PRAVIN RAMDHAN SOLANKE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. PSO PS BULDHANA (CITY) TAH. AND DIST.BULDHANA AND ANOTHER
Quashing of FIR under Section 306 and 354 IPC; Prosecution to Continue under Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act Based on Prima Facie Evidence.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-NAG:13356-DB
Decision Date: 02-12-2025
List of Laws
The Indian Penal Code, 1860; The Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999; Code of Criminal Procedure; Constitution of India; University Grants Commission Act
Case Brief
- Facts: The deceased, Bhagyashree, committed suicide by hanging. A suicide note indicated she was subjected to outraging of modesty by accused persons, including the applicant, which led to her suicide. The FIR was lodged by the deceased's father, Ramdas Balaji Shingne. A video clip recorded by the deceased also made similar allegations.
- Procedural Posture: The applicant, Pravin S/o Ramdhan Solanke, sought to quash the First Information Report No. 0109/2017 and the subsequent charge-sheet No. 95/2017, registered under Sections 306, 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 4 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999. The case was pending before the 8th Adhoc District Judge -1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana.
- Issue: Whether the FIR and charge-sheet against the applicant for offences under Sections 306 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 4 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999, should be quashed. Specifically, whether the allegations constitute abetment of suicide and outraging modesty, and whether there is a prima facie case for offences under the Ragging Act.
- Holding: The application is partly allowed. The High Court quashed the FIR and charge-sheet against the applicant concerning Sections 306, 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, but the prosecution under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999, will continue against the applicant.
- Reasoning: The Court found that except for naming the accused along with other classmates, there was nothing to show that the deceased was left with no alternative but to commit suicide. There were no allegations in the FIR or any material to show that the deceased was molested as contemplated under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the Court found a prima facie case to prosecute the applicant under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, considering the suicide note and video clip recorded by the deceased. The Court relied on precedents, including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, to emphasize that the High Court can exercise its powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. The court stated, "In the light of the settled legal position, in our considered opinion, the High Court was not justified in rejecting the petition filed by the appellants under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the charges under Section 306 IPC against them."