1 Criminal Application No.5063/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5063 OF 2010 Shankar Shridhar Bhalerao ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra . ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri S.K. Sadawarte, Advocate for applicant Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for respondents ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 13th January, 2011 PER COURT : 1. The accused/ applicant seeks discretion and extraordinary exercise of powers in terms of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code for an offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, arising out of Crime No.49/2010 of Faizpur Police Station, District Jalgaon. 2. The sorry state of affairs in the matter is, the accused/ applicant had love affairs with deceased Shamshad, aged 18 years. Her parents settled her marriage to the person in their community and the engagmenet was scheduled on 6.6.2010. The prosecution case illustrate, the accused/ applicant being enraged with the said settlement of marriage of his paramour, had mobile contacts with the 2 Criminal Application No.5063/2010 deceased Shamshad, her would be in-laws and conveyed them of his affairs with the deceased Shamshad. This has added fuel in the situation, resulting in severing the mariterial proposal of Shamshad with Layak Tadvi as was scheduled on 6.6.2010. The deceased Shamshad could not bear the brunt of situation, which was severly castigating to her and to the prestige of her family, she set herself ablaze. While she was taken in the hospital in a vehicle, on being specifically asked by her father, she disclosed that the accused/ applicant had approached would be in-laws and falsely conveyed of his love affairs and resulting in severing the marital tie, hence she has taken such an extreme and drastic step. The victim succumbed on 5.6.2010. 3. The counsel submits, though primarily there was mobile communication by the accused/ applicant either with Shamshad or with her would be in-laws, that by itself would not constitute an offence of abetment or giving rise to infraction of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The counsel blast the belated F.I.R. being lodged on 17.6.2010 for the event dated 5.6.2010. The learned counsel, in order to stress his point, placed reliance to the judgment in the matter of Satish Narayan Ate Vs. State of Maharashtra (1996- EQ(BOM)-0-103). The learned counsel extensively read paragraph No.13 of the judgment and submits that, taking the ground realities, as the accused/ applicant belongs to a different community than that 3 Criminal Application No.5063/2010 of the deceased, custodial interrogation is not desired. He has no occasion to cause institution in the abetment. 4. The contention of the learned counsel having placed reliance to the above referred judgment, would not be feasible to be accelerated in the light of the factual primary matrix of the present case as narrated hereinbefore. The accused/ applicant had no business and occasion and reason to make a phone call to the would be in-laws as has illustrated in their respective statement, to ensure that the marital knot is broken. This suicide could not be said to be honour-killing, but would be to save tarnished image of the family and to get rid of humiliation of the victim, who was under a threat of break of marriage, she committed suicide. 5. The Hon’ble Lordships of the Apex Court in the matter of Chitresh Kumar Chopra Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (2010 ALL MR (Cri.) 1331 SC) have indicated the facts of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code in the light of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein the Lordships have observed, direct involvement in the commission of offence is required. Here, it is explicitly narrated that there was a direct involvement of the accused/ applicant in the act of the deceased committing suicide. It is needless to indicate, everybody has his own mind set. There cannot be a fixed or strait- jacket formula to examine the situation. The mind set of the victim 4 Criminal Application No.5063/2010 being coming from a very poor family with her marriageable sisters has to be taken into consideration. The exploitation caused by the accused/ applicant left no alternative to the victim than of committing suicide to live an abandoned life with stigma. The act of accused certainly primarily illustrate his role, who in terms of the explanation provided under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code abeted the events. Hence, the exercise of powers under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code not warranted. Application rejected. 5. The observations are prima facie in nature. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/cri5063.10