ANIRUDH ARUN BHANDARKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

(2.) By this application, filed under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C., the Applicants have sought to quash the FIR No.238 of 2017 registered with M.H.B. Colony Police Station, Borivali, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Ss. 306 r/w 34 of the IPC.

(3.) Ms Aruna Pai, learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the deceased was working as a cashier in the shop of the Applicants. CCTV footage showed that he had committed theft of cash as well as goods from the shop. The deceased had admitted having committed theft and had agreed to return the money or continue to work in the shop till payment of money. She submits that the suicide note as well as the other material on record does not indicate that the Applicants had in any manner instigated the deceased-Raghuvir Acharya to commit suicide. She therefore contends that the allegations in the FIR and the other material on record do not disclose offence under Sec. 306 of the IPC. She has relied upon the decision of Mohit Singhal and Anr. Vs. The State of Uttarakhand and Ors., 2024 (1) SCC 417.