Krushna Prabhakar Pol And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra

CriRevn-74-2023 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 74 OF 2023

1. Krushna Prabhakar Pol Age : 30 years, Occ. : Farmer, R/o Shankarpur, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad.

2. Prabhakar Baburao Pol Age : 76 years, Occ : Farmer, R/o Shankarpur, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad.

3. Mangalbai Prabhakar Pol Age : 62 years, Occ : Household, R/o Shankarpur, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad. ... Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra (Through Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad) ... Respondent

..... Mr. Abhishek Patil h/f Mr. S. M. Gunjal, Advocate for the Revision Petitioners.

Mr. S. K. Shirse, APP for Respondent-State.

Mr. K. F. Shingare, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Krishna P. Rodge, Advocate for the complainant (appointed) .....

CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. Reserved on : 20.01.2026 Pronounced on : 23.01.2026 CriRevn-74-2023 -2-

JUDGMENT :

1. Present revisionists, who were arraigned as accused in Crime

No. 36 of 2021 registered at Police Station, Kranti Chowk,

Aurangabad for offence under Section 306 r/w 34 of IPC, are hereby

challenging the order dated 30.01.2023 passed by learned Additional

Sessions Judge, by which their application Exhibit 13, filed under

Section 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking discharge, stood dismissed.

2. Brief background of the case is that, one Popat Gangadhar Pole,

father of deceased Sagar, reported police that on 20.01.2021, accused

on being questioned for defecating on their way, got annoyed and

further, for seeking indulgence of other villagers, allegedly came to

the house of complainant at 8.25 a.m. and beat informant, his wife as

well as their son Sagar. Occurrence was reported to police and on

referral by police, when they went to hospital, it is alleged that,

accused Mangalbai and Krushna came there too, and Krishna

threatened to see Sager. While Sagar was returning back to

Aurangabad on motorcycle with his two friends, Krushna intercepted

the said motorcycle and threatened Sagar to be done to death by

means of koyta. Out of fright and fear, it is the case of informant that,

his son hanged himself in the room at Aurangabad where he stayed.

CriRevn-74-2023 -3-

Hence, holding accused responsible, report was lodged which resulted

into registration of above crime for above offence.

3. After investigation, accused were chargesheeted for above

offence and therefore they pressed into service application Exhibit 13

in Sessions Case No. 303 of 2021 urging for discharge on the ground

that there was no material in the chargesheet to make them face trial

for above offence. By order dated 30.01.2023, learned Additional

Sessions Judged turned down the request by rejecting the application.

Hence the revision.

4. Learned counsel for revision petitioners would submit that,

apparently there was long standing civil dispute between the parties.

He pointed out that, regarding the occurrence dated 20.01.2021,

there were complaints against each other by both the sides. He

pointed out that, from the FIR itself it is clear that deceased had left

the house at Shankarpur in the company of his friends and reached

Aurangabad same day. He pointed out that on the next day, it was

allegedly learnt that Sagar had hanged himself at Aurangabad.

Consequently, it is his submission that since leaving Shankarpur till

committing alleged suicide, there was no contact by accused with the

deceased in any manner whatsoever and therefore, it is his

submission that, essentials for attracting charge of 306 of IPC like CriRevn-74-2023 -4-

inducement, abetment or instigation are patently missing in the entire

chargesheet.

5. He pointed out that version of informant does not match with

the statement of his own wife and both are distinct on the point of

alleged occurrence. He pointed out that, statement of even friends of

deceased Sagar, which find place in the chargesheet, do not show that

deceased was upset, annoyed or under fear as was claimed by

informant. He pointed out that, in the statement of friend of

deceased, it has categorically come that after reaching Aurangabad,

everything was smooth and even informant himself had allegedly told

said friend that everything is smooth and matter has been settled.

Taking clue from the same, learned counsel would emphasize that,

the alleged occurrence was not at all, thus a trigger point to take the

extreme step of committing suicide. He pointed out that, there is no

suicide note. Exact reasons for committing suicide are not coming

forth. That, deceased had left the village in the afternoon around 3.00

p.m. or so, and suicide was allegedly committed on the intervening

night of 20.01.2021 and 21.01.2021 and therefore time gap between

occurrence in the morning and some conversation in the afternoon

cannot be said to have any proximity with the alleged suicide

committed at distinct place on next day.

CriRevn-74-2023 -5-

6. He further submitted that, except relatives and friends of

deceased, there are no other statements of independent witnesses. He

further pointed out that, even assuming that there were threats by

Krushna, there are no allegations attributable of any manner against

his parents and they are simply dragged. He pointed out that, when

there is no participation by any of the revision petitioners by

indulging in any positive act or overt act, charges of abetment to

commit suicide cannot be attracted. He would add that, there was no

mens rea in this case to attribute criminality to any of the petitioners.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in support of his

contentions, sought reliance on several rulings of the Hon'ble Apex

Court as well as High Courts. Few amongst them are as under :

i. Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of Madhya Pradesh SCC 1995 (Supp 3) 438.

ii. Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Cri.

Appeal No. 221 of 2025 decided by the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court by judgment dated 17.01.2025)

iii. V. P. Singh Etc. v. The State of Punjab & Ors. (Crl. A. No. 2104/2010 and 2105/2010 decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by order dated 24.11.2022.

CriRevn-74-2023 -6-

iv. Mangal Kashinath Dabhade and another v. The State of Maharashtra (Cri. Revision Application No. 285/2023 decided by this Court at Principal Seat at Bombay on 06.03.2024.

v. Shankar Genaji Wavalkar v. The State of Maharashtra decided by this Court by judgment dated 18.11.2025.

8. Learned APP, as well as learned counsel for original

complainant, both, appointed through legal Aid as well as engaged by

the complainant, have all strongly opposed the above application on

the premise that, in the FIR itself, detail role of accused is reflected.

That, in the morning as well as in the hospital, there were threats by

Krushna. That, he had also intercepted the way of deceased who was

proceeding to Aurangabad with his friends and had also issued life

threats. That, only because of such fear, deceased was under pressure

and he committed suicide. They pointed out that there was NC at the

instance of informant regarding above instances. Statements of

witnesses are recorded, both under Section 161 as well as 164 of

Cr.P.C. That, there was no other reason for deceased to commit

suicide. It is their submission that, accused persons being solely

responsible for the same and there being ample material in the

chargesheet, it is not at all a fit case for discharge, and as such, CriRevn-74-2023 -7-

according to them, learned trial court has also committed no error in

refusing to discharge the accused.

9. Law while dealing with discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C.

is fairly settled. In series of judgments, the Hon'ble Apex Court has

laid down the principles to be borne in mind while dealing with

application for discharge. A few landmark cases which are relevant on

this point are State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh (1977) 4 SCC 39 ;

Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal & Another (1979) 3 SCC 4 ;

R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antulay & Another (1986) 2 SCC 716; Sajjan

Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2010) 9 SCC 368 ; Amit

Kapoor v. Ramesh Chandra & Another (2012) 9 SCC 460 and recent

judgment in the case of Asim Shariff v. National Investigating Agency

(2019) 7 SCC 148, Ram Prakash Chadha v. State of Uttar Pradesh

(2024) 10 SCC 651.

10. The ratio that is culled out is that, while dealing with an

application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C., strong suspicion against the

accused cannot take the place of proof of his guilt at the conclusion of

the trial. But at the initial stage, if there is a strong suspicion which

leads the court to think that there is ground for presuming that the

accused has committed an offence, then it is not open to the court to CriRevn-74-2023 -8-

say that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the

accused. The test to determine a prima facie case would naturally

depend upon the facts of each case and it is difficult to lay down a

rule of universal application. Where the material placed before the

Court disclose grave suspicion against the accused which has not been

properly explained, the court will be fully justified in framing a charge

and proceeding with the trial. By and large however, if two views are

equally possible and the Judge is satisfied that the evidence produced

before him while giving rise to some suspicion but not grave suspicion

against the accused, he will be fully within his right to discharge the

accused.

11. In the above referred case of Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar

Samal (supra) and Amit Kapoor (supra), it is declared that, trial

Judge can sift the chargesheet for the limited purpose of determining

whether there is prima facie material against the proposed accused to

frame charge and to further make them face trial. It is expected that

while sifting and weighing evidence, court is not supposed to conduct

mini trial and evaluate the evidence. The principles that are laid down

in above cases suggest that at pre-trial stage, safeguard is taken to

prevent innocent being made to face ordeal of trial.

CriRevn-74-2023 -9-

12. In the light of above judicial precedent, available material in

the form of charge sheet is sifted. Here, deceased is namely Sagar.

There is no dispute that suicide is committed by him at Aurangabad

where he was staying in a room along with other friends. There is no

dispute that he had visited his village Shankarpur, taluka Gangapur at

relevant time of the occurrence. His father Popat has reported about

above suicide by his son in the intervening night of 20.01.2021 and

21.01.2021. Apparently, FIR is of 22.01.2021.

13. According to informant, accused, who are their kinsmen, were

regularly picking up quarrels on trifle counts. He stated that two to

three days prior to the occurrence, his son Sagar had come to the

village. In the early hours of 20.01.2021, they noticed that

deliberately accused Prabhakar and Krushna defecated on their way

and were therefore questioned and further it was informed to

villagers namely Ashok Pol, Sarangdhar Gaikwad, Kiran Pol,

Dnyaneshwar Gaikwad and others. Getting annoyed on account of

passing such information to others, it is alleged that, accused

Prabhakar, Krushna and Mangalbai came at around 08.25 a.m. and

questioned them and also allegedly beat them, of which report was

lodged at Shillegaon Police Station, who had referred them with

medical memo and when they were at the hospital, again it is alleged CriRevn-74-2023 -10-

that, Mangalbai and Krushna Pole came there also and there,

according to informant, Krushna had threatened to see his son. He

further reported that, thereafter they took the medical papers to the

police station.

He further reported that, friends of his son Sagar, namely

Krushna Khatal and Shubham Mogal came to their village on

motorcycle to take Sagar and while they were taking him towards

Aurangabad, it is alleged that, again on their way, Krushna

intercepted and issued threats to Sagar to commit his murder, as a

result of which, he claims that his son was frightened and terrified

and he duly told about it to his mother on phone. Again, as accused

Krushna, Prabhakar and Mangalbai visited their house at 3.30 p.m.

and issued life threats, both, informant and his wife approached

police with an application and gave complaint against accused

persons. He further claims that on 21.01.2021, information was

received at 9.30 a.m. about Sagar to be admitted in the hospital and

so, when they went to GHATI hospital, they learnt that Sagar had

hanged himself at 8.40 a.m. According to him, only because of the

beating and threats to kill, his son Sagar was mentally harassed due

to which he committed suicide and as such, accused persons were

responsible for the same.

CriRevn-74-2023 -11-

14. In the light of above contents of the report by father, apart from

his own statement, statement of his wife, the two friends who

allegedly came to take deceased Sagar to Aurangabad and the persons

who allegedly intervened in the afternoon on the road, gains

significance and is accordingly visited.

15. Chargesheet contains statement of wife of informant, namely,

Sangita, but surprisingly her statement is not recorded immediately

on the date of FIR dated 22.01.2021, but it is apparently recorded

after almost two weeks i.e. on 04.02.2021. Be it so. She too in her

statement has informed police about alleged defecation by accused in

the morning of 20.01.2021 on their way, accused being questioned,

indulgence of villagers being sought and she also stated that at

around 8.25 a.m. accused came to their house and initially after

questioning them for defaming them in the village, she, her husband

and son allegedly being abused as well as slapped and they

approaching police station. She too stated about visiting hospital and

that time accused Mangalbai as well as accused Krushna also came

there, however, according to her, in front of the hospital, accused

Krushna merely said to Sagar that he would see him and thereafter

they again carried the medical papers to the police station. She also

claims that friends of her son had come on motorcycle at Shankarpur CriRevn-74-2023 -12-

and there she prepared meals for them and her son and his friends

left for Aurangabad. She claims that, after 15 minutes she received

phone call from her son informing that Krushna had intercepted her

son's way at Agathana and issued threats to kill by means of koyta.

16. Apart from above statements of parents of deceased, equally

crucial is the evidence of the friends of deceased, namely Krushna

Khatal and Shubham Mogal, who were party to the alleged incident

which took place at around 3.30 p.m. while on the way to

Aurangabad and they were also in the company of deceased in the

evening as well as the intervening night. Resultantly, their evidence is

also visited.

17. In his statement dated 25.01.2021, Shubham seems to have

informed police about he being telephoned and called by deceased to

come to take him at Shillegaon and accordingly, after seeking

permission from police, they proceeded to the house of Sagar, had

meals and left for Aurangabad. According to him, around 3.00 to 3.30

p.m., a man a lady came on a motorcycle from opposite side and

Sagar was signaled to stop and accordingly, while Sagar was

proceeding towards him, the motorcyclist himself came towards Sagar

and questioned him for beating his mother. That time, while they

both were talking, another two motorcyclists came, intervened and CriRevn-74-2023 -13-

asked Sagar to go away and accordingly they came towards Lasur

Station, where friend of Krushna, namely, Sandip Chavan met them

and there, Sagar operated ATM, handed the cash to a shopkeeper and

they all again proceeded towards Aurangabad to their room. He

stated about, he making inquiry with Sagar about the events that took

place at police station and during police inquiry. After reaching room,

Sagar developed fever and therefore this witness gave him company

for some time. On 21.01.2021, Sagar went to use the washroom on

the upper floor but as he did not come for long time and as it was

getting late for breakfast, they all went and knocked the door but

there was no response and when the door was forced open, they

noticed that Sagar had committed suicide.

18. Similar sort is the statement of Krushna Khatal. There are also

statements of other witnesses namely, Jivan Kahate, Satish Choutmal

etc. Copies of NC are also placed on record suggesting police being

approached after the incidence of 08.25 a.m.

19. Here, on carefully considering the above material, it is clearly

emerging that accused and complainant are kinsmen but are on cross

terms with each other. Defecation on the road on the morning of

20.01.2021 seems to be the trigger point for quarrel which escalated

into episode of abuses and slapping to deceased Sager as well as his CriRevn-74-2023 -14-

parents by the accused persons.

20. Now, the moot question is whether, in view of the chargesheet,

there is prima facie material to frame charge for offence under

Section 306 r/w 34 of IPC. It is pertinent to note that, there is

material showing two episodes taking place at Shankarpur where

deceased, who was preparing for police recruitment and put up in

Aurangabad for studies, had temporarily gone. Regarding the

incidence of 08.25 a.m., police was indisputably duly approached. At

hospital premises, allegations are that accused Krushna merely said to

Sagar that he would see him. According to informant father, at

around 3.30 p.m., when deceased was proceeding towards

Aurangabad with his friends, that time also accused issued threats

and on intervention of others, deceased and his friends proceeded

ahead, took a brief halt at Lasur Station, there, deceased withdrew

amount and paid it to a shopkeeper and thereafter they reach

Aurangabad. Suicide by hanging came to light at around 8.00 a.m. of

21.01.2021.

21. Therefore, last meeting between deceased and accused Krushna

is of 3.30 p.m. on 20.01.2021, during which there was said to be

threat. Suicide is thus apparently committed 16 hours after alleged

threat, that too, at Aurangabad. There is nothing to indicate that CriRevn-74-2023 -15-

anything further happened even by way of threat on the intervening

night of 20.01.2021 and 21.01.2021. In fact statement of his friends

show that deceased woke up in the morning and went to washroom

on the upper floor for daily chores. During said time at Aurangabad,

there is no material about any threat, abetment, inducement or

enticement. There is nothing to show that there was any participation

by accused in any manner in making deceased take extreme decision

of ending up his life. Though there are threats to kill, said threats

were issued at Shankarpur, taluka Gangapur, that too in the

afternoon and occurrence was said to be duly reported to police.

Admittedly, alleged threats were during a quarrel and in the heat of

rage and anger. It was open for parents to again approach police for

receiving life threats, i.e. threat to kill by means of koyta. Further, as

pointed out, friend of deceased with whom informant/father had

telephonic conversation, has given statement about informant being

questioned whether there was any problem, and informant himself

conveying that there was no problem and that everything was settled

and case was taken back. Therefore, with such material, even the

element of fear of life ought to have come to an end. Accused and

deceased are shown to be miles apart. As stated above, there is no

material suggesting any inducement, abetment in any form to commit

suicide.

CriRevn-74-2023 -16-

22. Law is loud and clear that for attracting culpability under

Section 306 of IPC, it has to be demonstrated that accused had

specific intention to bring out suicide. There has to be material

suggesting abetment in that direction. Further, there has to be proof

of direct or indirect enticement for commission of suicide. Unless

there is positive action attributable to accused which too has to be in

proximity to the time of suicide, criminality for abetment to commit

suicide cannot be attracted. There has to be active participation by

accused or further, there has to be material suggesting creation of

such circumstances at the instance of accused that deceased is

harassed to such an extent that he or she is left with no other

alternative but to end up his/her life.

23. Some relevant citations on above aspects are referred as under :

In the case of Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P. and Another [1995 Supp (3) SCC 438] the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under :

"3. ..Those words are casual nature which are often employed in the heat of the moment between quarrelling people. Nothing serious is expected to follow thereafter. The said act does not reflect the requisite 'mens rea' on the assumption that these words would be carried out in all events ..."

In Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal, (2010)

1 SCC 707, this Court held as under:-

CriRevn-74-2023 -17-

"12. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC, the court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide.

Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable." [Emphasis supplied]

In M. Mohan v. State, (2011) 3 SCC 626, followed Ramesh

Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618, it was held as

under:-

41. This Court in SCC para 20 of Ramesh Kumar has examined different shades of the meaning of "instigation".

Para 20 reads as under: (SCC p. 629)

"20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do 'an act'. To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and CriRevn-74-2023 -18-

specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."

In the said case this Court came to the conclusion that there is no evidence and material available on record wherefrom an inference of the appellant-accused having abetted commission of suicide by Seema (the appellant's wife therein) may necessarily be drawn."

In Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhatisgarh , (2001) 9 SCC 618,

the Hon'ble three Judges' Bench of Hon'ble Apex Court had occasion

to deal a case arising out of dispute between husband and wife. There

also husband had committed suicide and in para.20 the Hon'ble Apex

Court while examining different shades of the meaning of

"Instigation", ruled as under :-

"Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an "act". To satisfy requirement of instigation, though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation CriRevn-74-2023 -19-

must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequences. Yet, a reasonablecertainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. A word uttered in fit of anger or omission without intending the consequence to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.

In Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of M.P. , 2002 Cri.L.J.

2796, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the word "instigate" denotes

incitement or urging to do some drastic or unadvisable action or to

stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea, therefore, is the necessary

concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge that the words

uttered in a quarrel or in spur of moment cannot be taken to be

uttered.

In S. S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan , (2010) 12 SCC 190,

it is held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that, "the intention of legislature

is that, in order to convict a person u/s.306 of the I.P.C., there has to

be clear mens rea to commit an offence and that there ought to be an

active or direct act leading the deceased to commit suicide, being left

with no option."

In M. Mohan v. represented by State the Superintendent of

Police, AIR 2011 SC 1238, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that, CriRevn-74-2023 -20-

"Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained."

In Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab , AIR 2017 SC 74, the

Hon'ble Apex Court held that,

"21. Section 306 of the Code prescribes the punishment for abetment of suicide and is designed thus :

Abetment of suicide. If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

22. It is thus manifest that the offence punishable is one of abetment of the commission of suicide by any person, predicating existence of a live link or nexus between the two, abetment being the propelling causative factor. The basic ingredients of this provision are suicidal death and the abetment thereof. To constitute abetment, the intention and involvement of the accused to aid or instigate the commission of suicide is imperative. Any severance or absence of any of this constituents would militate against this indictment. Remoteness of the CriRevn-74-2023 -21-

culpable acts or omissions rooted in the intention of the accused to actualize the suicide would fall short as well of the offence of abetment essential to attract the punitive mandate of Section 306 1.P.C. Contiguity, continuity, culpability and complicity of the indictable acts or omission are the concomitant indices of abetment. Section 306 1.P.C., thus criminalises the sustained incitement for suicide."

24. Consequently, keeping in mind above judicial precedent and

the above discussed material which is emerging on sifting the

chargesheet to ascertain whether there is material to make accused

face trial, admittedly, alleged threats were during a quarrel and in the

heat of rage and anger. Last confrontation between deceased and only

accused Krushna is also of around 3.30 p.m. of 20.01.2021. Suicide is

committed after 16 hours or so, that too at Aurangabad. Thus, during

such time there are no allegations about involvement or indulgence of

revision petitioners in any manner, more particularly with deceased

Sager which led him to end up his life.

25. In the considered opinion of this Court, essential elements of

abetment, inducement, enticement coupled with mens rea being

missing in the charge sheet, revisionist succeed. Hence, the following

order :

CriRevn-74-2023 -22-

ORDER

I. The Criminal Revision Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses "C" and "D".

II. The Criminal Revision Application is accordingly disposed off.

[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]

vre