no allegations of whatsoever against father-in-law.
11. From above FIR, it is emerging that, there are allegations of
continuous quarrel being picked up by accused no.1 wife with husband.
According to informant, it had become a regular affair. It is emerging
that, deceased left the house in the evening of 30.05.2019 declaring his
frustration due to regular quarrel and expressing his intentions to end
up the life. Though prima facie wife had also dared challenging to do so
and though that may not itself is sufficient to attribute to her
intentions, here there are material in the form of suicide note as well as
voice messages and whats app. Whatever informant claims to have
heard in the voice messages is also reproduced by him in the report. It
seems that at around 10.00 pm of 30.05.2019 wife allegedly sent
message to deceased that, he cannot end up his life and that she wanted
to see him die and suggested shooting video of the same and asking him
whether he is still alive. Therefore, though in the episode of afternoon
deceased had left, there are said to be voice messages to the above
extent. The same are said to be retrieve by investigating machinery.
PAGE 9 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
Therefore, there is prima facie material of continuous inducement or
abetment and challenge to die at least as regards to wife is concerned.
Investigating machinery seems to have laid hands on suicide note and
mobile containing above material. Even there is statement of mother
Anjanidevi, who was party to the quarrel, abuses, utterance by wife in
the afternoon of 30.05.2019 between husband and wife and has also
given statement in detail.
12. As regards to accused no. 2 father-in-law of deceased is
concerned, the only allegations against him are that, inspite of he being
called upon to give understanding to his daughter to behave properly, he
did not do so and rather allegedly blamed son in law. It is alleged that,
he instigated her to trouble him more. These much are only the
allegations against him in the FIR. Hence, Criminal Revision
Application No. 170/2023 filed by accused no. 2 - Amarlal alone
succeeds.
13. In view of above, I proceed to pass following order:
ORDER
(a) Criminal Revision Application No. 37 of 2025 is
dismissed.
(b) Criminal Revision Application No. 170 of 2023 is
allowed.
(c) Impugned order dated 28.02.2023 passed below Exhibit
PAGE 10 OF 11
REVN-170-23 with 37-2025.odt
9 in Sessions Case No. 106/2021 is hereby set aside.
(d) Accused No. 2 - Amarlal Sonumal Katariya is
discharged from offence punishable under Section 306
read with Section 34 of the IPC in connection with
Sessions Case No. 106/2021.
(e) Both Criminal Revision Applications stand disposed of.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)
Umesh
PAGE 11 OF 11
