Bombay High Court
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusRAMESH LAXMAN PAWAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The revision court held that a prima facie case of mental harassment and possible abetment exists and quashed the discharge order.
Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal revision challenging the Additional Sessions Judge’s order that discharged Ramesh Laxman Pawar, an Assistant Engineer accused of mentally harassing a junior technician who later committed suicide. The prosecution relied on the suicide note, which implicated the Respondent, and the testimony of a colleague supporting claims of continuous harassment, threats of suspension, and abuse. The Respondent argued there was no direct evidence of harassment, the suicide note was vague, and a 48‑day gap between a show‑cause notice and the death broke any causal link. The High Court held that the suicide note and witness statements, taken together, established a prima facie case of harassment and possible abetment, and that the lower court erred in dismissing the case without such consideration. Consequently, the revision was allowed, the discharge order was set aside, and all pending applications were disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the suicide note and accompanying witness statements establish a prima facie case of mental harassment sufficient to proceed against the Respondent.
- Whether the 48‑day interval between the show‑cause notice and the suicide negates the requisite proximity for liability.
- Whether the lower court erred in discharging the accused without evaluating the evidentiary value of the suicide note and related material.
Subjects
- mental harassment
- suicide
- abetment
- discharge of accused
- prima facie case
- criminal revision
- employer-employee relationship
- evidence
- suicide note
Judgment
1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 194 OF 2026
The State Of Maharashtra ...Applicant
VERSUS
Ramesh Laxman Pawar ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
Digitally signed
Mr.B.B. Kulkarni, AGP, for the Applicant-State.
NILAM by NILAM
SANTOSH Mr.Yogesh Patil, for the Respondent.
SANTOSH KAMBLE
KAMBLE Date: 2026.10.06 _________________________________________________________________
10:08:37 +0530
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C. :
. The challenge in this Application is to the impugned order
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, Pune, whereby
the learned Judge has allowed the Discharge Application of the
Respondent.
2. It is prosecution’s case that the Respondent was the Superior
officer of the deceased, who has committed suicide. The deceased left
behind suicide note stating that due to mental harassment allegedly caused
by the Respondent, he was compelled to take the extreme step of ending
life.
3. It is contention of the learned APP that the deceased was
serving as a Junior Technician at the Yavat Branch of Maharashtra State
Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. The Respondent was serving in the same
Page 1 of 6
1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
office as an Assistant Engineer and deceased was working under his
supervision. It is alleged that the deceased was subjected to continuous
mental harassment by the Respondent, which ultimately led him to commit
suicide. The suicide note specifically refers to the harassment by
Respondent and attributes responsibility for the suicide to him. The
statement of witness recorded during the investigation also supports the
allegations made by deceased. In particular, the statement of Mr.Pralhad
Ranpise, who was working with the deceased as his colleague, supports the
allegations regarding harassment and threat of suspension by the
Respondent. This witness has further stated that Respondent had prepared
a letter in the name of the deceased and was supposed to give the same to
him. The statement of the said witness is relevant as he was working with
the deceased and speaks about the conduct of the Respondent. It is
therefore, submitted that the material collected during the investigation
discloses acts of instigation and abetment on part of the Respondent.
However, this fact is not considered by the learned Judge and has passed
impugned order which is erroneous and and requested to allow the
Application.
4. It is contention of the learned for the Respondent that there is
no evidence produced on record to show that the Respondent had mentally
harassed the deceased with an intention to drive him to commit suicide.
Page 2 of 6
1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
The Respondent had reported the conduct of the deceased to the Executive
Engineer and thereafter Deputy Executive Engineer had issued a show-
cause notice to the deceased. The deceased had submitted his reply to the
said notice and suicide occurred approximately 48 days after the reply.
Therefore, there was no proximity between the alleged conduct of
Respondent and the commission of suicide. The learned counsel further
submitted that allegations contained in the suicide note are vague and no
specific allegations regarding harassment and abuse have been mentioned.
There was no instigation and abetement on part of the Respondent. The
learned counsel further submitted that the statement of witnesses do not
establish that Respondent had mentally harassed the deceased. He further
submitted that the Respondent was discharging his official duties and that
asking deceased, who was working as technician to perform electrical work
or to recover pending electricity bills could not amount to instigation to
commit suicide. The learned Sessions Judge has passed well reasoned
order, no interference is required in it and requested to reject the
Application.
5. The learned counsel for the Respondent relied on :-
(i) Vinod Shivkumar V/s. The State of Maharashtra1
(ii) Shri.Santosh Kisan Darekar & Anr V/s. The State of
Maharashtra & Anr.2
1 2026 INSC 867
2 2016 SCC Online Bom 12856
Page 3 of 6
1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
6. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned order
and documents produced on record.
7. Admittedly, the Respondent was superior officer of the
deceased. It is alleged that, in the suicide note, the deceased has
specifically stated that he was subjected to continuous mental harassment
by the Respondent and has attributed responsibility for his suicide to the
Respondent.
8. The learned Sessions Judge has relied upon the period of 48
days between the report submitted by the Respondent and the commission
of suicide. However, the prosecution case is of continuous harassment.
Therefore, merely because 48 days had elapsed between the report and the
suicide. At this stage, it cannot be said that, there was no proximity
between the alleged conduct of the Respondent and the suicide,
particularly when the deceased himself referred to the Respondent in the
suicide note.
9. The statement of Mr.Pralhad Ranpise, colleague of the deceased
supports the allegations made by the deceased in the suicide note. At the
stage of discharge, the suicide note cannot be overlooked. It has to be
considered along with the statement of the witnesses and the other
material collected during the investigation. It is true that the deceased was
working as a Junior technician and he was supposed to do his work.
Page 4 of 6
1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
However, the allegations are not merely that the Respondent directed the
deceased to perform work. The allegations are that such conduct was
accompanied by continuous harassment, abuse threats of suspension and
other acts which according to prosecution ultimately resulted in the
deceased taking such an extreme step.
10. The learned Sessions Judge has also observed that the suicide
note does not contain the exact words of abuse allegedly used by the
Respondent and that the allegations therein are vague. However, at the
stage of discharge, the Court ought not to discard the material merely
because every detail of the alleged incidents has not been mentioned in
the suicide note. The evidentiary value of the suicide note and the effect of
the statements of the witnesses are matters which can be properly assessed
during trial.
11. The learned Sessions Judge has given considerable importance
to the absence of eyewitness to the alleged harassment. There is statement
of Mr.Ranspie who has stated about harassment by the Respondent.
Moreover at the stage of discharge, the Court is not required to conduct a
meticulous appreciation of evidence or determine whether the prosecution
will ultimately be able to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
The material is required to be considered for the limited purpose of finding
out whether a prima facie case exists against the accused
Page 5 of 6
1-REVN-194-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
12. It is also necessary to consider that, at the time of the incident
no one knows mental condition of the deceased, if he writes something
before his death it gives some value and suicide note has to be considered
along with other evidence. In the present case the statement of the
Mr.Pralhad Ranpise supports the contention of the deceased in the suicide
note that he has committed suicide because of the harassment of the
Respondent. However, these facts are not considered by the learned
Sessions Judge.
13. I have gone through the case laws cited by the learned counsel
for the Respondent. The facts of cited case and present case are different.
Hence, not applicable.
14. In view of above, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Revision Application is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, Pune dated 4 th August
2025 in Sessions Case No.166 of 2017 is quashed and set
aside.
(iii) All pending Applications are disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 6 of 6
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.