The High Court erred in dismissing the petition to quash the FIR as the ingredients of the offence under Section 336 IPC were not established against the appellant.

ORDER :

1. The challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 29.12.2021 in Crl. Petition No.692/2019 whereby the High Court of Himachal Pradesh has dismissed the application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as, “CrPC”), for quashing FIR no. 27/19 dated 03.03.2019 under Section 336 of Indian Penal Code 1860 (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”) and final report under section 173 CrPC.

2. The factual background is that an FIR Crime No. 27/19 was registered on 03.03.2019 at the instance of one Smt. Meena w/o Sh. Babu Ram. It was alleged in the FIR that on 03.03.2019 at about 10:30 PM the complainant witnessed a loud blast from an electricity pole located about 100 meters away from her house, where she saw the appellant herein hanging on that pole being electrocuted. It was further alleged that this incident happened because of the carelessness of some person from the concerned electricity department by resuming electricity supply from behind. On the said FIR, a chargesheet came to be filed under Section 336 of IPC. The appellant herein is the man who incurred injuries from the electricity pole, as he was working in the Electricity Department. It is the same appellant that has sustained the injuries, that is the accused in the said criminal proceedings.

3. Aggrieved by the said chargesheet, the appellant approached the High Court under Section 482 of CrPC praying to quash the entire proceedings arising out of FIR no. 27/19 of Kandaghat Police Station, Solan, H.P.

4. The High Court vide order dated 29.12.2021 dismissed the said Criminal Petition and declined to interfere with the criminal proceedings based on the reasoning that all the issues raised by the appellant can be and should be raised by him before the Trial Court rather than raising them directly before the High Court in the first instance via petition under Section 482 of CrPC. Accordingly, the High Court ordered the proceedings under Section 482 of CrPC to be closed with liberty to the appellant to raise all the issues before the Trial Court.

5. Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the High Court, refusing to quash the criminal proceedings, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

6. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the High Court has erred in law by dismissing the petition as necessary ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 336 of IPC i.e., it must and ought to be shown that the accused committed the act rashly and negligently, endangering to the life of the public, are not made out in the FIR. Moreover, the appellant was doing his job as assigned to him by the Electricity Department officials and it is due to the negligence of the Electricity Department that the appellant had to incur severe body burns and injuries.

7. It is further submitted that the allegations in the complaint must have a reasonable nexus with the result caused. However, in this case only the appellant incurred injuries resulting from the sudden turning on of the electricity by the officials, and no other person was endangered.

8. It is further submitted that the High Court has erred in law by not exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process against the appellant in the interest of justice as there is absolutely no evidence on record to constitute an offence under Section 336 Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the appellant.

9. It is further submitted that the High Court has not appreciated the law laid down in Varala Bharath Kumar v. The State Of Telangana, Criminal Appeal No. 1565/2017; Shiv Kumar Jatia v. State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No. 1263-67 of 2019; Criminal 10 Appeal No 122/ 2022, Veena Mittal v. State of UP & Ors.

10. Per contra the Ld. counsels appearing on behalf of Respondent No.1 & 3 have vehemently opposed the present appeal.

11. Heard Ld. counsels appearing on both sides and perused the relevant documents placed on record.

12. The qu