SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(AP) 683

S.R.K.PRASAD
N. V. Subrahmanyam – Appellant
Versus
State (Government of India) – Respondent


S. R. K. PRASAD, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, who are accused in C. C. No. 219 of 1996 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class Court. Mummidivaram, East Godavari District invoke the inherent powers of this Court to quash the proceedings in the said C. C. 219 of 1996.

( 2 ) THE facts that led to filing of the complaint and later this petition can be briefly stated as follows : The petitioners are working as Chief Engineer/mines Manager; Chief Engineer/asst. Mines Manager and General Manager/agent in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (O. N. G. C. ). They have undertaken also drilling operations near GS-15-AB (Offshore) Location operating within 12 nautical miles from the site village. The drilling operations were entrusted to their Contractor. As per the contract the entire drilling operation will be conducted by the Contractor and thereafter production tests have to be conducted. It appears that on 23-11-1992 when the Contractor himself was conducting production tests at GS-15-AB, oil gas leakage was observed in the flow line and while four persons were working on the burner boom held by four steel ropes in an offshore drilling, one of the ropes snapped due to shearing o




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top