Bombay High Court
TANUJA ROHIT VIDYAGAJ AND ORSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Mere allegations of marital discord and harassment, without concrete evidence of instigation, are insufficient to establish abetment of suicide, warranting a stay of the criminal proceedings.
Summary
The petitioners, accused of abetting the suicide of the husband of the first petitioner, sought a stay of the criminal case pending before the Judicial Magistrate. They alleged that the deceased had repeatedly harassed them while intoxicated and that they had filed a 498A complaint and a maintenance application. The court examined the FIR and found no prima facie evidence of abetment, noting that mere marital discord and alleged harassment do not establish the intent or act required for abetment of suicide. Consequently, the court granted the interim relief sought, ordering a stay of the criminal proceedings (RCC No. 916 of 2026) until the petition is finally decided. Notice was issued to the respondents with directions for service and filing of replies.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations of harassment and matrimonial discord amount to sufficient prima facie evidence of abetment of suicide under the Indian Penal Code.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to interim relief in the form of a stay of the criminal proceedings pending the final disposal of the writ petition.
Subjects
- abetment of suicide
- marital discord
- interim relief
- stay of criminal proceedings
- Section 306 IPC
- Section 498A
- maintenance application
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
14. CRI WP-4654-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4654 OF 2026
Tanuja Rohit Vidyagaj & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Balwant Salunkhe, Advocate for Petitioners
Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for State
Mr. Amit B. Patil, API, Bhosari MIDC Police Station, Pimpari
Chinchwad
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : OCTOBER 8, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Salunkhe, learned Advocate for Petitioners; Ms.
Gotad, learned APP for State.
2. Petitioners are arraigned as accused in the present crime for
having abetted the death of the victim who was husband of Petitioner
no. 1. The complainant is the mother arrayed as Respondent No. 2
herein. Petitioner No. 1 and the victim got married on 25.05.2023 but
admittedly record shows that due to differences between them,
Petitioner no. 1 was living separately with her parents from
24.03.2024. The non-cognizable complaints, which are placed on
record by the Petitioners, show that victim had also created nuisance
for Petitioner no. 1 and her family members repeatedly by visiting her
place of residence in an intoxicated state at night and had abused
1 of 3
14. CRI WP-4654-26.odt
Petitioner No. 1 and her parents. The record also shows that Petitioner
No. 1 had filed 498A complaint on 24.12.2024 followed by Misc.
Application seeking maintenance on 25.03.2025, copies of which are
appended at page Nos. 135 onwards to the Petition.
3. The ingredients of abetment are required to be seen at the
prima facie stage. When the FIR is read, prima facie, none of the such
ingredients are present. The deceased victim had hung himself in a
public place in a parking lot inside a public bus. Though it is alleged in
a single line in the FIR that the deceased victim had met with
harassment at the hands of Petitioner no. 1 and her family members,
save and except this statement, there is no other incriminating fact,
incident and or material rather material facts to show any form of
harassment meted out to the deceased victim.
4. Deceased victim incidentally was working in a private job as can
be seen from the record. In that view of the matter, prima facie, mere
allegation of harassment and/or existence of matrimonial discord
cannot be a sufficient ground to demonstrate instigation or any
intentional act leading to or having direct nexus with the commission
of the act of suicide. In that view of the matter, I am of the clear view
that the Petitioners have made out a case for grant of interim relief.
Hence, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (e)
which reads thus:-
2 of 3
14. CRI WP-4654-26.odt
"e) pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Petition, stay
further proceedings in Criminal Case / RCC No. 916 of 2026
pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pimpari,
Dist. Pune arising out of FIR/Crime No. 0122 of 2026, registered
with Bhosari MIDC Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad and restrain
the Respondents from proceeding with the said criminal case against
the Petitioners."
5. In view of the above, issue notice to Respondents returnable on
19.11.2026. Hamdast permitted. Private service is also permitted.
Affidavit of service along with tangible proof thereof shall be filed on
or before the next date.
6. Learned APP waives service on behalf of State.
7. Reply, if any, shall be filed within a period of four weeks from
the date of service of the notice. Any rejoinder thereto, if any, shall be
filed within a further period of two weeks thereafter.
8. Stand over to 19th November, 2026.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
AMBERKAR
MOHAN Date:
AMBERKAR 2026.10.08
20:22:45
+0530
3 of 3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.