Supreme Court Upholds Quashing Of FIR Against Dadra & Nagar Haveli Administrator & Officials Over Suicide Of MP Mohanbhai Delkar

The bench had reserved the verdict on August 4. The Court heard the challenge made by the son of the deceased MP to the Bombay High Court order which quashed FIR against Dadra and Nagar Haveli Administrator Praful Khoda Patel , Collector Sandeep Kumar Singh, Police Superintendent Sharad Darade, and other authorities for allegedly abetting suicide of Mohanbhai Sanjibhai Delkar, seven times Member of Parliament (MP) of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. The petition was filed by Abhinav Mohan Delkar, the son of the deceased MP.

On September 8, 2022, the High Court bench of Prasanna B. Varale and Shrikant D. Kulkarni allowed a batch of writ petitions filed by the accused persons seeking to quash the FIR registered against them.

Delkar was found dead inside a room in Hotel Sea Green South in the city's Marine Drive on February 22, 2021.

His son Abhinav Delkar accused the petitioners of abetting the suicide in an FIR under Sections 306 (Abetment to suicide), 506 (criminal intimidation), 389 (putting person in fear of accusation of offence), 120-B (Criminal Conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Atrocities Act).

The FIR alleged that Delkar suffered ill-treatment, harassment and defamation under the orders of Praful Khoda Patel. The two-fold motive behind this was to take control over the college being run by Delkar and to prevent him from contesting the next elections. Further, as he belonged to a Scheduled Tribe, he was purposely ill-treated in public functions.

Why Was The FIR Quashed By The High Court?

The High Court held that it was only the impression created by Delkar that he was ill-treated or humiliated. The court observed that there is no material to show that the Administrator or any other petitioner was trying to take control over the college run by Delkar. Further, Delkar contested the election as an independent member and was elected.

"In such a situation, if both these alleged objects are not substantially established and it is only in the form of certain allegations and an impression of the deceased, then on such an unacceptable and unsustainable material asking the Petitioners to undergo the rigors of criminal prosecution, is nothing but an abuse of process of law", the court stated.

The court further observed that to attract Section 120 (B), there must be positive material to show that the Petitioners came together for hatching a conspiracy and effect was given to that conspiracy. However, in the FIR, there are bare allegations without any incident to show that the petitioners came together and acted under the orders of the Administrator.

The court relied on Apex Court judgment in Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat and held that there must a positive act for satisfying the word abetment. However, the incidents referred to in the FIR are insufficient to show any positive act committed by the Petitioners to satisfy the term abetment which is a pre-requisite of Section 306 of IPC.

The court concluded that the case falls under the guidelines given by the Apex Court in State of Haryana and Others v. Bhajan Lal. The court thus quashed the FIR registered against the nine accused.

For detailed report on the legal angle, read here.

Case Details : ABHINAV MOHAN DELKAR vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA| Crl.A. No. 002177 - 002185 / 2024

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 812