1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1877 OF 2008 Naresh Kevalchand Shanklesha & ors.......Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra ....... Respondant. Mr. Abhaykumar Apte for the Petitioners Mrs. A.S. Pai APP for State. CORAM: S. B. MHASE & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED: 11th NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C.: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties taken up for final hearing. 2. Heard Mr. Apte learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Pai APP for the State. The above writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with provisions of section 482 of Cr.P.C. 1973 for quashing the FIR No.1/2008 registered at Matheran Police Station, District Raigad on 2-3- 2008 at the instance of Somubai Mangilal Jain. 3. The fact giving rise to the present petiition in short are 2 as follows: In the year 2004 Kishore son of petitioner no.5 got married with Nitu daughter of informant Somubai Mangilal Jain at Ambernath and out of the said wedlock Nitu delivered a male child by name Harshad. In the month of July 2007, Kishore and Nitu along with their son Harshad had been to Matheran. They stayed in the hotel and on 6th July 2007 all three of them had been to luiza point at Matheran by hiring two hourses and after reaching there Kishore asked the horseman to wait as they were to return back within half an hour. Within 15/20 minutes thereafter the hoursemen heard shouts of lady and therefore they rushed towards Luiza point but could not find the three persons. However, an umbrella and ladies chappal were seen there by them. Therefore the horsemen went to Matheran police station and informed about it. At the instance of police, Thakar community adivasis stepped down the valley from Luiza point and after search they found the dead bodies of Kishore, Nitu and Harshad. Police recorded statements of one Paresh Raghunath Sakpal, a hourseman as well as Somubai. Considering the entire story, police recorded crime as accidental death vide A.D. No.2/2007. 4. After lapse of eight months period i.e. On 2-3-2008 said Somubai filed FIR with Matheran police station vide C.R. No. 1/2008 against the petitioner for offences punishable under 3 sections 306, 498-A read with section 34 or IPC, alleging that due to illegal demand and harassment by the petitioners, Kishore and Nitu committed suicide and their death cannot be said to be an accidental death. The petitioners thereafter apprehending arrest, approached Sessions court at Raigad for anticipatory bail and the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. As stated above, the present writ petition is filed for quashing the FIR. 5. Mr. Apte learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the FIR is after though and has filed with malafide intention to malign the status of the petitioners. He further submitted that the earlier statement of informant Somubai which was recorded on 6-7-2007 disclosses about accidental death of deceased Kishore, Nitu and Harshad. However contraditory allegations are made in the FIR. He also submitted that the FIR is filed after the lapse of eight months period from the date of incident and therefore deserves to be quashed. Mrs. Pai learned APP per contra opposed the petition by filing affidavit of Balkrishna Sakharam More, Asstt. Police Inspector, Matheran police station, District Raigad. She submitted that the FIR prima facie discloses the commission of offence and therefore there is no need to quash the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, and having gone through the petition along 4 with the annexures thereto and reply affidavit, we are of the considered opinion that there is merit in the petition and the FIR in question deserves to be quashed. 7. Deceased Kishore, Nitu and Harshad died at Luiza point and their bodies were recovered from the valley of Luiza point with the help of people from, Thakar community. On 6-7-2007 police have recorded statement of Paresh, the horseman and the informant Somubai. The statement of horseman discloses that deceased Kishore, Nitu and Harshad suffered accidental death. Even the informant Somubai in above statement has accepted that these persons were died accidental death and she has no complaint against anybody. Police thereafter recorded report of accidental death vide A.D. No.2/07. Inspite of this position, after the period of eight months, the present FIR is filed by Somubai against the present petitioner under section 306, 498-A read with 34 of IPC. Only explanation given in the FIR for delay is that she did not tell the real story to the police due to shock and now she feels that the petitioner being responsible for death, should be punished. In our opinion, this explanation can hardly be said to be satisfactory. Sumbai had made contradictory statement in earlier statement dated 6-7-2007 and present FIR dated 2-3-2008. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances in our opinion, the allegations made in the FIR are malafide with ulterior motive. 5 8. The petitioner no.5 is mother in law of deceased Nitu and petitioner no.2 is daughter of Petitioner no.5. Petitioner no.1 is husband of petitioner no.2 and petitioner nos.3 and 4 respectively are father and mother of petitioner no.1. The allegations in the FIR itself shows that the deceased Kishore and his wife deceased Nitu were staying separately from their parents since their marriage. Though it is alleged in the FIR that petitioner started illtreating and harassing deceased Nitu for meeting their illegal demands, however, till the date of filing of FIR, neither complaint is filed by the informant to the police nor said fact was disclosed to anybody. There was no question of causing harassment by the petitioner, as they were not staying with Kishore and Nitu. Deceased Kishore was also doing separate business, his financial condition was good and therefore also there is no reason for the petitioner to make illegal demands from Somubai. Considering the material on record, we are of the opinion that the FIR is filed with malafide intention and with ulterior motive. 9. The informant Somubai has made allegation that the petitioner used to harass deceased Nitu as their demands of dowry were not met. If that be so there is no reason for deceased Kishore and his minor son Harshad to commit suicide. If the statement of Paresh, the horseman recorded on 6-7-2007 is taken into consideration along with the above facts, then there is no 6 doubt in our mind, that the deceased Kishore, Nitu and Harshad suffered accidental death. 10. Taking over all circumstances mentioned above into consideration, we are of the opinion that the allegations in the complaint are absurd and inherently improbable. Allegations are made after thought with ulterior motive. The FIR is therefore deserves to be quashed and we accordingly quash the same. The writ petition is therefore made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). (R.V. MORE, J.) (S. B. MHASE, J.)