( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4437 OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus 1. Meenakshi Bhagwat Tayade .. Respondents Age. 23 years, 2. Vedu Motiram Suryawanshi, Age. 55 years, 3. Pankaj Vedu Suryawanshi, Age. 21 years, 4. Madhukar Mango Kakade, Age. 52 years, All are resident of Nashirabad, Tal. & Dist. Jalgaon. Shri B.V. Wagh, A.P.P. for the applicant/State. Shri Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM : P.R. BORKAR,J. DATED : 03.12.2009 P.C. :- 1. This is an application for leave to file appeal ( 2 ) against order of acquittal recorded by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, while deciding Sessions Case No. 96 of 2005 on 16.08.2007, whereby respondent Nos. 1 to 4 were acquitted of offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard A.P.P. Shri B.V. Wagh for the applicant/State and Adv. Shri Joydeep Chatterji for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 3. Briefly stated it is case of the prosecution that deceased Bhagwat was husband of accused No.1 - Meenakshi. Accused No.2 is father, accused No. 3 is brother and accused No.4 is maternal uncle of accused No.1. Bhagwat committed suicide 17.02.2005 at about 10.00 p.m. at village Fekari, Tal. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon. At that time a suicide note was found on the person of deceased in which he had blamed accused Nos. 1 to 4 for his decision to commit suicide. Brother of deceased Bhagwat lodged complaint stating that respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have abetted commission of suicide by Bhagwat and therefore crime was registered. The investigation was carried out and finally charge-sheet was sent. ( 3 ) 4. The reason for committing suicide according to prosecution is that accused No.1 Meenakshi used to quarrel with deceased Bhagwat and she was suspecting his character. The suicide note found on the person of deceased states that it was prepared on 16.02.2005 at about 7.00 a.m. Therein it is sated that “I, Bhagwat Budho Tayde, today on 16.02.2005 at 7.00 a.m. committing suicide due to Minakshi (wife), Madhukar Kakade (respondent No.4), Pankaj Vedu Suryawanshi (respondent No.3) and Vedu Suryawanshi (respondent No.2)”. It is further stated that today in the afternoon he has received notice through Taluka Police Station to appear before Mahila Dakshata Vibhag, Jalgaon, on 18.02.2005 at about 10.00 a.m. Third para is to the effect that because of respondent Nos. 1 and 4, the decision was taken by Bhagwat to commit suicide and the last para is to the effect that he was committing suicide due to his wife. So, there are four paragraphs. It appears that para 1 was written on 16.02.2005; whereas next three paragraphs were written on 17.02.2005. That is clear from the wording of paragraph 2 wherein it is mentioned that on that day he received notice for attending before Mahila Dakshta Vibhag. Admittedly, said notice was served him on ( 4 ) 17.02.2005. So, it does not appear that the Chit was written at one time although it is a small chit. It is also clear that in first paragraphs four persons were held responsible. In third para two persons were held responsible and in last para only wife was blamed. 5. The learned Sessions Judge while discussing evidence regarding this suicide note in para 26 & 27 observed that though the seizure of chit from the dead body is proved, authorship of chit has not been proved. Admitted hand writings of the deceased have not been taken from the proper custody. So, it was doubtful whether really the chit was in the handwriting of the deceased. Moreover, after discussing the contents of the chit, it is observed that the chit itself is suspicious. The chit appears to have been written both on 16.02.2005 and 17.02.2005. Perusal of chit Exh.65 itself raises doubt about genuineness and motive. It is not that due to immoral character of of wife, the husband was committing suicide. In this case, it was complaint of the wife that the husband’s character was suspicious and it is also prosecution case that because of that both husband and wife had gone to reside at village Fekari. It is also stated ( 5 ) that deceased had resigned from service because of allegations of wife. In sessions case, residence of all respondents was shown to be Nasirabad, Tal. & Dist. Jalgaon. It is mentioned in para 5 of the judgment that on 27.01.2005 it was informed to the complainant and deceased Bhagwat at Kalyan on telephone that Meenakshi had left her matriminal home at Fekari without informing any person from her in-laws. Subsequently they came to know that she went to her parents house. When complainant asked about the whereabouts of Meenakshi, the accused person again threatened him to involve him in criminal case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. In other words, accused No. 1 was not residing with in-laws for at-least 2-3 weeks prior to his death. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Additional Sessions Judge has rightly come to a conclusion that this is not case wherein it can be said that the accused have abetted commission of suicide by deceased Bhagwat. The Additional Sessions Judge has discussed evidence of P.W.3- Kishor, P.W.6-Sitaram Ingale and P.W.7-Rajendra Surwade in paras 30,31 and 32 and has given adequate reasons. In this case, there is nothing to show that the accused ever intended ( 6 ) that deceased Bhagwat should commit suicide. The judgment is well reasoned. 7. In my opinion, this is not a case where leave to appeal can be granted. Hence, the Criminal Application is dismissed. [P.R. BORKAR,J.] snk/2009/DEC09/cra4437.07