Criminal Petition No. 6890 of 2022 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6890 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SRI. CHANNAKESHAVA. H S/O. LATE HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS MECHANIC-2, KEB OFFICE, SRIRANGAPATNA - 571 438. (BY SRI. SRINIVAS .V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY
Legal Reasoning
MELUKOTE POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. …PETITIONER Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka 2. S. UMESH S/O. BETTASWAMY GOWDA, SINGRI GOWDANA KOPPAL, MELUKOTE HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1 R2 - SD - U/R) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.409/2020 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., PANDAVAPURA REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 304A OF IPC - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE IN PURSUANCE TO CR.NO.65/2019 REGISTERED FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 304(II) OF IPC. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being accused No.3 in Crime No.65/2019 of Melukote Police Station, in C.C.No.409/2020 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dvn) and JMFC, Pandavapura, Mandya registered for the offence punishable under Section 304(ii) of Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 as informant filed the first information with Melukote Police against accused Nos.1, 2 and others, alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC. After investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed. It is the contention of the prosecution that on 19.08.2019, accused No.1 being the driver of Lorry mounted with bore-well digging machine, was proceeding from Bellale towards the agricultural land belonging to Kempegowda. Accused No.1 noticed that the live electricity wire is hanging and apprehending that it may - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 come in contact with the lorry, he instructed the deceased who was on the lorry to lift the sagging live wire, and accordingly the deceased tried to lift the wire to enable the lorry to pass through. But at that moment, he came in contact with the live electric wire, sustained burnt injuries and died. It is stated that accused No.1 being the driver of lorry, accused No.2 being Junior Engineer and accused No.3 being the lineman, are negligent and are responsible for the death of the deceased. The petitioner being accused No.3 is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him. 3. Heard Sri Srinivas V., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on record. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him?" - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative' for the following: REASONS 5. It is the contention of the prosecution that the live electric wire was hanging on the public road leading from Bellale to Singrigowdana Koppalu. Accused No.1 being the driver of lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-02/MH-2989 mounted with bore-well digging machine, was driving the same. The deceased was also traveling in the said lorry. Accused No.1 who noticed that the live electric wire is hanging and apprehending that it may touch the lorry, instructed the deceased to lift the wire. The deceased immediately ventured to lift the live electric wire, as a result of which, he sustained injuries and died. Now it is the contention of the prosecution that petitioner being accused No.3, working as lineman in Chamundeshwari Electric Supply Corporation Limited (CHESCOM) was negligent in discharging his duty, as a result of which, the live electricity wire was hanging and he is responsible for the death of the deceased. 6. The Investigating Officer has cited as many as 19 witnesses in the charge sheet. None of the witnesses would say as to since how long the live electric wire was hanging, whether - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 it was brought to the notice of the petitioner who is a line man. The charge sheet does not say that anybody have complained regarding hanging electricity wire to CHESCOM or to any of its officials. Simply because the live electric wire was hanging and accused No.1, the driver of the lorry inspite of noticing it instructs the deceased to lift the wire, so as to avoid the electric wire touching the lorry, Prima-facie takes the risk of causing the death of the deceased, for which the petitioner who is the line man cannot be made responsible. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab1, wherein referring to its earlier decision in Kurban Hussein Mohamedalli Rangawalla v. State of Maharashtra2, extracted the following statement of law by Sir Lawrence Jenkins in Emperor v. Omkar Rampratap 4 Bom, which reads as under: "To impose criminal liability under Section 304-A, Indian penal code, it is necessary that the death should have been the direct result 1 2005 (5) SC 297 2 (1965) 2 SCR 622 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 of a rash and negligent act of the accused, and that act must be the proximate and efficient cause without the intervention of another's negligence. It must be the causa causans; it is not enough that it may have been the causa sine qua non." 8. The petitioner was nowhere in the picture when the incident had occurred and there were nobody to speak about the live electric wire hanging below the normal height and that the same was brought to the notice of the petitioner. Further, there are no materials to allege that the petitioner was negligent in setting the line right. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the petitioner is responsible for causing the death of the deceased by negligence. Hence, I am of the opinion that the initiation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner is in abuse of process of law. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
Decision
ORDER - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:7040 CRL.P No. 6890 of 2022 (ii) The criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Crime No. 65 of 2019 of MeluKote Police Station, pending on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dvn) and JMFC, Pandavapura, Mandya for the offence punishable under Section 304(ii) of IPC, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE MKM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23