SHIVAM DILIP CHAVANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                1                      948ba1474.26



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

               948 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1474 OF 2026

                        SHIVAM DILIP CHAVAN
                                VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                    ...
     Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Bhale Babasaheb S. and Mr. Wagh
                         Dnyaneshwar Manikrao
              APP for Respondent/State : Mr.S.D. Ghayal
                                    ...


                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                          DATE : 19.08.2026

PER COURT :


1.          Heard the learned Advocates for both the sides.


2.          The present application is filed under Section 483 of the BNS

by the applicant seeking regular bail in connection with the Crime No.

183 of 2026 registered with the Bidkin Police Station, District

Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for the offences punishable under Sections

108 351(2), and 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.



3.          The record indicates that the investigation is complete and

the charge-sheet is also filed. The present applicant is in custody since

09.06.2026.



4.          The prosecution story in brief is that the informant’s

daughter aged about 19 years was engaged with one Kailas and the

engagement ceremony was also held on 05.03.2026. On 09.03.2026, the
                                 2                      948ba1474.26



informant learnt from his cousin that the deceased had telephoned

Kailas and informed him that she was already in relationship with the

applicant and she did not wish to marry Kailas. According to the

informant, when the deceased was taken into confidence, she discloses

that the present applicant was troubling her since last 6 to 7 months.

She alleged to have stated that after learning about her engagement, the

applicant had compelled her to make telephonic call to Kailas and

threatened her that if she married the person with whom she was

engaged, then the applicant will defame her and kill her or would not

permit her to marry anyone other than himself.



5.          It is further alleged that on account of the said threats and

harassment the deceased was under considerable mental pressure. On

10.03.2026, at about 6.00 p.m. the deceased proceeded towards the

agricultural field on the pretext of bringing fodders for the cattle, when

she did not return, the mother of the deceased went in her search and

found her in well floating on water. The deceased was removed from the

well and taken to the Government Hospital at Beedkin, where she was

declared as dead. The Postmortem examination attributes the death due

to ‘asphyxia due to drowning’. Thus, the FIR came to be lodged by the

father of the deceased on 17.03.2026 in pursuance of the lodging of the

FIR the present applicant came to be arrested.



6.          The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits
                                 3                      948ba1474.26



that the allegations of coercion or instigation raised only upon the

statements of the parents as the deceased had allegedly disclosed to

them.   He placed reliance on the conversations between the deceased

and Kailas. It was submitted that during the conversation the deceased

had stated that she had been in relationship for more then two years and

did not wish to marry him. But she also stated that she had an affair,

disclosing the fact of relationship with other person to her family. She

did not stated during that conversation that the applicant had compelled

her to make call or threatened her to commit suicide. On the contrary,

when the deceased spoke of suicide, the statement of       Kailas suggest

that he advised her not take any such step and suggested she should

marry with the person to whom she is in relationship.



7.          The learned Advocate for the applicant further argued that

there are no independent witnesses available for the prosecution to show

that the applicant had instigated the deceased to commit suicide.      He

thus, submitted that presently the investigation is complete and the

charge-sheet has been filed, and therefore, further custody of the present

applicant is unwarranted.



8.          The learned APP opposed the present application by placing

the reliance mostly on the statements of the parent of the deceased. He

argues that the statement specifically discloses about the information

provided by the deceased herself pertaining to the threats and
                                    4                    948ba1474.26



harassment caused by the present applicant. It is submitted that the

call details between the deceased and the applicant are attributed during

the period immediate preceding to the incident.



9.          Considering the nature of the allegations and the proximity

of threats to the deceased and the applicant’s acquaints with the family

of the deceased, the learned APP raises apprehension that if the

applicant is released on bail then there is every likelihood that he may

influence the material witnesses.



10.         I have considered the rival submissions and has perused the

entire charge-sheet with the assistance of the learned Advocates.



11.         The section 108 of the BNS provides punishment for

abatement to suicide. Apart from the factum of suicide the material must

prima-facie indicate the act falling within the legal concept of abatement.

Intentional instigation, incitement or aid accompanied by the requisite

material elements and the proximity of connection with suicide.         The

above ingredients are important for constituting offence under Section

108 of the BNS. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Balaji Jaiswal

Vs. State of Chhattisgarh -2025 : CGHC : 16606 has also reiterated that

mere harassment or adverse circumstance is not by itself sufficient but

there must be discernible material indicating intention of instigation or

aid having proximity with suicide.
                                  5                      948ba1474.26



12.         In the present case the parents have stated that the

deceased had disclosed them that the applicant was harassing and

threatening her and compelled her to communicate with Kailas.



13.         The truthfulness of evidentiary value of the said disclosure to

the parents will necessarily have to be tested at the time of trial. At the

same time the prosecution itself relies upon the statement of Kailas,

prima-facie reading of the transcripts shows that the deceased spoke

about her existing relationship, her unwillingness to marry Kailas and

her affair by disclosing it to her mother and to her family members.

About her relationship, she did not named the applicant in the said

conversation or anything said that the calls were being made under

pressure or coercion. When she spoke about taking extreme step, the

transcript itself discloses that Kailas spoke to her and advised her to

marry the person of her choice.



14.         The call detail record prima-facie establishes that mere

frequent communications between the concerned numbers they may

support existence of contact or relationship. The record itself do not

contain that those conversations established intentional instigation to

commit suicide. Apart from the parents account are the oral disclosure

and no any independent statement has been pointed by the prosecution

which directly attributes the incitements to commit suicide by the

deceased to the present applicant.
                                   6                     948ba1474.26



15.            The applicant has been in custody since 09.06.2026.      The

investigation has been complete and the charge-sheet is already filed.

The relevant material in the nature of the statements of witnesses, the

call records, the transcript of the communication made by the deceased

with the prosecution witness Kailas and other documentary evidence in

the nature of electronic material has already been collected by the

investigating agency.     Consequently, further custodial interrogation or

custody of the applicant is not shown to be necessary.



16.            The applicant is not reported with any criminal antecedents

and therefore, the I am inclined to allow the present Bail Application.

Hence the following order :

                                   ORDER

         (i)      The Bail Application is allowed.

         (ii)  The applicants shall be released on bail in Crime No.
         183 of 2026 registered with the Bidkin Police Station,
         District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for the offences
         punishable under Sections 108 351(2), and 351(3) and 3(5)
         of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing a
         personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
         Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount,
         subject to the following conditions :

         a)    The    applicants     shall  attend the concerned
         Investigating Officer as and when called unless his
         attendance is specifically exempted.

         b)    The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, contact,
         threaten, induce or influence the informant or any
         prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the
         prosecution evidence.
                                     7                      948ba1474.26




             c)   The applicant shall furnish his current residential
             addresses and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer
             and the trial Court within seven days of release, intimate
             any change forthwith, and attend the Investigating Officer
             upon prior written notice if further investigation is required.

             d)     The applicant shall not leave India without prior
             permission of the trial Court and, if he possess passports,
             shall deposit the same with the trial Court within seven days
             of his release.

             e)     The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence
             of a similar nature while on bail.

             f)    Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the
             prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail.

             g)    All observations in this order are prima facie and
             confined to the decision of this bail application. The trial
             Court shall decide the case independently on the evidence
             led before it. The Bail Application is disposed of in the above
             terms.




                                         (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)




mahajansb/