[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVN.APPLN.NO.127 OF 2008 Yogesh Dilip Gelada ..Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Sanjay Bhagat Adv. with Mr.P.D.Purway advocate for applicant Ms.A.A.Mane A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-original accused and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is facing prosecution in Sessions Case No. 701 of 2007. The said case is pending before the Sessions Court at Pune. The said case is under Section 306 r.w. 34 of IPC. The applicant is seeking discharge in the said case. 3. The learned APP has pointed out that deceased Sachin committed suicide by hanging himself. A suicide note was found with Sachin. In the said note, deceased Sachin had clearly stated that the [-2-] present applicant along with some other persons have cheated him. The applicant had been named by Sachin in the suicide note. Sachin has stated that applicant had cheated him. Besides, the learned APP has also pointed out the statement of witness Vikram Thakur. Vikram Thakur has stated that the applicant and deceased Sachin was known to one another and there was some money transaction between them. Vikram Thakur has stated that in his presence, Sachin had given money to the applicant and some other persons. Vikram has further stated that on 21.1.2007 when he met Sachin, Sachin told him that he was under severe tension and that the present applicant and one other person had cheated him in the money dealings. Sachin had also told Vikram that the present applicant and other persons were torturing him and as they are big people, he cannot face up to them. On the very next day, Sachin had committed suicide. 4. The learned advocate for the applicant has placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Netaidutta Vs. State of West Netaidutta Vs. State of West Netaidutta Vs. State of West Bengal 2005 (1) B.Cr.C.(SC) 666. Bengal 2005 (1) B.Cr.C.(SC) 666. Bengal 2005 (1) B.Cr.C.(SC) 666. I have perused the said decision. In the said case in the suicide [-3-] note, except referring the name of the accused at two places there was no reference to any act on the part of the said accused persons and hence, proceedings came to be quashed. In the present case, suicide note and the statement of Vikram clearly implicate the applicant. 5. Thereafter reliance was placed on the decision in the case of Manish Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Manish Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Manish Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan, Rajasthan, Rajasthan, reported in 1995 Cri.L.J. 3066. 1995 Cri.L.J. 3066. 1995 Cri.L.J. 3066. I have perused the said decision. Facts therein and the facts in the present case are entirely different, hence, the said decision would not apply to the facts of the present case. 6. Looking to the facts of this case and in view of the suicide note and the statement of Vikram Thakur, I find that there is sufficient material to proceed against the applicant, hence, no case is made out for discharge. Application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]