1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.129/2008. Baburao s/o Gunderao Chame - APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Mah. and Ors. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.SS Panale, Advocate for Applicant; Mr.SG Nandedkar,APP for State Mr.VD Gunale, Advocate for Resp.Nos. 2 to 6. ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 8TH October,2009. PER COURT : 1) Rule, Rule made returnable forthwith Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2) The acquittal recorded for the offence under Section 306 r/w 34, 506 of IPC by order dated 5th March, 2008 by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-4th, Latur, is subject of criticism by the aggrieved complainant – Baburao. 3) The Counsel submits, the learned Additional Sessions Judge did not discuss the evidence and simply covered the judgment by 2 respective submissions and concluded in acquittal. The Counsel further submits the role of the Investigator in the matter is confused though he was equipped with a report from Baburao dated 9.11.2006, he did not bother to prosecute the matter as was his bounden duty. The Counsel submits the dead body was found injured by accused no.2. 4) The acrimony between marital status of Shrinivas and his wife, the accused no.4 – Aruna had itself different shades and colour. The deceased Shrinivas could not bear the situation and out of frustration, it is apparent he has committed suicide by taking recourse of consuming poisonous substance Endosulfan. There is no evidence, suggesting abetment from any of the accused persons to make the life of said Shrinivas miserable. It was his own negligence and his mental temperament that has constrained him to commit suicide by opting such extreme step. Every person has his own way of life. Shrinivas was a person, probably who could not bear the brunt for a long duration and out of such frustration, he had culminated his life keeping others in lurch. Loss of life is apparent. There was no nagging to him at any time that he should commit suicide or he should end his life. The sad demise of Shrinivas though is 3 a matter of record, but the accused, his relations, cannot be said to be author thereof. In any sense, there is no abetment to commit suicide. There was no such eventuality. The view taken by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge was a possible view in the facts of the available evidence. No interference. Criminal Revision Application dismissed. Rule discharged. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/crrv129.08