::1::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
CNR NO. MHCC02-000917-2022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.181 OF 2022
IN
C.R. NO.14 OF 2022
1. Sachin Kishor Mahadik
Age 31 years, Occ: Service
2. Kishor Kamlakar Mahadik
Age 64 years, Occ: Nil,
Both Residing at Matrusmruti, D/1, S.G.
Barve Marg, Kurla – East, Mumbai.

…Applicants/Accused
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Chunabhatti Police
Station in C.R. No.14 of 2022)
…Respondent/
Complainant
Appearances:
Advocate Mr. Kakade for the applicants/Accused.
Advocate Mr. Tejas Bhatacharya h/f Advocate Pooja Yadav for
intervener.
APP Mrs. Meera Choudhary – Bhosale for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : H.H.THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
SONALI P. AGARWAL (C.R. NO. 41)
DATED : 31st JANUARY, 2022.

::2::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
:ORDER:
This is an bail application filed by accused under section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as
“Cr.P.C.”) for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.14/2022
for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) registered with
Chunabhatti Police Station.
2.

Heard argument of learned counsel for accused, learned counsel
for intervener and learned APP for the State.
3.

Prosecution has alleged that deceased Shruti was staying with her
husband Yashraj Mahadik and her parents and grand mother on the
ground floor of Matrusmruti building. It is further alleged that
applicant-accused Kishor Mahadik, his son applicant-accused Sachin
Mahadik and his wife are staying on the first floor of such building. It is
further alleged that there is separate staircase to go on the first floor of
the building. It is further alleged that applicant-accused Kishor Mahadik
is uncle of Yashraj Mahadik. It is further alleged that it is ancestral
property of people staying on the ground floor and first floor. It is
further alleged that in July 2016, mother of Yashraj Mahadik and in
August 2018, his grand mother died. It is further alleged that in July
2020, husband of deceased Yashraj Mahadik and Nandadeep Mahadik
were suffering from Corona and therefore, Kishor Mahadik and his
family closed the door in the corridor and therefore, there was hot
exchange of words between both family. It is further alleged that Kishor
Mahadik again closed that door and family of Yashraj Mahadik
requested to keep the door open but Kishor Mahadik’s family did not
listen and closed the door and that time there was quarrel between the
::3::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
parties and applicant-accused Kishor Mahadik abused and beat
deceased with and applicant-accused Sachin Mahadik bite hand of
deceased and therefore, complaint was given to Nehrunagar Police
Station. It is further alleged that on 12.01.2022, when informant made
phone call on father-in-law of deceased, he told her that deceased and
her son are not at home. When informant’s husband went to house of
deceased that time her husband also came home. They found one chit
written by deceased. That time they saw CCTV footage and they found
deceased and their son left home at 2.08 p.m. They searched her and
gave missing complaint to Nehrunagar police station. It is alleged that
on the same day at 2.08 p.m. deceased along with her son Rajveer
committed suicide by jumping from the building Alta Vista Society,
Chembur, Mumbai. It is alleged that as applicant-accused Kishor
Mahadik and her cousin mother-in-law Vidya Mahadik subjected her
mental and physical cruelty and she is committed suicide and therefore,
FIR came to be lodged.
4.

Applicants-accused have contended that there is family disputes
between both the families due to family property i.e. the house in which
they are residing separately since long and to that effect N.C. is filed by
wife of applicant-accused No.2
Smt. Vidya Kishor Mahadik against
Nandadeep Mahadik and Yashraj Mahadik. They have further
contended that wife of applicant No.2 Vidya Kishor Mahadik gave letter
to B.M.C. for the repair work of the house and due to that dispute arose
between both the families. They have further contended that applicants
are made victim by taking advantage of the alleged incident of July
2020 and except said alleged incident of July 2020, there is no evidence
to connect them remotely also with the suicide committed by deceased.
They have further contended that it is not digestible to the mind of
::4::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
prudent man that due to harassment by applicants deceased will take
such drastic step to end her life along with her 3 years old son. They
have further contended that the alleged incident of quarrel took place in
July 2020 and deceased committed suicide in January 2022. Therefore,
there is no proximity between the said two alleged incidents as there is
a long period gap of more than one and half year and prayed to be
released on bail.
5.

Heard arguments of learned counsels for both parties and
perused Written Submissions.
6.

It appears, as per the contentions of prosecution deceased was
stayed with her husband on the ground floor and applicants were
staying on the first floor of the same building. Applicant is cousin
father-in-law and another applicant is his son. It is alleged that in July
2020 when there was dispute between the parties applicant-cousin
father-in-law abused and beat deceased and his son bite her. Intervener
has submitted that Nehru Nagar Police Station has merely registered
N.C. and they should have registered offence under Section 354 of IPC
then further incident would not have caused. They have produced copy
of such N.C. alongwith xerox copy of medical examination of deceased
Shruti. Learned counsel for intervener has cited such medical certificate
supporting contention that bite was taken of the body of deceased in
that incident. Intervener has submitted that husband of deceased and
her father-in-law used to be out of the house for work and therefore,
only deceased and her son used to be at home and mother-in-law of
deceased and grand-mother-in-law of the deceased died in July 2016
and August 2018. In such circumstances applicants were staying on the
first floor and they were constantly mentally torturing deceased in the
::5::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
absence of husband and father-in-law of deceased. Intervener has
contended that they used to abuse her in filthy language and outrage
her modesty in front of her family and therefore, she had to approach
Nehru Nagar Police Station but only N.C. was filed. Intervener has
further contended that in July 2020, husband and father-in-law of
deceased Shruti tested positive for Covid-19 and then applicants
purposefully closed the kitchen door which led to the common backyard
and after construction work the door was also again closed by them.
Intervener has further stated that N.C. is given to Nehru Nagar Police
Station on 27.06.2021. Intervener has further contended that deceased
was under constant fear to her life and her child. Intervener has further
stated that she would, at such times, assuage her fears and ask her to
remain calm and deceased informed that her husband was in the
process of looking for different accommodation.
7.

During course of argument learned APP has referred to xerox
copy of the suicide note written by deceased Shruti. In the suicide it is
mentioned that, “My in-laws has made with me domestic violence. Mr.
Sachin Mahadik & his family members has done this and we have made
NOC against the same. Please don’t blame my husband and father-inlaw, my mother & dad also knows everything.” Learned APP has argued
that in suicide note it is specifically stated that applicants are
responsible and therefore, deceased committed suicide.
8.

Learned counsel for applicants has cited judgment of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in case of Gangula Mohan Reddy Vs. State of Andhra
Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1301 of 2002 decided on 05.01.2020, in
which it is held that, “Abetment involves a mental process of instigating
a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a
::6::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing
suicide, conviction cannot be sustained.” In the case in hand yet
investigation is not complete. In the case in hand it is alleged by
intervener and prosecution that deceased was subjected to constant
mental and physical torture by applicants when she used to be alone at
home and therefore, she wrote a suicide note specifically referring to
applicants and then committed suicide. It is alleged that applicants beat
her and bite also. Therefore, prima faciely, it appears, there is positive
act on the part of the accused which instigated deceased to commit
suicide. Therefore, facts of the case cited and in hand are different.
Hence, this case law is not applicable to the case in hand.
9.

Learned counsel for the applicants has cited order of the Hon’ble
Bombay High Court in case of Rahul Raj Singh Vs. The State of
Maharashtra in Anticipatory Bail Application No.661 of 2016 decided
on 25.04.2016, in which it is held that, “To constitute the offence under
section 306, it is necessary for the Court even at the stage of
anticipatory bail to find out whether prima facie case of abetment as
per the ingredients of section 107 of Indian Penal Code is made out or
not. There should be instigation or conspiracy or a person should
intentionally aid that the deceased should commit suicide. It is
necessary to show whether the accused was having mens rea that he
wanted deceased to commit suicide.” In the case in hand deceased
along with her three years old child has jumped from the building and
committed suicide. It is submitted by intervener and learned APP
argued that in the suicide note there is specific reference of applicants.
It is alleged that deceased used to be alone at home with her child and
applicants were constantly subjecting her to cruelty and on one occasion
they beat her, abused her and bite her. Therefore, prima faciely it
::7::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
appears, there are positive act on the part of the accused instigating her
to commit suicide.
10.

Learned counsel for applicants cited judgment of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in case of M. Arjunan Vs. The State Rep. By its Inspector of
Police in Criminal Appeal No.(s). 1550 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP
(Crl.) No.382 of 2016) (From Madras High Court) decided on
04.12.2018, reported in ABC 2019 (I) 152 SC, in which it is held that,
“The essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. are:
(i) the abetment; (ii) the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or
abet the deceased to commit suicide. The act of the accused, however,
insulting the deceased by using abusive language will not, by itself,
constitute the abetment of suicide. There should be evidence capable of
suggesting that the accused intended by such act to instigate the
deceased
to
commit
suicide.

Unless
the
ingredients
of
instigation/abetment to commit suicide are satisfied, accused cannot be
convicted under Section 306 I.P.C.”
In the case in hand applicants
subjected deceased to constant mental and physical harassment and
cruelty and abused, beat and bite her. It is not alleged that she is merely
abused. Therefore, facts of the case cited and in hand are different.
Hence, this case law is not applicable to the case in hand.
11.

As discussed above, the lady deceased has committed suicide
along with her three years child by jumping on the building.

It is
alleged that both applicants constantly subjected her physical and
mental cruelty and on one occasion she is beaten, abused and bite by
them. It is submitted that in the suicide not written by her before
leaving the house to commit suicide there is reference of names of
applicants. Intervener has submitted that now the intervener are also
::8::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
staying with the husband and father-in-law of deceased in the same
house. Applicants are staying on the first floor of the same house. Yet
investigation is not complete. It appears, in such circumstances, if
accused are released on bail, then there is every possibility that they will
threaten
witnesses,
tamper
with
evidence
and
may
abscond.

Considering such circumstances, it appears, applicants are not entitled
to get bail. Hence, pass following order:
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.181 of 2022 is rejected.

2.

Criminal Bail Application No.181 of 2022 stands disposed of
accordingly.

Dt. 31.01.2022
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
(SONALI P. AGARWAL)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Bombay
: 31.01.2022
: 31.01.2022
: 31.01.2022
::9::
Criminal Bail Application No.181/2022
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
02/02/2022 at 12.57 p.m.
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME
Subhash Sukhdeo Poul
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H.H.J. Sonali P. Agarwal
Room No.
Room No.41)
Date
of
Pronouncement
Judgment/Order
of 31/01/2022
Judgment/Order signed by P.O.on
31/01/2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on
02/02/2022
(Court