Rajeev Ramrao Chavan, the vendor of the sale deed dated 27.10.2021, died allegedly having committed suicide on 08.03.2022 and having left behind a suicide note, naming the tenants as abettors. The two tenants, Vijaykumar Vishwanath Dhawale and Vinod Dodhu Chaudhary lodged complaint initially with the Police Station, but as the same was not acknowledged, they moved an application before the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
application, instead of directing the police to register the FIR and investigate, passed an order on 20.12.2022 for an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., confining it to the involvement of the brother of the deceased, widow of the deceased, and the five purchasers. The order of the Revisional Court dated 23.03.2023 was challenged before the High Court by all the 13 accused through separate petitions titled under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No 14585 of 2023 and Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No 14572 of 2023 have been filed by the six police personnel again arising out of the two complaints filed by the two tenants.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/doctrine-of-necessity-in-a-societys-election-meeting/
From the factual matrix as recorded above, we find that the continuance of these two criminal proceedings would not be of any avail once the complainant has himself stated to withdraw the complaint. Out of the six police personnel, three are constables, one is a Head Constable, one is a Sub-Inspector, and one is an Inspector.
Case Title: SHATRUGHNA ATMARAM PATIL Vs. VINOD DODHU CHAUDHARY (2024 INSC 75)
Case Number: SLP(Crl) No.-014585 / 2023
